Back to the Future? Lessons of Differentiated Integration from the EFTA Countries for the UK’s Future Relations with the EU

Abstract

Abstract:The decision of the United Kingdom (UK) to withdraw from the European Union (EU) raises the question of how to shape their post-Brexit relations. The EU has developed various forms of external differentiated integration with neighbouring countries, whereby the members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) enjoy the most far-reaching access to the internal market. This article discusses the conditions under which the UK could join EFTA, the EFTA countries' European Economic Area with the EU, or a similar arrangement. In light of the UK's desire to conduct an independent trade policy, to contain immigration, and to take back control of laws, lessons are drawn from EFTA's experience for trade, the free movement of persons, and institutional issues.

‘Flexible and Imaginative’: The EU’s Accommodation of Northern Ireland in the UK–EU Withdrawal Agreement

“…In exchange, institutional arrangements are in place to ensure a degree of ‘decision-shaping’ influence for the non-member state over the new or amended acquis (Doherty et al, 2017; Gstöhl & Phinnemore, 2019). The best example of a dynamic arrangement can be found in the European Economic Area (EEA) (Gstöhl & Frommelt, 2017). The EEA Agreement (1994) is between the EU and the three member states of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) that participate in the EEA, namely Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.…”

“…The effectiveness of any dynamic arrangement with the EU depends on the capacity of the non-member state to respond to the challenge and keep up with the requirements of alignment. As Gstöhl and Frommelt (2017) argue: any dynamic form of deep and comprehensive integration requires an efficient institutional set-up for taking over relevant new EU acts and case law and for ensuring the surveillance and enforcement of these obligations.…”

“…Altogether there are several different groups, committees and routes through which the EEA-EFTA states are consulted by the EU, and many of these areas can be used in turn by the EEA-EFTA states to try to shape decision-making in the EU. That said, even these highly institutionalized and arrangements are inadequate, mainly due to inconsistency in selection of relevant decisions and in terms of delay in implementation (Gstöhl & Frommelt, 2017).…”

Unity over diversity? The politics of differentiated integration after Brexit

“…Denmark, for instance, opts-out of the Euro, the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), while Poland has an opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR), and Ireland opts-out of Schengen (Gstöhl and Frommelt 2017;Olsen 2011). Formal opt-outs are complemented by informal derogations which have gained broad acceptance in spite of their lack of substantive legal backing: Sweden's 'informal' Euro opt-out and the long-term reticence of candidate countries such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to join the common currency are perhaps the best known examples (Schütze 2015, 809-810).…”