IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/p0037.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sterile debates and dubious generalisations: An empirical critique of European integration theory based on the integration processes in telecommunications and electricity

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Susanne K.

Abstract

Analyses of European integration processes are still dominated by the dichotomous debate between intergovernmentalism and supranationalism. Sides are often taken in this debate based on very case-specific empirical findings. An analysis of two cases, European telecommunications and electricity policy, illustrates how misleading such generalisations can be. The former case is often used to support supranational claims, while the latter highlights the importance of intergovernmental vetos. However, further analysis reveals the very parallel supranational policy approach of the European Commission to both sectors and the resulting weakness of the dominant interpretation. An analysis using a multilevel governance approach to European integration would avoid these difficulties.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Susanne K., 1996. "Sterile debates and dubious generalisations: An empirical critique of European integration theory based on the integration processes in telecommunications and electricity," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:p0037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/43176/1/21486197X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1991. "Negotiating the Single European Act: national interests and conventional statecraft in the European Community," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 19-56, January.
    2. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1995. "The politics of legal integration in the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(01), pages 171-181, December.
    3. Ostrom, Elinor, 2009. "An Agenda for the Study of Institutions," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 89-110, December.
    4. Argyris, Nicholas, 1993. "Regulatory Reform in the Electricity Sector: An Analysis of the Commission's Internal Market Proposals," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 9(1), pages 31-44, Spring.
    5. Stephen Padgett, 1992. "The Single European Energy Market: The Politics of Realization," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 53-76, March.
    6. Thomas Risse‐kappen, 1996. "Exploring the Nature of the Beast: International Relations Theory and Comparative Policy Analysis Meet the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 53-80, March.
    7. -, 1986. "Agenda = Agenda," Series Históricas 8749, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    8. Gary Marks & Liesbet Hooghe & Kermit Blank, 1995. "European Integration and the State," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 7, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    9. Mattli, Walter & Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1995. "Law and politics in the European Union: a reply to Garrett," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(01), pages 183-190, December.
    10. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1992. "International cooperation and institutional choice: the European Community's internal market," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 533-560, April.
    11. Gatsios, Konstantine & Seabright, Paul, 1989. "Regulation in the European Community," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 5(2), pages 37-60, Summer.
    12. Corbey, Dorette, 1995. "Dialectical functionalism: stagnation as a booster of European integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 253-284, April.
    13. Scharpf, Fritz W. & Mohr, Matthias, 1994. "Efficient self-coordination in policy networks: A simulation study," MPIfG Discussion Paper 94/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    14. Schneider, Gerald & Cederman, Lars-Erik, 1994. "The change of tide in political cooperation: a limited information model of European integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 633-662, October.
    15. Burley, Anne-Marie & Mattli, Walter, 1993. "Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 41-76, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Feick, Jürgen, 2002. "Regulatory Europeanization, national autonomy and regulatory effectiveness: Marketing authorization for pharmaceuticals," MPIfG Discussion Paper 02/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    2. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    3. Susanne K. Schmidt, 2000. "Only an Agenda Setter?," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 37-61, February.
    4. Grimmel, Andreas, 2011. "Politics in robes? The European Court of Justice and the myth of judicial activism," Discussion Papers 2/11, Europa-Kolleg Hamburg, Institute for European Integration.
    5. José Luis Castro-Montero & Edwin Alblas & Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2018. "The Court of Justice and treaty revision: A case of strategic leniency?," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 570-596, December.
    6. Jean-Yves Pitarakis & George Tridimas, 2003. "Joint Dynamics of Legal and Economic Integration in the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 357-368, November.
    7. Andreas Grimmel, 2011. "Integration and the Context of Law: Why the European Court of Justice is not a Political Actor," Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po 3, Centre d'études européennes (CEE) at Sciences Po, Paris.
    8. Mark A. Pollack, 2007. "The New Institutionalisms and European Integration," The Constitutionalism Web-Papers p0031, University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science.
    9. Tridimas, George & Tridimas, Takis, 2004. "National courts and the European Court of Justice: a public choice analysis of the preliminary reference procedure," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 125-145, June.
    10. George Tridimas, 2004. "A Political Economy Perspective of Judicial Review in the European Union: Judicial Appointments Rule, Accessibility and Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 99-116, July.
    11. Benjamin Werner, 2016. "Why is the Court of Justice of the European Union not more Contested? Three Mechanisms of Opposition Abatement," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(6), pages 1449-1464, November.
    12. Dederke, Julian, 2014. "Bahnliberalisierung in der Europäischen Union: Die Rolle des EuGH als politischer und politisch restringierter Akteur bei der Transformation staatsnaher Sektoren," PIPE - Papers on International Political Economy 20/2014, Free University Berlin, Center for International Political Economy, revised 2014.
    13. Fritz W. Scharpf, 2009. "The Asymmetry of European Integration - or why the EU cannot be a Social Market Economy," KFG Working Papers p0006, Free University Berlin.
    14. Beate Kohler-Koch, 1997. "The European Union Facing Enlargement: Still a System sui generis?," MZES Working Papers 20, MZES.
    15. Wolf, Sebastian, 2011. "Euratom Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Non-Integration," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 15, December.
    16. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2010. "Community and autonomy: Institutions, policies and legitimacy in multilevel Europe," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 68, number 68.
    17. Cohen & Antonin, 2008. "Scarlet Robes, Dark Suits: The Social Recruitment of the European Court of Justice," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 35, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    18. Cichowski, Rachel A., 2000. "Policy Paper 53: European Legal Integration and Environmental Protection," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt799928k5, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    19. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2003. "Problem-solving effectiveness and democratic accountability in the EU," MPIfG Working Paper 03/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. Clifford J. Carrubba, 2003. "The European Court of Justice, Democracy, and Enlargement," European Union Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 75-100, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:p0037. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.