SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 2

All quiet on the Western Front? Functionalist European Union and post- functionalist European integration

Batı cephesinde yeni bir şey yok mu? Fonksiyonalist Avrupa Birliği ve fonksiyonalizm-sonrası Avrupa bütünleşmesi

Sevilay KAHRAMAN
Pages
247–275
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The aim of this study is to analyze this seemingly contradictory co-existence of a functionalist EU and politicized European integration process in a historical perspective beginning from the mid-1950s up to present.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Building on the assumption that European political integration simultaneously constitutes a process and a project, this article argues that European political integration process and the interplay of its four key sub-dimensions, namely, policy integration, institutional integration, security integration and attitudinal integration has, over time generated a European Union (EU) which may be characterized as functionalist in character.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The expanded scope of policy integration and the intensified level of institutional integration has given rise to a multi-leveled, elitist, output performance oriented system of governance as well as an emerging political community originally based upon the permissive consensus of the masses.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The aim of this study is to analyze this seemingly contradictory co-existence of a functionalist EU and politicized European integration process in a historical perspective beginning from the mid-1950s up to present.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Building on the assumption that European political integration simultaneously constitutes a process and a project, this article argues that European political integration process and the interplay of its four key sub-dimensions, namely, policy integration, institutional integration, security integration and attitudinal integration has, over time generated a European Union (EU) which may be characterized as functionalist in character. The expanded scope of policy integration and the intensified level of institutional integration has given rise to a multi-leveled, elitist, output performance oriented system of governance as well as an emerging political community originally based upon the permissive consensus of the masses. Yet, beginning from the 1990s, the overlapping of the internal dynamics of the integration process and the external demands and pressures of the post-Cold War era increased the political salience of European integration in general and its attitudinal integration in particular. As a consequence, while the EU has managed to preserve its functionalist character by adapting itself to changing circumstances through the successive policy and institutional reforms, the growing impact of integration over the national polities and politics has contributed to an increasing politicization and contestation of the European integration process. The aim of this study is to analyze this seemingly contradictory co-existence of a functionalist EU and politicized European integration process in a historical perspective beginning from the mid-1950s up to present.

Özet

Eşzamanlı bir süreç ve proje niteliğindeki Avrupa bütünleşmesi ve bütünleşmenin dört temel boyutu (siyasal bütünleşmesi, kurumsal bütünleşme, tutumsal bütünleşme ve güvenlik bütünleşmesi) arasındaki etkileşim “fonksiyonalist” olarak tanımlanabilecek bir Avrupa Birliği (AB) ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bütünleşmenin siyasa kapsamı ve kurumsal derinliği zamanla çok-düzlemli, elitist, işlevselliğe odaklı ve kitlelerin izin veren konsensüsüne dayanan bir yönetişim modeli ve siyasi topluluk yaratmıştır. Ancak Soğuk Savaş sonrası Avrupa’da kesişen iç ve dış dinamik ve baskılar, bütünleşmenin siyasa ve kurumsal boyutları yanında tutumsal bütünleşmeyi de ön plana çıkarmıştır. Bunun sonucu AB, fonksiyonalist özelliğini uyarlayarak sürdürürken, bütünleşmenin üye devletler ve ulusal siyaset üzerinde artan etkisi, Avrupa bütünleşmesini ulusal düzlemde giderek siyasileştirmiş ve daha tartışmalı kılmıştır. Bu makalenin amacı, fonksiyonalist AB ile siyasileşen ve Avrupa bütünleşmesinin çelişkili gibi görünen birlikteliğini 1950 ortalarından günümüze dek uzanan tarihsel gelişim süreci içinde analiz etmektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAHRAMAN, S. (2013). All quiet on the Western Front? Functionalist European Union and post- functionalist European integration. ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 2, 247–275. https://ajindex.com/articles/292107

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. AYBARS, A. İ. (2012), “Sosyal Politika”, Avrupa Birliği Tarihçe, Teoriler, Kurumlar ve Politikalar, B. Akçay ve İ. Göçmen (der.), Seçkin Yayınevi, Ankara, s. 455-478.
  2. BARTOLINI, S. (2005), Restructuring Europe. Centre Formation, System Building and Political Structuring between the Nation-State and the European Union, Oxford University Press, Oxford, s. 363-412.
  3. BACHE, I. ve GEORGE, S, (2006), Politics in the European Union, 2. Baskı,
  4. Oxford University Press,
  5. Oxford. BACHE, I, GEORGE, S ve Bulmer, S. (2011), Politics in the European Union, 3. Baskı,
  6. Oxford University Press,
  7. Oxford. BAKER, D, GAMBLE, A ve LUDLAM, S (1994), “Conservative Divisions and British Ratification of the Maastricht Treaty”, Parliamentary Affairs, 47(1), s. 37-60,
  8. BEACH, D. (2012), “A Stronger, More Supranational Union?”, Key Controversies in European Integration, H. Zimmermann ve A. Dür (der.), Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire ve New York, s. 49-56.
  9. CHRISTIANSEN, T, DUKE, S ve KIRCHNER, E (2012), “Understanding and Assessing the Maastricht Treaty”, Journal of European Integration, 34(7), s. 683-858.
  10. CHRYSSOCHOU, D. N. (2003), “EU Democracy and the Democracy Deficit”, European Union Politics, M. Cini (der.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, s. 365-382.
  11. CHURCH, C. ve PHINNEMORE, D. (2006), Understanding the European Constitution: An Introduction to the EU Constitutional Treaty, Routledge, Londra. CHURCH, C.(2010), Understanding the European Constitution: An Introduction to the EU Constitutional Treaty, Routledge, Londra. CRIDDLE, B. (1993), “The French Referendum on the Maastricht Treaty”, Parliamentary Affairs, 46(2), s. 228-38.
  12. DE VRIES, C. ve EDWARDS, E. (2009), “Taking Europe to Its Extremes: Extremist Parties and Public Euroskepticism”, Party Politics, 15(1), s. 5-28.
  13. EGAN, M (2010), “The Single Market”, European Union Politics, M. Cini ve N.P. Solozano Borragan (der.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, s. 258-74
  14. FARELL, D. ve SCULLY, R. (2007), Representing Europe’s Citizens? Electoral Institutions and the Failure of Parliamentary Representation, Oxford University Press,
  15. Oxford. FUSACCHIA, A. (2006), “The Exhaustion of the Primary Resource: Why the Community Method is Unfit to Integrate Europe Further”, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 7(3), s. 253-275.
  16. GRILLER, S ve ZILLER, J. (2008), The Lisbon Treaty: EU Constitutionalism Without a Constitutional Treaty, Springer, Viyana. HAAS, B. E. (1958), The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces 1950– 57, Libra