Introduction: the Europeanisation of Southern Europe

Iosif Botetzagias
{"title":"Introduction: the Europeanisation of Southern Europe","authors":"Iosif Botetzagias","doi":"10.1080/14613190500391437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present special issue on the Europeanisation of Southern Europe is more than a collection of up-to-date research papers on the different aspects of Europeanization. Its underlying rationale is to assess the problems, experiences and responses of, on the one hand, existing member states and, on the other hand, of new and candidate member states to Europeanisation. Different contributors in this issue use different definition(s) of Europeanisation (processes), and I am not going to offer in these opening lines yet another one: suffice to say that we all ascribe to the description of Europeanisation as ‘domestic change caused by European integration’. Another common thread of this issue’s papers is that they all address at least one of the three different mechanisms of Europeanisation’s impact on domestic change, identified by Knill and Lehmkuhl (2002): namely, (a) ‘institutional compliance’—where European policy making prescribes specific institutional requirements which have to be implemented, (b) ‘changing the domestic opportunity structures’—where the EU changes the ‘domestic rules of the game’, and finally (c) ‘a change in the beliefs and preferences of domestic actors’—a ‘framing integration’, affecting perceptions. The papers in this issue are organised in a way which allows the reader to progressively move across countries, national levels, policy domains and EU member state ‘categories’ in a differentiated pace: though each contribution is self-contained, one can easily draw comparisons with its preceding and following ones. In the first paper, Massimiliano Andretta and Manuela Caiani discuss the Europeanisation of the Italian social movements, employing a dual approach: on the one hand, with a top-down approach, they assess whether and how social movements are adapting their strategies within a Europeanised context, and whether and how they are able to seize the new European opportunities for achieving their goals, reaching the conclusion that while social movements still seem better able to exploit the domestic political opportunities, nevertheless they are slowly adapting to the transforming political context, taking more and more into account the European level. On the other hand, using a bottom-up approach, they deal with whether and how social movements frame their claims and identities as ‘European’ and which kind of vision of the process of European integration they promote, concluding that while they are more","PeriodicalId":313717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14613190500391437","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The present special issue on the Europeanisation of Southern Europe is more than a collection of up-to-date research papers on the different aspects of Europeanization. Its underlying rationale is to assess the problems, experiences and responses of, on the one hand, existing member states and, on the other hand, of new and candidate member states to Europeanisation. Different contributors in this issue use different definition(s) of Europeanisation (processes), and I am not going to offer in these opening lines yet another one: suffice to say that we all ascribe to the description of Europeanisation as ‘domestic change caused by European integration’. Another common thread of this issue’s papers is that they all address at least one of the three different mechanisms of Europeanisation’s impact on domestic change, identified by Knill and Lehmkuhl (2002): namely, (a) ‘institutional compliance’—where European policy making prescribes specific institutional requirements which have to be implemented, (b) ‘changing the domestic opportunity structures’—where the EU changes the ‘domestic rules of the game’, and finally (c) ‘a change in the beliefs and preferences of domestic actors’—a ‘framing integration’, affecting perceptions. The papers in this issue are organised in a way which allows the reader to progressively move across countries, national levels, policy domains and EU member state ‘categories’ in a differentiated pace: though each contribution is self-contained, one can easily draw comparisons with its preceding and following ones. In the first paper, Massimiliano Andretta and Manuela Caiani discuss the Europeanisation of the Italian social movements, employing a dual approach: on the one hand, with a top-down approach, they assess whether and how social movements are adapting their strategies within a Europeanised context, and whether and how they are able to seize the new European opportunities for achieving their goals, reaching the conclusion that while social movements still seem better able to exploit the domestic political opportunities, nevertheless they are slowly adapting to the transforming political context, taking more and more into account the European level. On the other hand, using a bottom-up approach, they deal with whether and how social movements frame their claims and identities as ‘European’ and which kind of vision of the process of European integration they promote, concluding that while they are more
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
简介:南欧的欧洲化
本期关于南欧欧洲化的特刊不仅仅是关于欧洲化不同方面的最新研究论文的集合。其基本原理是一方面评估现有成员国的问题、经验和反应,另一方面评估新成员国和候选成员国对欧洲化的反应。本期不同的撰稿人对欧洲化(过程)使用了不同的定义,我不打算在开篇提供另一个定义:足以说明我们都将欧洲化的描述归因于“欧洲一体化引起的国内变化”。本期论文的另一个共同点是,它们都论述了欧洲化对国内变化影响的三种不同机制中的至少一种,由Knill和Lehmkuhl(2002)确定:即,(a)“制度合规”——欧洲政策制定规定了必须实施的具体制度要求,(b)“改变国内机会结构”——欧盟改变“国内游戏规则”,最后(c)“改变国内行为者的信念和偏好”——“框架一体化”,影响观念。本期论文的组织方式允许读者以不同的速度逐步跨越国家,国家层面,政策领域和欧盟成员国的“类别”:虽然每个贡献都是独立的,但人们可以很容易地与之前和之后的论文进行比较。在第一篇论文中,Massimiliano Andretta和Manuela Caiani采用双重方法讨论了意大利社会运动的欧洲化:一方面,通过自上而下的方法,他们评估社会运动是否以及如何在欧洲化的背景下调整他们的战略,以及他们是否以及如何能够抓住新的欧洲机会来实现他们的目标,得出的结论是,虽然社会运动似乎仍然能够更好地利用国内政治机会,然而,他们正在慢慢适应不断变化的政治环境;越来越多地考虑到欧洲的水平。另一方面,使用自下而上的方法,他们处理社会运动是否以及如何将他们的主张和身份定义为“欧洲”,以及他们促进的是欧洲一体化进程的哪种愿景,结论是,虽然他们更多
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Leaders, political behaviour and decision-making: the case of the former President of the Republic of Cyprus, George Vasiliou Understanding banking sector reforms in Turkey: assessing the roles of domestic versus external actors The Europeanization of Turkey and its impact on the Cyprus problem Building institutional, economic and social capacities through discourse: the role of NGOs in the context of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia The Southern European model of immigration: do the cases of Malta, Cyprus and Slovenia fit?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1