Home  About us  Contact
 

EU Studies (eu + studies)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Humanities and Social Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Across the EU Studies,New Regionalism Frontier: Invitation to a Dialogue

JCMS: JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES, Issue 4 2010
ALEX WARLEIGH-LACK
This article notes a lack of communication between two broad schools of scholarship on regional integration: EU studies and analyses of the ,new regionalism'. It is argued that the existence of this divide, which is perpetrated by proponents of both schools, is an impediment to the elaboration of useful theory as well as being a missed opportunity. The benefits and problems of using the EU as a comparator in studies of regionalism are assessed. While the mistake of giving the EU analytical primacy as a benchmark or model is to be avoided, it is argued that careful treatment of accumulated insights from EU studies (including a proper re-inspection of classical integration theory) brings clear methodological and meta-theoretical benefits for the project of comparative regional integration scholarship. [source]

Stanford School on Sociological Institutionalism: A Global Cultural Approach,

INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY, Issue 3 2010
Didem Buhari-Gulmez
Stanford School,World Society or World Polity approach,led by John W. Meyer has been largely overlooked despite its revolutionary insights (Robertson 2009). Nevertheless, renewed interest in neoinstitutionalisms and concepts as world society, culture, and legitimacy (Clark 2007) imply Stanford School's relevance for contemporary social and political sciences. This essay discusses first, the underlying theoretical arguments of the School, second, its main findings and responses to criticisms, and third, Stanford School's resonance with the Constructivist, Neoinstitutionalist, and Sociological turns in International Relations. Finally, it suggests that Stanford School opens new horizons for EU studies by establishing the "missing link" between globalization and European integration. [source]

Across the EU Studies,New Regionalism Frontier: Invitation to a Dialogue

JCMS: JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES, Issue 4 2010
ALEX WARLEIGH-LACK
This article notes a lack of communication between two broad schools of scholarship on regional integration: EU studies and analyses of the ,new regionalism'. It is argued that the existence of this divide, which is perpetrated by proponents of both schools, is an impediment to the elaboration of useful theory as well as being a missed opportunity. The benefits and problems of using the EU as a comparator in studies of regionalism are assessed. While the mistake of giving the EU analytical primacy as a benchmark or model is to be avoided, it is argued that careful treatment of accumulated insights from EU studies (including a proper re-inspection of classical integration theory) brings clear methodological and meta-theoretical benefits for the project of comparative regional integration scholarship. [source]

The Governance Approach to European Integration

JCMS: JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES, Issue 2 2001
Markus Jachtenfuchs
This article argues that the study of European integration is divided into two distinct approaches: classical integration theory for which the shape of the Euro-polity is the dependent variable; and the governance approach for which it is the independent variable. An historical and conceptual overview of the approach focuses on the efficiency side of governance and excludes issues of democracy and legitimacy. From a sociology of knowledge perspective, the first part traces the roots of the present discussion back to three bodies of literature, namely studies on Europeanization, regulatory policy-making and network concepts. The second part presents the achievements of the approach: putting EU studies in a comparative perspective, directing attention towards democratic governance and bypassing old dichotomies on the future of the nation-state. The final section evaluates present shortcomings, most notably a bias toward problem-solving, the proliferation of case studies and the lack of a coherent theoretical perspective. [source]