Between failure and success of the integration process: explaining the policy impact (the case of the fiscal and energy unions)

• Authors: Petrakov Iaroslav , Kucheryavaya Elena

Title variants

PL

Porażka i sukces w procesie integracji: wyjaśnianie wpływu polityk (przypadek unii fiskalnej i energetycznej)

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The aim of the article is to explain why the EU integration efforts have different outcomes in times of crisis with regards to impact on key stakeholders. Besides traditional political theories of European integration, authors suggest to take into account the importance of behavioural intentions and stimuli to adhere to the reforms agenda. The research results presented in this article explain two recent deep EU crises: energy crisis and fiscal crisis, which evolved simultaneously, but resulted in different integration projects within the same political and institutional background. Authors analysed Eurobarometer public opinion surveys together with empirical data on the impact on stakeholders, based on available indicators in Eurostat. Authors found that the key for a policy to succeed in targeting agents’ and groups’ behaviour is its direct ties with stakeholders’ motivation which can be done only at market level. Thus, policy shift in integration areas should be reinforced by direct and clear market solutions and corrective mechanisms avoiding politically-relevant targets.

PL

Celem artykułu jest wyjaśnienie dlaczego inicjatywy integracyjne w ramach UE mają w czasie kryzysu zróżnicowane efekty, jeśli chodzi o wpływ na kluczowych interesariuszy. Autorzy sugerują, że oprócz tradycyjnych politycznych teorii integracji europejskiej należy uwzględnić znaczenie intencji behawioralnych i czynników skłaniających do wypełniania planu reform. Rezultaty badań zaprezentowanych w artykule dotyczą dwóch ostatnich poważnych kryzysów w UE: energetycznego i fiskalnego, które ewoluowały równolegle, lecz pomimo tożsamego kontekstu politycznego i instytucjonalnego ich skutki były różne. Autorzy przeanalizowali badania opinii publicznej Eurobarometru oraz dane empiryczne dotyczące wpływu na interesariuszy, zaczerpnięte z Eurostatu. Autorzy ustalili, że kluczowe dla sukcesu polityki, jeśli chodzi o wpływ na zachowanie jednostek i grup, są bezpośrednie więzy z motywacjami interesariuszy, co można osiągnąć jedynie na poziomie rynku. Reformom polityk w obszarze integracyjnym powinny towarzyszyć bezpośrednie i przejrzyste rozwiązania rynkowe oraz mechanizmy korekcyjne unikające celów ważnych politycznie.

Keywords

EN

European integration; fiscal union; energy union; theory of fields; crises of the European Union

PL

integracja europejska; unia fiskalna; unia energetyczna; teoria pól; kryzysy Unii Europejskiej

• Publisher: Wydział Nauk Politycznych i Studiów Międzynarodowych, Uniwersytet Warszawski
• Journal: Przegląd Europejski
• Year: 2016
• Issue: 4(42)
• Pages: 38-55

Dates

published

2016

Contributors

author

Petrakov Iaroslav

• Chernihiv National University of Technology, Ukraine

author

Kucheryavaya Elena

• Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, University of Warsaw

References

• BAUER Michael W., and KNILL Christoph (2014), A conceptual framework for the comparative analysis of policy change: measurement, explanation and strategies of policy dismantling, “Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice”, no. 16(1).
• BECKER Lawrence J. (1978), Joint effect of feedback and goal setting on performance: a field study of residential energy conservation, “Journal of Applied Psychology”, no. 63(4).
• BICKERTON Christopher J., HODSON Dermot and PUETTER Uwe (2014), The new intergovernmentalism: European integration in the Post-Maastricht era, “JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies”, no. 53(4).
• BORKOWSKI Paweł J. (2007), Polityczne teorie integracji międzynarodowej, Warszawa.
• auf dem BRINKE Anna (2016), Excessive deficit procedure without fines?, Delors Institute, Blog Post, July 2016. (http://www.delorsinstitut.de/en/publications/qa-excessive-deficit-procedure-without-fines) (accessed: 23/12/2016)
• CAREY Sean (2002), Undivided Loyalties: Is National Identity an Obstacle to European Integration?, “European Union Politics”, no. 3.
• CARPENTER Edwin, CHESTER Theodore S. (1988), The impact of state tax credits and energy prices on adoption of solar energy systems, “Land Economics”, no. 64(4).
• CHRISTIANSEN, Thomas (2015), Institutionalist Dynamics behind the New Intergovernmentalism: the Continuous Process of EU Treaty Reform, in: D. Hodson, U. Puetter, C.J. Bickerton (eds), The New Intergovernmentalism, Oxford.
• COSTANZO Marko, ARCHER Dane, ARONSON Elliot, PETTIGREW Thomas F. (1986), Energy conservation behaviour: the difficult path from information to action, “American Psychologist”, no. 41.
• DAUTER Luke, FLIGSTEIN Neil (2006), The Sociology of Markets, IRLE Working Paper, 145-07.
• DIMAGGIO Paul (1988), Interest and agency in institutional theory, in: L. G. Zucker (ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, Cambridge.
• DUPONT Claire (2013), Climate policy integration into EU energy policy, Brussels Free University.
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2006), A European Strategy for Sustainable, Competitive and Secure Energy. Green Paper (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV%3Al27062 ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2007), Communication from the Commission to the European Council and the European Parliament. An Energy Policy for Europe (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=celex:52007DC0001 ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2008), Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Second Strategic Energy Review. An EU Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52008DC0781 ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2014a), Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, and the Council. European Energy Security Strategy (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0330&qid=1407855611566) (accessed: 23/12/2016)
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2014b), Gas stress test: Cooperation is key to cope with supply interruption, Press-release 16 Oct 2014 (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-1162_en.htm ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2015), Commission communication on the framework strategy for the energy union, COM (2015) 80 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2015%3A80%3AFIN ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROBAROMETER (2006), Special issue “Energy”. No. 258. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_258_en.pdf ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROBAROMETER (2007), Special issue on “Energy Technologies: Knowledge, Perception, Measures”. No. 262. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_262_en.pdf ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROBAROMETER (2010), Standard issue “Public opinion in the European Union”. No. 73. (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb73/eb73_first_en.pdf ) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROBAROMETER (2013), Standard issue “Europeans, the European Union and the Crisis. No. 80 (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_cri_en.pdf) (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• EUROBAROMETER (2014), Standard issue “Europeans, the European Union and the Crisis”. No. 81 (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb81/eb81_cri_en.pdf) . (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• FALKNER Gerda (2016), The EU’s current crisis and its policy effects: research design and comparative findings, “Journal of European Integration”, no. 38(3). DOI:10.1080/07036337.2016.1140154
• FLIGSTEIN Neil (2002), Constructing Polities and Markets: An Institutionalist Account of European Integration, Advanced Journal of Sociology, 107(5): 1206–1243.
• FLIGSTEIN Neil (2008), Fields, power and social skill: A critical analysis of the new institutionalisms, “International Public Management Review”, no 9(1).
• FLIGSTEIN Neil, POLYAKOVA Alina, SANDHOLTZ Wayne (2011), European Integration, Nationalism, and European Identity, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, no. 50 (1).
• FLIGSTEIN Neil, MCADAM Doug (2012), A theory of fields, Oxford.
• GEHRING Thomas (1996), Integrating Integration Theory: Neo-functionalism and International Regimes, “Global Society”, no. 10(3).
• GIDDENS Anthony (1979), Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis, Berkeley.
• GUNNTHORSDOTTIR Anna, RAPOPORT Amnon (2006), Embedding social dilemmas in intergroup competition reduces free-riding, Organization Behaviour Human Decision Processes, 101: 184–199.
• HAAS Ernst B. (2001), Does Constructivism Subsume Neo-Functionalism?, in: T. Christiansen, K.E. Jorgensen, A. Wiener (eds.), The Social Construction of Europe, Thousand Oaks.
• HILL Christopher (1993), The capacility-expectations gap or conceptualizing Europe’s international role, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, no. 31(3).
• HUSEYNLI Seymur (2013), Energy Policy of the European Union and Importance of the Energy Resources of Azerbaijan: Neo-functionalist and Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach, “International Affairs and Global Strategy”, no. 8.
• INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY RESEARCH (2014), Germany’s Electricity Market Out of Balance, http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/germanys-electricity-market-balance-must-pay-flexible-back-power/ (accessed: 23/12/2016).
• JEGEN Maya, MERAND Frederic (2013), Constructive Ambiguity: Comparing the EU’s Energy and Defence Policies, “West European Politics”, DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2013.818325.
• KAPUSNIAK Tomasz (2010), The eastern dimension of the European Union’s Neighbourhood Policy. Inclusion without membership?, Warszawa.
• LANTOS Geoffrey Paul (2011), Consumer behaviour in action: real-life applications for marketing managers, New York.
• LAFFAN Brigid, SCHLOSSER Pierre (2016), Public finances in Europe: fortifying EU economic governance in the shadow of the crisis, “Journal of European Integration”, no. 38(3). doi:10.1080/07036337.201 6.1140158.
• LETZLER Robert (2007), Applying Psychology to Economic Policy Design: Using Incentive Preserving Rebates To Increase Acceptance of Critical Peak Electricity Pricing, Working Paper 162. Berkeley: Center for the Study of Energy Markets, University of California.
• MASTER Beata (2014), Teorie i koncepcje zjednoczeniowe Unii Europejskiej w założeniach programowych oraz w praktyce polskiej polityki integracyjnej (praca doktorska), Instytut Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa, Uniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach.
• MORAVCSIK Andrew (1995), Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Integration: A Rejoinder, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, no. 33.
• NIEMANN Arne, DEMOSTHENES Ioannou (2015), European economic integration in times of crisis: a case of neofunctionalism?, “Journal of European Public Policy”, no. 22(2).
• OFGEM (2011), What Can Behavioural Economics Say about GB Energy Consumers?, London.
• OSTROM Elinor (1998), A behavioural approach to the rational choice theory of collective action, “American Political Science Review”, no. 92(1).
• POLLACK Mark A. (1998), The Engines of Integration? Supranational Autonomy and Influence in the European Union, in: Wayne Sandholtz, Alec Stone Sweet (eds), European Integration and Supranational Governance, Oxford.
• POLLITT Michael G., SHAORSHADZE Irina (2011), The Role of Behavioural Economics in Energy and Climate Policy, “Cambridge Working Paper in Economics”, no. 1165.
• RENNER Stephan (2009), The Energy Community of Southeast Europe: A neofunctionalist project of regional integration, “European Integration Online Papers”, Vol.13.
• SANDHOLTZ Wayne, STONE SWEET Alec, FLIGSTEIN Neil (eds, 2001), The institutionalization of Europe, Oxford – New York.
• SANDHOLTZ Wayne, STONE SWEET Alec (2012), Neo-functionalism and supranational governance, “The Oxford Handbook of the European Union” (ed. by Erik Jones, Anand Menon, and Stephen Weatherill, 2012).
• STONE SWEET Alec, BRUNELL Thomas (1998), Constructing a Supranational Constitution: Dispute Resolution and Governance in the European Community, “American Political Science Review”, no. 92.
• STONE SWEET Alec (1999), Judicialisation and the Construction of Governance, “Comparative Political Studies”, no. 32(2).
• WITKOWSKA Marta (2013), Zastosowanie paradygmatów federalizmu i rządzenia wielopoziomowego do badania mechanizmów podejmowania decyzji w Unii Europejskiej, in: Janusz Ruszkowski, Luiza Wojnicz-Smal (eds), Multi-level Governance w Unii Europejskiej, Szczecin-Warszawa.
• WITKOWSKA Marta (2015a), Przezwyciężanie kryzysu w procesie integracji europejskiej poprzez zmiany regulacji dotyczących udziału obywateli UE w podejmowaniu i realizacji decyzji, „Przegląd Europejski”, no. 1.
• WITKOWSKA Marta (2015b), Kryzys modelu demokracji w Unii Europejskiej - przyczyny, uwarunkowania, scenariusze rozwoju sytuacji, in: Jadwiga Nadolska, Konstanty A. Wojtaszczyk (eds), Kryzysy w procesie integracji europejskiej i sposoby ich przezwyciężania, Warszawa.
• YATES Suzanne M., ARONSON Elliot (1983), A social‐psychological perspective on energy conservation in residential buildings, “American Psychologist”, no. 38(4).
• ZACHMANN Georg (2014), Elements of Europe’s energy union, “Bruegel Policy Brief”, no.5.