EU promotion of democratic governance in the neighbourhood

Abstract

This article analyses the effectiveness of the EU’s promotion of democratic governance through functional co-operation in the European neighbourhood. In a comparative study of three policy sectors in three countries (Moldova, Morocco, and Ukraine), we show that the EU is capable of inducing neighbouring countries to adopt policy-specific democratic governance provisions in the absence of accession conditionality. In line with the institutionalist hypotheses, we find that effective rule adoption can be secured by strong legal specification of democratic governance elements in the EU sectoral acquis and international conventions. However, successful rule adoption does not necessarily lead to rule application

Europeanisation in new member and candidate states

“…Since the EU demanded unilateral adjustments, legitimacy increased if it used soft tactics rather than overt pressure (Kubicek 2003b: 16), and with a 'low density of EU demands', which allows domestic actors 'to engage in relatively unpressured "learning" (Jacoby 2004: 10). ' Furthermore, substantive rules are more likely to be perceived as legitimate if they are codified internationally or in the EU's own acquis (see also Freyburg et al 2009). The conditions for candidates must not be more onerous than for the incumbents (Schimmelfennig and Sedelmeier 2005c: Living Reviews in European Governance http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2011-1 18-19; Schwellnus 2006); they must be normatively consistent and there must be a strong international consensus on the technical and political appropriateness of policy prescriptions (Epstein 2006(Epstein , 2008a.…”

One ofwhatkind? Comparative perspectives on the substance of EU democracy promotion

“…Similarly, there are different interpretations as to what governance means in the context of EU democracy promotion. Some interpret it as more attention to civil society actors as part of 'effective governance' (Börzel et al 2008) or elements of democratic governance in policy sectors (Freyburg et al 2009;Lavenex and Schimmelfennig 2011), while others see governance as a technocratic approach to economic reform (for example, Hout 2010). Carothers, for example, labels the EU as primarily 'developmentalist' in contrast to the more 'political' view of the US (2009, 13).…”

Democracy promotion in Kosovo: mapping the substance of donor assistance and a comparative analysis of strategies

“…The governance-oriented category is employed in this article to characterize the substance of assistance, and is thus similar to that employed within Lavenex and Schimmelfennig's (2011) framework, as well as the conceptualization developed by Freyburg et al (2009). It demotes assistance designed to trigger a change in the interactions around policymaking and enforcement.…”

“…This is the most direct form of democracy promotion in the sense that impact can be clearly measured. As conceptualized by the authors, the governance model refers to mechanisms designed to specifically formulate new policies and the transfer of knowhow and competencies within particular key policy areas (see also Freyburg et al 2009). In other words, strategies that directly target the way politics is conducted.…”

“…Drawing on the existing literature on EU democracy promotion in third countries, this article employs a conceptual framework based on Carothers' bifurcated model of democracy promotion (political and developmental), but introduces the additional notion of governance-oriented assistance as a third category for defining initiatives designed specifically to stimulate democratic governance, a core normative objective of the EU (see Youngs 2001, 363;Freyburg et al 2009).…”