From capacity to sovereignty: Legislative politics and differentiated integration in the European Union

Abstract

The literature suggests that legislative politics among European Union Member States is characterised by economic exchanges, and constrained by the social norms of a European community of legislators. Both views draw a clear line between the legislative process and the conflicts over sovereignty that have left their mark on treaty making and European public opinion since the 1990s. This article suggests revisiting this view, based on an analysis of why Member States have opted out of legislation from the 1970s to today. It argues that differentiation, while once a response to capacity problems of relatively poor countries, has recently become driven by sovereignty concerns of the Union's wealthy and nationally oriented Members that oppose the EU's intrusion into core state powers. The article presents evidence for the impact on legislative outcomes of factors so far thought not to matter. The results indicate greater European‐level legislative responsiveness towards national sovereignty demands than previously recognised. They underline that the nature of European politics has been changing with the EU's push into core state powers.

On the Methodology of Studying Differentiated (Dis)integration: Or How the Potential Outcome Framework Can Contribute to Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Opting In or Out

“…(). The establishment of the EUDIFF dataset (Duttle et al ., ) has recently allowed a quantitative turn, exemplified by contributions from Duttle (), Winzen () and Winzen and Schimmelfennig (). The focus of these works, again, is largely on the causes of differentiated integration.…”

“…Their insightsthat interactions between interdependence and politicization largely shape the horizontal and vertical patterns of differentiationare condensed and further developed in two articles, namely Rittberger et al (2014) and Schimmelfennig et al (2015). The establishment of the EUDIFF dataset (Duttle et al, 2017) has recently allowed a quantitative turn, exemplified by contributions from Duttle (2016), Winzen (2016) and Winzen and Schimmelfennig (2016). The focus of these works, again, is largely on the causes of differentiated integration.…”

Eastern enlargement and differentiated integration: towards normalization

“…For the older cohorts, the figure shows the last years of a long-term decline in differentiation that results in particular from the consolidation of the EU's market legislation. However, widespread exemptions from core state powers, notably justice and home affairs legislation, distinguish the Northern cohort (Duttle et al forthcoming;Winzen 2016). The level of differentiation of the 2004 cohort increases slightly.…”

Enhanced Cooperation, EMU Reforms and Their Implications for Differentiation in the European Union

“…Tuytschaever (1999, pp. 7-32) also writes on the differentiation in the TEEC, the SEA and the TM, while Winzen (2016) speaks of the differentiation in secondary law.…”