非常欧洲的出路:政体维护与第 50 条的设计

Joseph Ganderson, Niccolò Donati, Maurizio Ferrera, Anna Kyriazi, Zbigniew Truchlewski
{"title":"非常欧洲的出路:政体维护与第 50 条的设计","authors":"Joseph Ganderson, Niccolò Donati, Maurizio Ferrera, Anna Kyriazi, Zbigniew Truchlewski","doi":"10.1017/gov.2023.44","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Multilevel polities do not typically facilitate secession, so why did the European Union adopt Article 50? Revisiting formative debates from the 2003 Convention on the Future of Europe, we combine archival research with an original dataset of delegate debates over two levels: the existence and procedural operation of an exit article. This reveals essential new detail on the genealogy of Article 50. We locate this institutional innovation within a Rokkanian–Hirschmanian theoretical framework which treats exit closure as necessary for loyalty and resilience. Further refining this ‘polity’ perspective, we find many participants showed awareness of the potentially disruptive implications of an exit article. Yet, given extant tensions around ‘ever closer union’, a Eurocentric procedural design prevailed as a safety valve, granting EU authorities default control over any exit process. This European logic of ‘controlled opening' offers a potential blueprint for other integrating compound polities and international organizations facing backlashes from member states.","PeriodicalId":503990,"journal":{"name":"Government and Opposition","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Very European Way Out: Polity Maintenance and the Design of Article 50\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Ganderson, Niccolò Donati, Maurizio Ferrera, Anna Kyriazi, Zbigniew Truchlewski\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/gov.2023.44\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Multilevel polities do not typically facilitate secession, so why did the European Union adopt Article 50? Revisiting formative debates from the 2003 Convention on the Future of Europe, we combine archival research with an original dataset of delegate debates over two levels: the existence and procedural operation of an exit article. This reveals essential new detail on the genealogy of Article 50. We locate this institutional innovation within a Rokkanian–Hirschmanian theoretical framework which treats exit closure as necessary for loyalty and resilience. Further refining this ‘polity’ perspective, we find many participants showed awareness of the potentially disruptive implications of an exit article. Yet, given extant tensions around ‘ever closer union’, a Eurocentric procedural design prevailed as a safety valve, granting EU authorities default control over any exit process. This European logic of ‘controlled opening' offers a potential blueprint for other integrating compound polities and international organizations facing backlashes from member states.\",\"PeriodicalId\":503990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Government and Opposition\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Government and Opposition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2023.44\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Government and Opposition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2023.44","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

多层次政体通常不会促进分离,那么为什么欧盟会通过第 50 条呢?我们重新审视了 2003 年《欧洲未来公约》中的形成性辩论,将档案研究与代表辩论的原始数据集结合起来,涉及两个层面:退出条款的存在和程序运行。这揭示了有关第 50 条谱系的重要新细节。我们将这一制度创新置于罗坎-赫希曼(Rokkanian-Hirschmanian)理论框架内,该框架将退出封闭视为忠诚和复原力的必要条件。通过进一步完善这一 "政体 "视角,我们发现许多参与者都意识到了退欧条款的潜在破坏性影响。然而,考虑到 "日益紧密的联盟 "所带来的紧张局势,以欧洲为中心的程序设计作为安全阀占了上风,赋予欧盟当局对任何退欧程序的默认控制权。欧洲的这种 "受控开放 "逻辑为其他面临成员国反弹的一体化复合政体和国际组织提供了潜在的蓝图。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Very European Way Out: Polity Maintenance and the Design of Article 50
Multilevel polities do not typically facilitate secession, so why did the European Union adopt Article 50? Revisiting formative debates from the 2003 Convention on the Future of Europe, we combine archival research with an original dataset of delegate debates over two levels: the existence and procedural operation of an exit article. This reveals essential new detail on the genealogy of Article 50. We locate this institutional innovation within a Rokkanian–Hirschmanian theoretical framework which treats exit closure as necessary for loyalty and resilience. Further refining this ‘polity’ perspective, we find many participants showed awareness of the potentially disruptive implications of an exit article. Yet, given extant tensions around ‘ever closer union’, a Eurocentric procedural design prevailed as a safety valve, granting EU authorities default control over any exit process. This European logic of ‘controlled opening' offers a potential blueprint for other integrating compound polities and international organizations facing backlashes from member states.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Going Local, Going Mainstream? Ethnographic Study of Two French Cities Governed by the Rassemblement National Elizabeth Meehan ‘Best Article’ Prize Understanding the Political Party Think Tank Landscape: A Categorization of Their Functions and Audiences Party-Based Sovereignism in EU Countries: Main Patterns and Their Justification Convicting Politicians for Corruption: The Politics of Criminal Accountability
×
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