Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
chapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelthat still venerates democracy’s principles but regularly despairs of its practice, the nascent political Older of the European Union (EU) is a crucial test case. Can the ideal of self-government be extended to this new setting, with its welter of problem-solving committees, processes, and reflectio Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabeln groups that appear to lie beyond the reach of popular direction and accountability? What does the prospect of this extension tell US about the possiSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
bilities of popular sovereignty and redistributive solidarity when politics extends beyond current national political boundaries? And what does it telchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelthe description are not completely, uncontentious, they command sufficient agreement that they must be respected by any theoretical characterization of what the EU is and what it might become.179Judged simply by its ability to survive, the EU is a success. ‘Unity impossible, collapse improbable’, is Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel the grudging acknowledgment of a British observer inclined to euro-scepticism (Garton Ash 2001: 60-7). In a dynamic environment, where the basic termSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
s of collaboration remain uncertain but paralysis would soon lead to breakdown, existence itself is an achievement. In particular the EU is managing tchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelgrated market by eliminating obstacles to internal trade—in particular by mutual recognition of norms of commercial exchange (as urged by the European Conn of Justice),1 and by their harmonization through other means—while also protecting public health and safety, avoiding regulatory races to the bo Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelttom and possibly initiating some races to the top. To be sure, outcomes differ by policy area, with greater harmonization, and at a higher level, inSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
safety devices for machines than in highway or railroad transport, and more in transport than in taxation. But areas that seemed intractable ten yearschapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelns and practices of individual Member States, and natural instruments of competitive conflict—now seem at least in principle possible arenas of harmonization.2 Whatever the precise extent of regulation, dark predictions of a new laissez-180fairc order. established beyond die reach of existing nation Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelal regulatory regimes, have been overturned by events.Moving from policy to process, the EU is producing die regulatory setting for the integrated marSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
ket through new forms of rule-making issuing in open-ended lilies. One well-studied example is comitology. This system of expert committees, appointedchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel, or pressure vessels. In principle decisionmaking in these committees is by qualified majority vote. Ill practice they operate through deliberation — (self-) reflective debate by which participants reason about proposals and are open to changing their own initial preferences — aimed at consensus. C Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelommittee deliberations are driven by the comparison of differences among current regulatory systems in the Member States. Such comparisons permit idenSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
tification of best practices that serve as the starling point for a detailed, harmonized regime. Because the Commission is formally implementing decischapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelgn lawgiver — the EL in the guise of the Commission and the Council is setting the rules (Joerges el al. (eds.) 1997; Joerges and Vos (eds.) 1999; Van Schcndelcn 1998; Christiansen and Kirchner (eds.) 2001).181https://khothuvien.cori!A more recent and encompassing version of this kind of regulatory Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabeldevice — a decentralized specification of standards, disciplined by systematic comparison — is the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). In the OMC MembeSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
r States agree to formulate national action plans to further, say, employment promotion. These plans integrate, and adjust their policies in related, chapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel criticized by a panel of expen officials from other Member States in light of other plans, and each country’s performance is judged against its own goals, the performance of the others, and its response to earlier rounds of criticism. The exact mechanisms by which the OMC is applied differ between Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelpolicy areas, especially with regard to the thoroughness of peer review and the sanctions for lax response byMember States. These (sometimes significaSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
nt) differences aside, the goal here too is mutual correction, not uniformity, and here too peak-level consultation among expens grows out of and reflchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelion by policymakers is connected to broader democratic debate and practice— is an open question.3The OMC formalizes and makes manifest a form of policy making that the EƯ has applied to encourage an integrated approach to economic development regionally and to social inclusion — as a response to gri Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelnding poverty — locally. With regard to social inclusion, for182https://khothuvien.cori!example, (he EƯ typically funds at the municipal level a publiSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
c-private partnership whose members are drawn from NGOs and the relevant statutory authorities (the welfare department, the training sendee, and so onchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabele public-private partnerships organized as non-profits. The most promising proposals are selected and reviewed periodically in the light of their ability to achieve their goals, and the achievements of other projects in the parent company’s jurisdiction. In addition to monies provided by the EL', fu Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelnding for projects often includes resources formally allocated to the statutory agencies and placed at the disposition of the local partnership by boaSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
rd members with the approval of their home department. The performance of the parent company is, ideally, evaluated by comparison of its projects to tchapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabele OMC, integrated programs that reflect the peculiarities of their contexts emerge through iterated, critical comparison of local initiative (Sabel 1996; Geddes and Benington (eds.) 2001).The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has tolerated these innovations in regulatory process, despite their tenuous Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel connection to the constitutional structure, such as it is, of the EU (or any other advanced democracy, for that matter). In particular, the ECJ has nSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
ot substantially limited the cascading delegation of authority by the EƯ or Member States to experts or to public183https://khothuvien.cori!private pachapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelus the ECJ requires that comitological deliberations be generally transparent to the public, respect the full range of reasonable argument, and strictly apply certain other rules of procedure.4 The ECJ has arguably itself encouraged a roughly analogous form of rule making by occasionally using its c Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelase law jurisprudence to articulate frameworks within which the parties, after extensive collaboration with affected interests, must construct concretSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
e solutions. Is this de facto collaboration between the EQI and the Commission a marriage of convenience, an expression of judicial deference or defeachapter 13Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. SabelI. Some Stylized Facts About the EU’s Democratic VocationIn a world t Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabeless in reconciling market integration and protection of public health and safety, creating integrative actors regionally and locally, and fostering deliberative policy-making in the regulatory surround of the single market. Moreover, the Commission and the ECJ (a de facto constitutional court) are a Sovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabelmicably cohabitating. Nevertheless, the EU manifestly suffers from a ‘democratic deficit’.Most notably, it has failed to engage the attention of a EurSovereignty and Solidarity EU and US Joshua Cohen and Charles F. Sabel
opean electorate. Turnout for elections to the European Parliament has declined steadily from some 60 per cent of the eligible voters a decade ago toGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook