Sovereignty and Differentiated Integration in the European Union

Walker, Neil

doi:10.1111/1468-0386.00058

Cited by 64 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike existing accounts of opt-outs, which either assume the perspective of the legal coherence of the EU (Curtin 1993;Walker 1998) or examine opt-outs in their particular domestic contexts (Wiener 1999;Hansen 2002), this article explores the management of the British and Danish opt-outs in the area of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). The multiplication of UK opt-outs in the last two decades has contributed to the image of Britain as the 'awkward partner' (George 1998), and the Danish opt-outs justify the description of Danish EU policy as 'hesitant' (Miles 2005: 99).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Behind the scenes of differentiated integration: circumventing national opt-outs in Justice and Home Affairs

Adler‐Nissen¹

2009

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the formal and informal practices of two champions of opting out, the United Kingdom and Denmark, in the area of Justice and Home Affairs. On the surface, both countries have chosen to avoid further integration within this policy area to safeguard national autonomy. Foreign policy experts have argued that national reservations lead to the loss of influence and possibly second-class membership, and legal scholars describe substantial opt-outs as a 'hijacking' of the acquis communautaire. This article demonstrates that opting out does not necessarily imply that member states are out in the cold. Both the UK and Denmark, it is argued, have influence and adapt to new EU legislation, even in politically sensitive areas covered by their protocols. National opt-outs are pragmatically circumvented in the consensus-oriented Council of Ministers.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Behind the scenes of differentiated integration: circumventing national opt-outs in Justice and Home Affairs

Adler‐Nissen¹

2009

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this regard, supporting a differentiated framework for the European integration might be a good strategy to achieve the mentioned symbiotic institutionalization instead of a normative (federalist) framework imposing too much hegemonic power over the nation state (Walker, 1998). There have already been some developments in the European integration process supporting this argument.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

(Re)considering sovereignty in the European integration process

Kaplan

2018

Asian j. Ger. Eur. stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World War II (WWII) as a great shock significantly weakened the European nation-state paradigm and gave the European elites a chance to achieve a 'paradigm shift' from 'the nation-state paradigm' to a 'federalist paradigm'. However, the nation-state's strong institutionalization did not allow a paradigm shift and the WWII actually created a 'paradigm duplication' in the European integration process. In this two-layered atmosphere, 'democracy' was conceptualized under the influence of 'federalist intellectual paradigm' but its implementation had to be achieved in the nation-state paradigm. Therefore, this anomaly has played a significant role in the recent stalemate the European integration process has faced. For example, the literature clearly shows the relationship between the sensitivity of European nations towards their national sovereignty and the rise of Euroscepticism in the European integration process. Moreover, the institutional and legitimate strength of the nation-state gives the nation-state paradigm a gravitational power, which gradually weakens the feasibility of the ideas originating from the federalist paradigm. As a result, this article argues that a more symbiotic institutionalization of democracy and sovereignty is necessary to make the European integration more attractive again.

show abstract

“…As Walker (1998, p. 356) observes, the concept of sovereignty ‘was introduced into legal and political thought as a way of comprehending a one-dimensional pattern of state-centred authority’, or as Hirst and Thompson (1999, p. 256) put it, ‘“sovereignty” in its modern form is a highly distinctive political claim – to exclusive control of a definite territory.’ Sovereignty implies control over both specific areas of territory and particular functions and so ‘tends to be restricted by boundaries of space and subject matter’ (Walker, 1998, p. 356). This identification of sovereignty with control of a specific territory implies that sovereignty has been exercised ‘uniformly within a given territory’ (Pauly and Grande, 2005, p. 8).…”

Section: Graduated Sovereignty and Global Governance Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Graduated sovereignty and global governance gaps: Special economic zones and the illicit trade in tobacco products

Holden

2017

Political Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illicit trade in tobacco products has been a significant problem globally for many years. It allows cigarettes to be sold far below their legal price and thus contributes to higher consumption, morbidity and mortality, and deprives state treasuries of a substantial amount of revenue. This article identifies special economic zones (SEZs), particularly free trade zones, as a key conduit for this illicit trade. The development of SEZs as weak points in the global governance architecture is explained with reference to the concept of ‘graduated sovereignty’, whereby the uniform management of territory by modern states has given way to a more spatially selective form of territorial governance, in which some slices of territory are more fully integrated into the world economy than others via various forms of differential regulation. Attempts to comprehensively (re)regulate SEZs, in the face of growing evidence of the dysfunctionalities that they can engender, have so far been unsuccessful. It is concluded that the neo-liberal global economy has facilitated a regulatory ‘race to the bottom’, a problem that can only ultimately be overcome by international negotiation and agreement.

show abstract

Sovereignty and Differentiated Integration in the European Union

Cited by 64 publications

References 3 publications

Behind the scenes of differentiated integration: circumventing national opt-outs in Justice and Home Affairs

Behind the scenes of differentiated integration: circumventing national opt-outs in Justice and Home Affairs

(Re)considering sovereignty in the European integration process

Graduated sovereignty and global governance gaps: Special economic zones and the illicit trade in tobacco products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About