Shadowboxing in silence: balancing with European Semester guidelines in national parliamentary debates on economic policies

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences Critical Policy Studies Pub Date : 2022-07-28 DOI:10.1080/19460171.2022.2101015
Hanna Rautajoki, Laia Pi Ferrer
{"title":"Shadowboxing in silence: balancing with European Semester guidelines in national parliamentary debates on economic policies","authors":"Hanna Rautajoki, Laia Pi Ferrer","doi":"10.1080/19460171.2022.2101015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines national responses to the introduction of a strong policy coordination tool by the European Commission: the European Semester. The tool was introduced in 2012 in reaction to the economic crisis to prevent unsustainable policy choices within EMU. It sets annual country-specific recommendations for economic policies, which the Member States are expected to implement when drafting national budgets. We study the uptake of the policy tool in three disparate Member States: Finland, Spain and France in 2013. The article explores how national parliaments tackle the challenge imposed on national sovereignty by the powerful tool. We investigate the discursive practices and justifications evinced by national politicians on policy proposal in the parliamentary debate on annual state budget. Politicians balance between contrastive normative frameworks by operating on evasive discursive formulations and performative silences, which point to a deafened legitimation work and double commitment within the multilevel polity of the EU.","PeriodicalId":51625,"journal":{"name":"Critical Policy Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2101015","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article examines national responses to the introduction of a strong policy coordination tool by the European Commission: the European Semester. The tool was introduced in 2012 in reaction to the economic crisis to prevent unsustainable policy choices within EMU. It sets annual country-specific recommendations for economic policies, which the Member States are expected to implement when drafting national budgets. We study the uptake of the policy tool in three disparate Member States: Finland, Spain and France in 2013. The article explores how national parliaments tackle the challenge imposed on national sovereignty by the powerful tool. We investigate the discursive practices and justifications evinced by national politicians on policy proposal in the parliamentary debate on annual state budget. Politicians balance between contrastive normative frameworks by operating on evasive discursive formulations and performative silences, which point to a deafened legitimation work and double commitment within the multilevel polity of the EU.
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
沉默中的太极拳:在国家议会关于经济政策的辩论中与欧洲学期指导方针保持平衡
摘要本文考察了各国对欧盟委员会推出强有力的政策协调工具——欧洲学期的反应。该工具于2012年推出,以应对经济危机,防止欧洲货币联盟内部出现不可持续的政策选择。它为经济政策制定了针对具体国家的年度建议,预计会员国将在起草国家预算时执行这些建议。2013年,我们研究了三个不同成员国对该政策工具的接受情况:芬兰、西班牙和法国。文章探讨了各国议会如何应对这一强大工具对国家主权的挑战。我们调查了国家政治家在议会关于年度国家预算的辩论中对政策提案的讨论做法和理由。政客们通过回避性的话语表述和表演性的沉默来平衡对比性的规范框架,这表明在欧盟的多层次政治中,合法化工作和双重承诺震耳欲聋。
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
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
A complementary approach to Critical Frame Analysis and ‘what is the policy represented to Be?’ Pragmatism over sovereignty? The Italian policy response to the infrastructuralization of non-EU cloud service providers Exploring counter hegemony and action research to address the climate crisis Social prescribing for and beyond health: hyper-solutionism in health policy What problems is the AI act solving? Technological solutionism, fundamental rights, and trustworthiness in European AI policy
×
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