This study assumes the validity of liberal intergovernmentalism (LI) theory and follows Ingebritsen‘s sectoral approach. The thesis under investigation is formulated as follows: While the fishing industry in Norway constantly succeed in intervening in national policy-making towards European integration, Icelandic fishermen lost access to governing parties after the sudden change of government in 2009. Consequently they failed to prevent the government from filing the EU membership application.
Iceland and Norway have traditionally been referred to as “outsiders” or even “outliers” in the process of European Integration (Miles 2005). While Iceland had not applied for EU membership until 2009, the Norwegian public rejected the country´s accession twofold in a referendum, first 1972 and again in 1994. Since the mid-1990s, both states have nevertheless been highly affiliated to the EU project through their participation in the European Economic Area (EEA). Additionally, both countries experienced similar developments concerning political representation since 1994, with long-serving Eurosceptic center-right governments, which were replaced by pro-European center-left governments after the turn of the millennium. The electorate in Norway brought a coalition government of Labor, Socialists and Center Party to power in 2005, which was reelected four years later. In Iceland, a coalition of social democrats and Left-Green Movement replaced the conservative government in 2009. How did it come that Iceland for the first time in history applied for EU membership after the change in government while Norway did not?
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- 1 Introduction
- 2 State of Research
- 2.1 The European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)
- 2.2 Impact of interest groups on political parties
- 2.3 Reluctant Europeans: The Case of Iceland
- 2.4 To Join or Not to Join: The Case of Norway
- 3 Theoretical Framework
- 3.1 Liberal Intergovernmentalism & the Sectoral Approach
- 3.2 Network analysis
- 3.3 Dependent and independent variable
- 4 Methodology
- 4.1 Operationalization of (in)dependent variable
- 4.2 Case Selection
- 5 Expected Results
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This study investigates the contrasting paths of Iceland and Norway towards EU membership, focusing on the role of the fishing industry and its influence on national policy-making. It aims to explain why Iceland applied for EU membership for the first time in 2009, while Norway has consistently rejected accession. The study utilizes liberal intergovernmentalism and a sectoral approach to analyze the interplay between domestic political actors and the EU integration process.
- The influence of the fishing industry on national policy regarding EU membership.
- The impact of interest group-political party relations on EU integration decisions.
- A comparison of the political dynamics in Iceland and Norway concerning EU accession.
- The application of liberal intergovernmentalism and the sectoral approach to the case studies of Iceland and Norway.
- The role of access to decision-makers in shaping national policy towards the EU.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
1 Introduction: This introductory chapter sets the stage for the study by highlighting Iceland and Norway's historical reluctance towards EU membership despite their strong affiliation through the EEA. It introduces the central research question: why did Iceland apply for EU membership in 2009 while Norway did not? The chapter establishes the theoretical framework (liberal intergovernmentalism and Ingebritsen's sectoral approach), the main hypothesis (that the fishing industry's influence on political parties explains the difference), and the threefold contribution of the research: addressing gaps in existing literature on Nordic EU integration, explaining Iceland's recent shift, and testing Ingebritsen's theory. The chapter also briefly touches on the concept of "access to decision-makers" as a key element of the analysis.
2 State of Research: This chapter provides a review of relevant literature and lays the groundwork for the empirical analysis. It begins with an overview of the European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and its implications for Iceland and Norway. The chapter then delves into the existing scholarship on the interaction between interest groups and political decision-makers, contextualizing the study within broader debates about interest group influence. Lastly, it presents a concise historical and socio-political analysis of Iceland and Norway, leading up to the period of study.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
European Union, Iceland, Norway, EU membership, fisheries policy, Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), interest groups, political parties, liberal intergovernmentalism, sectoral approach, network analysis, access to decision-makers, European integration.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Study of Iceland and Norway's Paths Towards EU Membership
What is the main topic of this study?
This study investigates the contrasting paths of Iceland and Norway towards EU membership, focusing on the role of the fishing industry and its influence on national policy-making. It aims to explain why Iceland applied for EU membership for the first time in 2009, while Norway has consistently rejected accession.
What are the key themes explored in this study?
Key themes include the influence of the fishing industry on national policy regarding EU membership; the impact of interest group-political party relations on EU integration decisions; a comparison of the political dynamics in Iceland and Norway concerning EU accession; the application of liberal intergovernmentalism and the sectoral approach to the case studies of Iceland and Norway; and the role of access to decision-makers in shaping national policy towards the EU.
What theoretical framework is used?
The study utilizes liberal intergovernmentalism and a sectoral approach to analyze the interplay between domestic political actors and the EU integration process.
What methodologies are employed in this research?
The methodology includes operationalization of (in)dependent variables and case selection. The study employs a comparative analysis of Iceland and Norway.
What is the significance of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)?
The European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and its implications for Iceland and Norway are central to understanding the context of the study. The CFP's impact on the fishing industry in both countries is a key factor in shaping their respective stances on EU membership.
What is the role of interest groups in this study?
The study examines the interaction between interest groups (particularly the fishing industry) and political parties, analyzing how these relationships influence national policy regarding EU integration.
How does this study contribute to existing literature?
This research addresses gaps in existing literature on Nordic EU integration, explains Iceland's recent shift towards EU membership, and tests Ingebritsen's theory (likely referring to a specific theory on sectoral influence in integration processes).
What are the key chapters and their summaries?
Chapter 1 (Introduction): Sets the stage, introduces the research question, theoretical framework, hypothesis, and contributions of the research. Chapter 2 (State of Research): Reviews relevant literature, including the CFP and interest group influence, and provides historical context for Iceland and Norway. Further chapters detail methodology and expected results.
What are the keywords associated with this study?
European Union, Iceland, Norway, EU membership, fisheries policy, Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), interest groups, political parties, liberal intergovernmentalism, sectoral approach, network analysis, access to decision-makers, European integration.
- Citation du texte
- Ron Böhler (Auteur), 2010, Fishing in Troubled Waters. Iceland, Norway and the Question of EU Membership, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/376502
