This paper takes a look at the debates surrounding EU enlargement from the perspective of norms entrepreneurship. It begins by introducing the challenges that come with enlargement including both administrative and financial commitments that EU members must bear as they enlarge. In the cost-benefits analysis, it would only mean that EU would enlarge in circumstances where benefits have surpassed costs.
However this is not always the case with EU enlargement. Consequently leading to the need for a search of other motives behind the enlargement which this paper has attempted. The question to what extent are norms the drives of EU enlargement? has been answered with two objectives. First the examination of when and how norms are formulated in the process of an enlargement and secondly the evaluation of the role norms play in making the final decision to enlarge.
This paper is using an historical approach has probed the debates and negotiations around EU enlargement from the Second to the CEECs enlargement accounting for the role of norms in shaping debates and framing members’ behavior. Finally this paper has concluded that in cases where the need for norms entrepreneurship superseded the calculations of cost and benefits, EU framed the enlargement as a norms exercise hence the conclusion that norms play a key role in enlargement.
Table of Contents
EU Enlargement: A Norms Entrepreneurship Exercise?
Introduction
Norms and EU Enlargements
Second Enlargement Round: Phase I-1981
The Eastern enlargement/Fourth round of enlargement-2004
Conclusion
Objectives and Research Focus
This paper investigates the extent to which norms drive European Union enlargement, moving beyond traditional cost-benefit analyses to understand how sociological factors and shared values influence membership decisions across different enlargement rounds.
- The formation and formulation of norms during the enlargement process.
- The evaluation of the role norms play in final enlargement decisions.
- An historical analysis of enlargement rounds from the second round to the 2004 CEECs enlargement.
- The interplay between rational economic calculations and sociological values in member state behavior.
- The concept of the European Union as a "norms entrepreneur" in the international arena.
Excerpt from the Book
Second Enlargement Round: Phase I-1981
This round is marked by the entry of Greece to the EEC after making her application in 1975 barely two years after the first enlargement thus no proper adjustment had taken place. The effects of the first enlargement being described as ‘more severe than anticipated’ stretching the community system and institutions to the limit. Consequently raising doubts about the ability of the Commission and the Council to “survive the addition of yet more member governments, each with its own special national interests to protect and defend”. To this end, enlargement looked less viable despite the Council’s pronouncement in 1972 of a possibility of a European Union an idea which was thrown in disarray by the oil crisis of 1973 (Verney, 2006). The crisis did not only complicate the chances of integration but left each country pre-occupied with measures to overcome the crisis shifting the focus from the European agenda to national-domestic agenda.
The economic recession which diverted the attention of Nation-States called for a new objectives of the EEC buttressed by the Tindemans Report which claimed that, “Over the years, the European public has lost a guiding light, namely the political consensus between our countries on our reasons for undertaking this joint task and the characteristics with which we wish to endow it” (European Council 1976: 11). Subsequently, it has been deduced that EU suffered both questions of legitimacy and direction (Verney, 2006). It is at this time when EU is facing enormous challenges that Greece which was also of less economic consequence applied to join EU. It is noteworthy that at this time, there was only one condition provided for under the Treaty of Rome which was geographical under Article 237 limiting the right to apply to European states. However, there were two informal conditions on politics and economics that had been imposed on the country wishing to join the Community (Verney, 2006).
Summary of Chapters
EU Enlargement: A Norms Entrepreneurship Exercise?: This chapter introduces the core research question regarding the role of norms in driving EU enlargement and identifies the administrative and economic costs often associated with the process.
Introduction: This section establishes the historical context of EU enlargement and contrasts rationalist cost-benefit perspectives with the need for a sociological explanation involving norms and values.
Norms and EU Enlargements: This section examines the circumstances under which EU members utilize norms to justify or reject enlargement, defining these norms as essential values and identities vital to European belonging.
Second Enlargement Round: Phase I-1981: This chapter analyzes the Greek accession, focusing on how values like democracy and the return to European "roots" were used to overcome significant economic and geopolitical concerns.
The Eastern enlargement/Fourth round of enlargement-2004: This chapter explores the complex political and economic debates surrounding the 2004 enlargement, detailing the tension between "drivers" and "brakemen" within the EU.
Conclusion: This final section synthesizes findings across all discussed enlargement rounds, concluding that norms play a constitutive and persuasive role that often supersedes rational economic calculations.
Keywords
EU Enlargement, Norms Entrepreneurship, Sociological Approaches, European Identity, Democracy, Rational Choice, CEECs, Accession Negotiations, Political Integration, Values, Economic Costs, Historical Approach, European Commission, Member State Behavior, Sovereignty.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
This paper examines whether European Union enlargement is driven by norms and values rather than purely economic cost-benefit calculations.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
The work covers the history of EU enlargement rounds, the tension between economic interests and shared political values, and the influence of sociological constructivism on decision-making.
What is the main research question?
The core research question is: "To what extent are norms the drives of EU enlargement?"
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author adopts an historical approach, analyzing debates and negotiations from the second enlargement round up to the 2004 Eastern enlargement.
What is examined in the main body of the text?
The main body investigates specific enlargement cases—specifically Greece, Spain, Portugal, and the Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs)—to see how arguments based on democracy, human rights, and European identity shaped the final integration decisions.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
The research is characterized by terms such as EU enlargement, norms entrepreneurship, European identity, democracy, and sociopolitical integration.
How does the author define the "fountainhead" in the context of Greek membership?
The author highlights that Greece was described by political representatives as the "fountainhead" of European ideals, using its classical heritage to justify its accession as a "return to the roots" of Europe.
What is the distinction between "drivers" and "brakemen" in the 2004 enlargement?
"Drivers" were member states that pushed for quick and firm commitments to Eastern enlargement, while "brakemen" were those who were reluctant and focused on the potential economic and administrative costs of the integration process.
- Quote paper
- Calvince Omondi Barack (Author), 2018, EU Enlargement. A Norms Entrepreneurship Exercise?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/436003
