Differentiated integration

Last updated

Differentiated integration (DI) is a mechanism that gives countries the possibility to opt out of certain European Union policies while other countries can further engage and adopt them. This mechanism theoretically encourages the process of European integration. It prevents policies that may be in the interest of most states to get blocked or only get adopted in a weaker form. [1] As a result, policies are not implemented uniformly in the EU. In some definitions of differentiated integration, it is legally codified in EU acts and treaties, through the enhanced cooperation procedure, but it can also be the result of treaties which have been agreed to externally to the EU's framework, for example in the case of the Schengen Agreement. [2]

Contents

Supranational European Bodies-en.svg
A clickable Euler diagram [file] showing the relationships between various multinational European organisations and agreements

Types of differentiated integration

In an attempt to resolve confusion around the many kinds of differentiated integration, Alexander Stubb categorised the mechanism into three distinct concepts: multi-speed, variable geometry, and à la carte. Each is respectively pegged to a corresponding variable: time, space, and matter. [3] [4]

Stubb's initial work can be considered outdated as it does not take into account facets of DI which have more recently been outlined by academics. [6] Some academic literature includes de facto differentiated integration and informal opt-outs focusing on the different ways member states comply with uniform EU rules, [7] others look at groups of member states forming informal differentiated cooperation. [8] Two kinds of differentiated integration can separated: firstly, internal referring to the level of participation of EU members in implementing policies, and secondly, external which looks at the participation of non-member states in implementing EU policies. Furthermore, one can also distinguish horizontal to vertical differentiation, the former analysing the differences in integration from one state to another, the latter looking at integration from one policy area to another across the EU. [9]

Benefits

DI can be viewed as a solution to deepening integration while widening the EU. It has been argued that DI can circumvent large practical challenges in European integration. In the context of the Eurozone crisis, the Fiscal Compact, for example, was seen as a treaty that would enable states that wished to reform the Eurozone without being blocked by other states who did not wish to do so in the same manner. [10]

The main practical strength of differentiated integration is its ability to move negotiations forward in the context of a heterogeneous Europe. This is seen by many academics as the main benefit of DI. [11] There may be multiple reasons for political impasses to arise. A member state may not wish to join or engage in implementing a policy that is being negotiated by multiple European states. They may also be unable to meet expected imposed criteria at a certain time. This is a key example where Multi-Speed DI can be seen as an effective solution. If unanimous agreement must be met, policies may be dictated by the lowest common denominator or be confronted by political deadlock. Article 20 of the Treaty of the European Union states that "enhanced cooperation shall be adopted by the Council as a last resort when it has established that the objectives of such cooperation cannot be attained within a reasonable period by the Union as a whole". [12]

There have been cases where DI has been viewed as effective in resolving deadlock. Under John Major, the British government did not wish to be part of the common currency nor the proposed social policy in 1992 during the Maastricht Treaty negotiations. The eventual flexibility offered by other member states and EU institutions regarding these key issues for the UK brought two advantages. First, it made it possible for the other states to proceed in negotiation, and second, it relieved political pressure from the British government. [13] This is an example of À La Carte DI where policy specific opt-outs are carried out by an EU member state. [3]

There may be cases where offering opt-outs within the EU's framework is not an accepted path to resolve a political impasse. In these cases, DI can take place outside the EU's framework. The 1985 Schengen agreement is the product of DI through separate treaty making. [14] This example of a variable geometry DI [3] satisfies the wish of both groups. The first group of states could open their borders to each other, deepening the process of integration much further while the states who did not want to participate in this aspect of integration had total freedom to control their borders. Thus, the process of integration can proceed with little obstruction and most parties could fulfil their perceived national interest. [15]

When aggregating the opinions of DI, most academics believe that its benefits outweigh the risks. [1]

Weaknesses

Concentric circles in variable-geometry DI and overlapping circles present in the À La Carte model entail reinforcing division and potentially alienating states from each other. This issue has been explicitly pointed out by states who felt were being pushed out of negotiations through the use of the enhanced cooperation process. The introduction of EU patents is one such case. Italy and Spain, who had some reservations regarding the language in which patents were to be submitted, explicitly stated that "the envisaged enhanced cooperation does not aim to further the objectives of the Union but to exclude a Member State from the negotiations" when they appealed before the EU Court of Justice. [16]

In the context of future accession to the EU, Schengen creates two possible paths; first, if future EU member states are expected to accept the Schengen agreement, non-Schengen EU states may be more alienated from the rest of the EU, it could even cause current states within the Schengen area to leave it. Second, if future EU member states are not expected to accept the Schengen agreement, DI would bring discrimination towards these new members and may put into question the EU's authority and legitimacy. [17] In both cases, DI brings new long-term challenges.

DI introduces issues regarding solidarity between member states. States that choose to opt-out of certain policies remove themselves from shared risks. Regarding the Schengen case, in 2011, the states directly affected by migration coming from north Africa were those who did not opt-out of the Schengen agreement. At first, solidarity between states that opted-in seemed to have been the core issue, namely between France and Italy. This was mainly due to Italy granting temporary residence permits to migrants who could then move freely within the Schengen area which led France to introduce internal border checks. [18] This crisis led the Italian prime minister to question the value not only to membership of Schengen but also to the EU. [19] In this example, division of Schengen states was present regardless of DI, but additionally, non-Schengen states did not show solidarity as they distanced themselves from the crisis since the beginning. Solidarity of all EU member states could have contributed positively to resolving the crisis, but DI in this case absolved certain states from finding common solutions. [15]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Union</span> Supranational political and economic union of 27 states

The European Union (EU) is a supranational political and economic union of 27 member states that are located primarily in Europe. The union has a total area of 4,233,255 km2 (1,634,469 sq mi) and an estimated total population of over 448 million. The EU has often been described as a sui generis political entity combining the characteristics of both a federation and a confederation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Maastricht Treaty</span> 1992 founding treaty of the European Union

The Treaty on European Union, commonly known as the Maastricht Treaty, is the foundation treaty of the European Union (EU). Concluded in 1992 between the then-twelve member states of the European Communities, it announced "a new stage in the process of European integration" chiefly in provisions for a shared European citizenship, for the eventual introduction of a single currency, and for common foreign and security policies, and a number of changes to the European institutions and their decision taking procedures, not least a strengthening of the powers of the European Parliament and more majority voting on the Council of ministers. Although these were seen by many to presage a "federal Europe", key areas remained inter-governmental with national governments collectively taking key decisions. This constitutional debate continued through the negotiation of subsequent treaties, culminating in the 2007 Treaty of Lisbon.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Schengen Agreement</span> European Union treaty on internal border controls

The Schengen Agreement is a treaty which led to the creation of Europe's Schengen Area, in which internal border checks have largely been abolished. It was signed on 14 June 1985, near the town of Schengen, Luxembourg, by five of the ten member states of the then European Economic Community. It proposed measures intended to gradually abolish border checks at the signatories' common borders, including reduced-speed vehicle checks which allowed vehicles to cross borders without stopping, allowing residents in border areas freedom to cross borders away from fixed checkpoints, and the harmonisation of visa policies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty of Amsterdam</span> Interesante

The Treaty of Amsterdam, officially the Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts, was signed on 2 October 1997, and entered into force on 1 May 1999; it made substantial changes to the Treaty of Maastricht, which had been signed in 1992.

European integration is the process of industrial, economic, political, legal, social, and cultural integration of states wholly or partially in Europe or nearby. European integration has primarily come about through the European Union and its policies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multi-speed Europe</span> Political idea

Multi-speed Europe or two-speed Europe is the idea that different parts of the European Union should integrate at different levels and pace depending on the political situation in each individual country. Indeed, multi-speed Europe is currently a reality, with only a subset of EU countries being members of the eurozone and of the Schengen area. Like other forms of differentiatedintegration such as à la carte and variable geometry, "multi-speed Europe" arguably aims to salvage the "widening and deepening of the European Union" in the face of political opposition.

A continental union is a regional organization which facilitates pan-continental integration. Continental unions vary from collaborative intergovernmental organizations, to supranational politico-economic unions. Continental unions are a relatively new type of political entity in the history of human government. Throughout most of human history, political organization has been at the local level and in more recent centuries, the sub-regional ("regional")/sub-continental level ; however, starting with the advent of better transportation, weapons and communication there was for the first time the ability for a union of member states to organize at the continental level. After the devastation of the First and Second World Wars in the middle of the twentieth century, Europe began to slowly integrate with the founding of the "European Community", which became a political union covering much of the European continent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andorra–European Union relations</span> Bilateral relations

A customs union is the principal area of robust formal agreement between the Principality of Andorra and the European Union (EU). Andorra borders two EU member states: France and Spain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prüm Convention</span> Law enforcement treaty in part of Europe

The Prüm Convention is a law enforcement treaty which was signed on 27 May 2005 by Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Spain in the town of Prüm in Germany, and which is open to all members of the European Union, 14 of which are currently parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1992 Danish Maastricht Treaty referendum</span>

A referendum on the Maastricht Treaty for the founding of the European Union was held in Denmark on 2 June 1992. The treaty was rejected by 50.7% of voters with a turnout of 83.1%. This meant a serious hurdle on the way in the process of further European integration, which nevertheless did continue because all twelve memberstates did want to ratify.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Opt-outs in the European Union</span> EU regulations which are not imposed by member states by agreement

In general, the law of the European Union is valid in all of the twenty-seven European Union member states. However, occasionally member states negotiate certain opt-outs from legislation or treaties of the European Union, meaning they do not have to participate in certain policy areas. Currently, three states have such opt-outs: Denmark, Ireland and Poland. The United Kingdom had four opt-outs before leaving the Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Enhanced cooperation</span> European Union procedure

In the European Union (EU), enhanced cooperation is a procedure where a minimum of nine EU member states are allowed to establish advanced integration or cooperation in an area within EU structures but without the other members being involved. As of October 2017, this procedure is being used in the fields of the Schengen acquis, divorce law, patents, property regimes of international couples, and European Public Prosecutor and is approved for the field of a financial transaction tax.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Area of freedom, security and justice</span> EUs home affairs and justice policies

The area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) of the European Union (EU) is a policy domain concerning home affairs and migration, justice as well as fundamental rights, developed to address the challenges posed to internal security by collateral effects of the free movement of people and goods in the absence of border controls or customs inspection throughout the Schengen Area, as well as to safeguard adherence to the common European values through ensuring that the fundamental rights of people are respected across the EU.

The Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification (CVM) is a safeguard measure invoked by the European Commission when a new member or acceding state of the European Union has failed to implement commitments undertaken in the context of the accession negotiations in the fields of the Area of freedom, security and justice or internal market policy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Permanent Structured Cooperation</span> European Union defence policy agreement

The Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) is the part of the European Union's (EU) security and defence policy (CSDP) in which 26 of the 27 national armed forces pursue structural integration. Based on Article 42.6 and Protocol 10 of the Treaty on European Union, introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009, PESCO was first initiated in 2017. The initial integration within the PESCO format is a number of projects which launched in 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaties of the European Union</span>

The Treaties of the European Union are a set of international treaties between the European Union (EU) member states which sets out the EU's constitutional basis. They establish the various EU institutions together with their remit, procedures and objectives. The EU can only act within the competences granted to it through these treaties and amendment to the treaties requires the agreement and ratification of every single signatory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Schengen acquis</span> Set of rules and legislation in EU law

The Schengen acquis is a set of rules and legislation, integrated into European Union law, which regulate the abolition of border controls at the internal borders within the Schengen Area, as well as the strengthening of border controls at the external borders.

The migration and asylum policy of the European Union is within the area of freedom, security and justice, established to develop and harmonise principles and measures used by member countries of the European Union to regulate migration processes and to manage issues concerning asylum and refugee status in the European Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom opt-outs from EU legislation</span> Former EU provisions

The United Kingdom was a member state of the European Union and of its predecessor the European Communities from 1973 until 2020. Since the foundation of the European Communities, it has been an important neighbour, and was a leading member state until its withdrawal from the EU on 31 January 2020 as a result of Brexit, ending 47 years of membership.

References

  1. 1 2 Bellamy, Richard; Kröger, Sandra (2017-07-29). "A demoicratic justification of differentiated integration in a heterogeneous EU". Journal of European Integration. 39 (5): 625–639. doi:10.1080/07036337.2017.1332058. hdl: 10871/27757 . ISSN   0703-6337. S2CID   73708439.
  2. ↑ Schimmelfennig, Frank; Winzen, Thomas (March 2014). "Instrumental and Constitutional Differentiation in the E uropean U nion". JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 52 (2): 357. doi:10.1111/jcms.12103. ISSN   0021-9886. S2CID   153796388. Archived from the original on 2023-04-19. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Stubb, Alexander C-G. (June 1996). "A Categorization of Differentiated Integration". JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 34 (2): 283–295. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.1996.tb00573.x. ISSN   0021-9886.
  4. ↑ Schimmelfennig, Frank (2019-08-28). "Differentiated Integration and European Union Politics". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. p. 4. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1142. ISBN   978-0-19-022863-7 . Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  5. ↑ Bellamy, Richard (2022). Flexible Europe : differentiated integration, fairness, and democracy. Sandra Kröger, Marta Lorimer. Bristol, UK. pp. 9–10. ISBN   978-1-5292-1994-4. OCLC   1291317909.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  6. ↑ Tamim, James. (2022) 'What is differentiated integration?,' European Digital Policy Institute. James Tamim.
  7. ↑ Andersen, Svein S.; Sitter, Nick (2006-09-01). "Differentiated Integration: What is it and How Much Can the EU Accommodate?". Journal of European Integration. 28 (4): 313–330. doi:10.1080/07036330600853919. ISSN   0703-6337. S2CID   154588158.
  8. ↑ Which Europe? : the politics of differentiated Integration. Kenneth H. F. Dyson, Angelos Sepos. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. 2010. ISBN   978-0-230-55377-4. OCLC   610853030.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  9. ↑ Leuffen, Dirk (2013). Differentiated integration : explaining variation in the European Union. Berthold Rittberger, Frank Schimmelfennig. Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 17. ISBN   978-0-230-24643-0. OCLC   815727629.
  10. ↑ What is Differentiated Integration? – InDivEU Stakeholder Forums – Video I, archived from the original on 2023-04-19, retrieved 2023-04-19
  11. ↑ Kröger, Sandra; Loughran, Thomas (2021-12-26). "The Risks and Benefits of Differentiated Integration in the European Union as Perceived by Academic Experts". JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 60 (3): 702–720. doi:10.1111/jcms.13301. hdl: 10871/127933 . ISSN   0021-9886. S2CID   245532645.
  12. ↑ "EUR-Lex – 12012M/TXT – EN – EUR-Lex". eur-lex.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 2021-02-09. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  13. ↑ Diedrichs, Udo; Faber, Anne; Tekin, Funda; Umbach, Gaby, eds. (2011-01-13). Europe Reloaded. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. doi:10.5771/9783845228334. ISBN   978-3-8329-6195-4. Archived from the original on 2023-04-19. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  14. ↑ Winzen, Thomas; Schimmelfennig, Frank (December 2016). "Explaining differentiation in European Union treaties". European Union Politics. 17 (4): 7. doi:10.1177/1465116516640386. ISSN   1465-1165. S2CID   156897242. Archived from the original on 2023-04-24. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  15. 1 2 Ondarza, Nicolai (2013). "Strengthening the Core or Splitting Europe?" (PDF). Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP). pp. 15–16. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2023-04-19. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  16. ↑ "Case C-274/11 (Kingdom of Spain against Council of the European Union)". 2011. Archived from the original on 2022-07-25. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  17. ↑ Wang, Shichen (2016-12-01). "An Imperfect Integration: Has Schengen Alienated Europe?". Chinese Political Science Review. 1 (4): 715. doi: 10.1007/s41111-016-0040-0 . ISSN   2365-4252.
  18. ↑ "A Race against Solidarity: The Schengen Regime and the Franco-Italian Affair". CEPS. 2011-04-29. Archived from the original on 2023-04-19. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
  19. ↑ "Italian minister questions value of EU membership". EUobserver. 2011-04-11. Archived from the original on 2023-04-19. Retrieved 2023-04-19.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.