The Rise and Fall of a ‘Europe of the Regions’

Hepburn, Eve

doi:10.1080/13597560802351572

Cited by 51 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Macphail (2008), for example, notes that beyond the traditional area of European regional policy, scholars have not examined the political, institutional and policy dimensions of regional participation in 'new' modes of governance. There is also a paucity of research examining how different regional actors seek to project their demands upwards within the EU, and the strategies that are developed for interest articulation and policy influence (Jordan, 2001: 201;Dardanelli, 2005;Elias, 2008;Hepburn, 2008). Neither is it clear how subnational politics and policies change under the pressure of European integration.…”

Section: Re-thinking the Role Of Regions In European Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Hepburn (2008) notes, thus far the multi-level governance literature has had very little to say about how political parties at the regional level behave in, and are affected by, competition within multi-level political systems. These contributions aim to fill this gap in the literature by examining how political parties below the state have responded to the process of European integration.…”

Section: Revisiting the Regional Dimension Of European Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introduction: Whatever Happened to the Europe of the Regions? Revisiting the Regional Dimension of European Politics

Elias

2008

Regional & Federal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Re-thinking the Role Of Regions In European Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Revisiting the Regional Dimension Of European Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Whatever Happened to the Europe of the Regions? Revisiting the Regional Dimension of European Politics

Elias

2008

Regional & Federal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The 'impressive extension' of the multi-level governance framework allowed it to be used to interpret and explain Europeanization processes, with the result that scholars 'devoted' greater attention 'to the diverse, contradictory and anything but linear trajectories of institutional change and institutionalization' (Gualini 2003: 418). With more complex and varied electoral arenas, political parties needed new strategies to perform effectively in 'multi-layered systems'; however, MLG was 'very much a party-free zone' (Deschouwer 2003: 213; see also Hepburn 2008). In short, MLG was about opportunities for some and loss (of power and influence) for others, leading to potential conflict, blocking and, subsequently, strategies to circumvent the national level whereby lower levels sought to increase their institutional and negotiating capacity.…”

Section: Europeanization and Regionalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

Stephenson¹,

Bache²,

Flinders³

2017

Frameworks of the European Union’s Policy Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two decades since the Maastricht Treaty, multi-level governance (MLG) has developed as a conceptual framework for profiling the 'arrangement' of policy-making activity performed within and across politico-administrative institutions located at different territorial levels. This contribution examines the ways in which the MLG literature has been employed, effectively taking stock of applied research to date. It identifies five main uses of MLG and the different focus of emerging research over time. Considering the most recent scholarship, the contribution explores possible new directions for research, in light of global governance, culminating in a 'bird's eye view' of MLG over 20 years.

show abstract

“…While hesitant in decentralising power at home, parties have also been cautious towards the European party associations, attempting to 'serve as the principal gatekeepers within the European electoral arena, and hence seek[ing] to monopolise access and to dominate the agenda' (Mair 2000: 38). This confirms the perception of a national political space with unified external representation, akin to the view that member states are the building blocks in the EU (Hepburn 2008). It also corresponds to how subnational authorities have channelled their interests through shared British positions rather than lobbying EU institutions alone (Bulmer et al 2006).…”

Section: ø Bratbergmentioning

confidence: 51%

Multi-level Parties in Process: Scottish and Welsh MEPs and their Home Parties

Bratberg¹

2010

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional autonomy and European integration present national institutions with a double challenge, potentially diluting national authority from both below and above. The interaction between the two processes adds a particular dynamic, as when regions forge direct links to the EU bypassing the nation state. This article looks at three British parties from that perspective, focusing on the autonomy of party branches in Scotland and Wales in relation to their Members of the European Parliament. The empirical analysis confirms that devolution has enhanced the potential for regional autonomy in the parties. However, this has had little practical effect on European policy-making, where national unity prevails. The limited effect of devolution can be explained, first, by the hegemonic status of national party unity and, second, by the disadvantages of operating alone in the European Parliament. An interesting parallel can be drawn to the way subnational authorities relate to EU institutions.Regional autonomy and European integration present national institutions with a double challenge, potentially diluting their authority from both below and above. Britain is an instructive example. Here, the political power of London has been constrained by regionalisation in the form of devolution to the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales since 1999. 1 In the same period, policies emanating from the European Union have continued to permeate both national and regional politics (Bache 2008). Devolution implies a new set of opportunity structures at the regional level, changing the terrain in which political parties operate. The research question discussed in this paper is whether devolution has also enabled regional party branches to obtain more autonomy from the state-wide parties in European policy-making. Such autonomy should be visible in enhanced discretion over the selection of candidates and programmes as well as in the forging of direct links to the EU level. British parties are particularly relevant in this regard since Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) since 1999 have been elected on a regional basis, using

show abstract

The Rise and Fall of a ‘Europe of the Regions’

Cited by 51 publications

References 19 publications

Introduction: Whatever Happened to the Europe of the Regions? Revisiting the Regional Dimension of European Politics

Introduction: Whatever Happened to the Europe of the Regions? Revisiting the Regional Dimension of European Politics

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

Multi-level Parties in Process: Scottish and Welsh MEPs and their Home Parties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About