Differentiated integration in the European Union: Institutional effects, public opinion, and alternative flexibility arrangements

Does differentiated integration undermine the motivation of parliamentarians from less integrated member states to become involved in European Union affairs? Focusing on the European Union's new interparliamentary conferences in economic governance, and justice and home affairs, this study examines whether voluntary and involuntary as well as comprehensive and partial differentiation influence parliamentary involvement, measured as participation in interparliamentary conferences. Based on new data and Coarsened Exact Matching, the results indicate that the effect of differentiation depends on its political origins and design. Only voluntary and comprehensive differentiation depress parliamentary involvement. The results can be seen as favourable regarding the legitimacy of differentiation and compatible with the European Union's ambition to limit the institutional implications of differentiation. They also indicate a targeted parliamentary response to differentiated integration.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Does differentiated integration weaken parliamentary involvement? Evidence from the European Union's interparliamentary conferences

Winzen

2022

“…Flexibility is predominantly used in two other situations: when all member states agree on the need to retain substantial room for member states' choices or when member states show a wide variety of different preferences and capacities, without clear majority and minority positionssimilar to experimental governance (see Zeitlin and Rangoni, 2023). This difference between DI and flexibility offers a solution to one of the potential trade-offs of efficient DI described in the introduction to this special issue (Schimmelfennig et al, 2023). As was argued there, for DI 'maximizing the homogeneity of member states runs the danger of creating groups that are too small to meet the policy goals, produce economies of scale, and pool resources.'…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As was argued there, for DI 'maximizing the homogeneity of member states runs the danger of creating groups that are too small to meet the policy goals, produce economies of scale, and pool resources.' (Schimmelfennig et al, 2023). Flexibility operates differently in this respect, as it includes all member states but offers a room for choices in implementation.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentiation through flexibility in implementation: Strategic and substantive uses of discretion in EU directives

Zbíral

Princen

Smekal

2022

This article analyses the extent to which European Union (EU) directives allow for variation in domestic implementation. Such flexibility in implementation may be used to deal with heterogeneity among member states. Based on an original dataset of 164 directives adopted between 2006 and 2015, we find that the use of flexibility is associated more with efforts to accommodate differences between national policies (substantive use of discretion) than with attempts to facilitate the decision-making process in and between EU legislative institutions (strategic use of discretion). Although flexibility may be used to address some of the same concerns that drive differentiated integration (DI), the situations in which each is most likely to be used are distinct because they approach the divergences between member states differently.

“…Differentiated integration started as an aspect of treaty reforms in the 1990s (Stubb, 1996), but by the 2020s, differentiation is now a key feature of many policy decisions as well as secondary legislative instruments (e.g. Duttle et al, 2017; Leruth and Lord, 2016; Leuffen et al, 2012; Schimmelfennig et al, 2023; Schimmelfennig and Winzen, 2014, 2020). What is more, differentiated integration is increasingly nonlinear, or multidimensional, because different member states participate in different policy areas, legal acts, and decision-making processes, and to a greater or lesser extent in each area.…”

Section: External Differentiated Integration: a Multidimensional Opti...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Where is the EU–UK relationship heading? A conjoint survey experiment of Brexit trade-offs

Hix

Linden

Massie

et al. 2022

The Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) is the start of a new relationship between the UK and the European Union (EU). As the consequences of Brexit unfold, there will be pressure to change the TCA, either in a “softer” or “harder” direction. To determine the potential medium-term direction of the EU–UK relationship, we conducted a conjoint survey experiment with a sample of British voters, where we asked them to choose between different hypothetical package deals. When faced with such choices, British citizens overall mostly support a softer relationship in which the UK applies EU regulatory standards in return for greater access to the single market. However, Leave voters most often support a much harder trade-off of full regulatory sovereignty but continued restrictions on UK exports.