欧洲联合俱乐部:非正式分化与欧盟内部外交的社会秩序

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Cooperation and Conflict Pub Date : 2022-08-19 DOI:10.1177/00108367221103494
Kristin Haugevik
{"title":"欧洲联合俱乐部:非正式分化与欧盟内部外交的社会秩序","authors":"Kristin Haugevik","doi":"10.1177/00108367221103494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article makes the case for integrating informal, social and minilateral dynamics in analyses of ‘differentiated integration’ in the European Union (EU) context. In EU studies, differentiated integration has mainly served as an analytical lens for studying variation in states’ degree of formalized commitment to the European integration project or in organizational decision-making procedures across policy areas. While this focus has generated important analytical and empirical insights, three dimensions tend to be lost when limiting the study of differentiated integration to negotiated outcomes manifest in legal documents and decision-making procedures. First, informal processes of integration precede and concur with formal ones. Second, European integration is an inherently social process, and member states integrate with the EU identity-building project in different ways and to different degrees. Third, member states enjoy heterogeneous social ties with one another, routinely forming informal bi- and minilateral coalitions in everyday decision-shaping processes. More knowledge about these informal and social dynamics can give us a better understanding of how differentiated integration manifests itself in practice and where the European integration process is heading. The theoretical argument is buttressed by data from the 2020 European Council of Foreign Relations’ ‘Coalition Explorer’ survey, showing how partner preferences within the EU continue to reflect stable social sub-orders.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":"58 1","pages":"374 - 392"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"United clubs of Europe: Informal differentiation and the social ordering of intra-EU diplomacy\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Haugevik\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00108367221103494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article makes the case for integrating informal, social and minilateral dynamics in analyses of ‘differentiated integration’ in the European Union (EU) context. In EU studies, differentiated integration has mainly served as an analytical lens for studying variation in states’ degree of formalized commitment to the European integration project or in organizational decision-making procedures across policy areas. While this focus has generated important analytical and empirical insights, three dimensions tend to be lost when limiting the study of differentiated integration to negotiated outcomes manifest in legal documents and decision-making procedures. First, informal processes of integration precede and concur with formal ones. Second, European integration is an inherently social process, and member states integrate with the EU identity-building project in different ways and to different degrees. Third, member states enjoy heterogeneous social ties with one another, routinely forming informal bi- and minilateral coalitions in everyday decision-shaping processes. More knowledge about these informal and social dynamics can give us a better understanding of how differentiated integration manifests itself in practice and where the European integration process is heading. The theoretical argument is buttressed by data from the 2020 European Council of Foreign Relations’ ‘Coalition Explorer’ survey, showing how partner preferences within the EU continue to reflect stable social sub-orders.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47286,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cooperation and Conflict\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"374 - 392\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cooperation and Conflict\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221103494\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cooperation and Conflict","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221103494","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文在分析欧盟背景下的“差异化一体化”时,提出了将非正式、社会和微观动态相结合的理由。在欧盟研究中,差异化一体化主要作为研究各国对欧洲一体化项目的正式承诺程度或各政策领域组织决策程序变化的分析视角。虽然这一重点产生了重要的分析和实证见解,但当将差异化一体化的研究局限于法律文件和决策程序中体现的谈判结果时,往往会失去三个维度。首先,非正式的一体化进程先于正式进程,并与正式进程相一致。第二,欧洲一体化是一个内在的社会过程,成员国以不同的方式和程度融入欧盟身份建设项目。第三,成员国之间享有异质的社会关系,在日常决策过程中经常形成非正式的双边和多边联盟。更多地了解这些非正式和社会动态,可以让我们更好地了解差异化一体化在实践中的表现,以及欧洲一体化进程的走向。2020年欧洲外交关系委员会“联盟探索者”调查的数据支持了这一理论论点,该调查显示了欧盟内部的伙伴偏好如何继续反映稳定的社会次级秩序。
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
United clubs of Europe: Informal differentiation and the social ordering of intra-EU diplomacy
This article makes the case for integrating informal, social and minilateral dynamics in analyses of ‘differentiated integration’ in the European Union (EU) context. In EU studies, differentiated integration has mainly served as an analytical lens for studying variation in states’ degree of formalized commitment to the European integration project or in organizational decision-making procedures across policy areas. While this focus has generated important analytical and empirical insights, three dimensions tend to be lost when limiting the study of differentiated integration to negotiated outcomes manifest in legal documents and decision-making procedures. First, informal processes of integration precede and concur with formal ones. Second, European integration is an inherently social process, and member states integrate with the EU identity-building project in different ways and to different degrees. Third, member states enjoy heterogeneous social ties with one another, routinely forming informal bi- and minilateral coalitions in everyday decision-shaping processes. More knowledge about these informal and social dynamics can give us a better understanding of how differentiated integration manifests itself in practice and where the European integration process is heading. The theoretical argument is buttressed by data from the 2020 European Council of Foreign Relations’ ‘Coalition Explorer’ survey, showing how partner preferences within the EU continue to reflect stable social sub-orders.
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Published for over 40 years, the aim of Cooperation and Conflict is to promote research on and understanding of international relations. It believes in the deeds of academic pluralism and thus does not represent any specific methodology, approach, tradition or school. The mission of the journal is to meet the demands of the scholarly community having an interest in international studies (for details, see the statement "From the Editors" in Vol. 40, No. 3, September 2005). The editors especially encourage submissions contributing new knowledge of the field and welcome innovative, theory-aware and critical approaches. First preference will continue to be given to articles that have a Nordic and European focus. Cooperation and Conflict strictly adheres to a double-blind reviewing policy.
期刊最新文献
The rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire’s religiously inspired status symbols Is world politics class politics? States, social forces and voting in the United Nations General Assembly 1946–2020 ‘Recognising Merit’ in late British colonial Cyprus The importance of being civilized: Opera houses as status symbols in International Relations Forum on Heikki Patomäki’s World Statehood: The Future of World Politics
×
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