Install the app
Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.
Just tap then “Add to Home Screen”
Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.
Just tap then “Add to Home Screen”
Menu
Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.
Just tap then “Add to Home Screen”
Differentiated integration (DI) is the process whereby some member states integrate further, while others temporarily or permanently opt out of specific policies. As a result, member states have different rights and obligations in regard to specific EU policies. So far, research on DI has by and large focused on its conceptualisation as well as on its empirical mapping. Both these undertakings remain important. But we also need to know much more about how the advantages and disadvantages of DI interact with each other and which are the effects of DI on states, citizens, policies as well as the EU constitutional order. DI has many potential advantages as well as many potential disadvantages. Defenders of DI argue that increasing Euroscepticism throughout the EU implies that the EU should evolve into a less centralized and more flexible organization, not least so as to guard against disintegration. From this perspective, DI may stabilise the EU by combining pro-integrationist dynamics with critical views. Pragmatically, DI is sometimes seen to provide a way forward when uniform integration is not possible and provides an occasion to pioneer new measures. From a normative perspective, it is seen to protect legitimate diversity and be responsive to different national democratic choices. It can also be the case that it is unfair to treat unequals equally and that DI can be a means of keeping already existing cleavages from deepening. DI also is the source of empirical and normative challenges and risks. Pragmatically, it can contribute to free-riding and to the imposition of negative externalities on other member states and citizens. It can exacerbate collective action problems in terms of overcoming obstacles to a common solution. It sets member states on different paths of policy and institutional development. As a result, the gap between insiders and outsiders can widen. It can strengthen the power and discursive hegemony of pro-integration member states, which might be able to impose their will on the others. These dynamics in turn can weaken mutual trust between member states and strengthen feelings of national belongings and identity. Normatively, DI can dilute the unity of the Community, dividing people into first and second class citizens depending on which policies their states participate in. It could lead to disintegration. Last but not least, DI can lead to unfairness when and where it involves free-riding by those who benefit from policies but do not participate in them, just as it might leave solidarity between member states at the good will of the stronger, core member states. How these and other potential benefits and risks interact, what the effects of DI are on policies, states and citizens as well as the EU constitutional order, is still very much under-researched, and the verdict on how desirable DI is remains open to debate. Apart from some notable exceptions, these questions have so far remained unaddressed in existing works on DI, and a joint session workshop on DI in the EU therefore could not be more timely.
As regards participants, the workshop is open to academics at any career stage, and from different disciplinary backgrounds. We will additionally seek to achieve a geographic and a gender balance. As the workshop aims to bridge the gap between political theory and empirical political science, we look forward to contributions which are either strictly theoretical or theory-driven empirical papers. They should directly speak to one of the three blocs below and not have been submitted yet. Selected papers will be included in a proposal for a special issue with an international peer-reviewed journal. We are particularly interested in papers that address one of the following aspects of DI: 1. What are the potential benefits and risks of DI? One the one hand, one might argue that DI is important for European integration to be able to move forward; for recognising the diversity of policy preferences within the EU; for overcoming collective action problems in EU policy making; for ensuring that member states remain committed to the European project; for addressing the rising levels of Euroscepticism within the EU; for recognising that one size does not always fit all. On the other hand, DI might be considered to reinforce existing divisions within the EU; to weaken trust between states by creating permanent ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’; to strengthen the negotiating power of member states which participate in all forms of integration; to strengthen national identity and weaken European identity thus undermining the EU as a political project; to allow challenges to the rule of law within the EU; to solidarity between member states becoming reliant on the goodwill of the stronger states; to set members states on different pathways of policy and institutional development; to undermine the unified legal order of the EU and create different classes of citizenship; or to be a forerunner to disintegration. Papers dealing with the trade-offs of these benefits and risks, are very welcome. 2. A second set of questions relates to issues of democratic self-rule. Here, we are interested in papers that address questions such whether DI is a legitimate way for protecting national self-determination; or whether DI is a fair way of dealing with differences between EU member states; whether DI can lead or has led to domination by specific EU member states. In the context of discussions on democratic backsliding, we are also interested in papers that discuss whether DI makes it easier or more likely for EU member states to ignore the Rule of Law and fundamental rights. 3. Third, we are interested in papers that theorise the institutional or normative compatibility with European integration and/or the impact DI might have on EU integration, including possible linkages to disintegration. How does DI resonate with the idea of the EU being a community of equals? Should DI be possible in all policy areas or only in select ones? Should the EU do more to keep potential exiters in the EU, and at what cost could this be achieved?
Papers will be avaliable once proposal and review has been completed.