EU Economic Governance and Globalization

EU Economic Governance and Globalization

Edited by Miriam L. Campanella and Sylvester Eijffinger

It is through a gradual evolution, rather than by grand design, that the somewhat fragmented economic policies of the EU now appear to be heading towards a rather more robust and coherent economic governance. EU Economic Governance and Globalization considers the following crucial question as the EU enters its final stage of institution-building; will the economic institutions of the EU push ahead to reform its rigid national economies and open them up to globalization and international competition?


Miriam L. Campanella and Sylvester C.W. Eijffinger

Subjects: economics and finance, political economy, politics and public policy, political economy


Miriam L. Campanella and Sylvester C.W. Eijffinger INTRODUCTION Regulatory policies, harmonization, targets as well as peer pressure are ingredients of what this book refers to as EU economic governance. Each has its roots in the Jean Monnet method of integration which aimed at narrowing gaps and differences, overcoming conflicts, inducing cooperation and eventually furthering a truly European polity. It should not matter how many and what institutions take part in this historical task of building a peaceful and integrated Europe. Whether they be supranational or intergovernmental, elected or bureaucratic, national or subnational, private corporations or social organized interests, the arena is perceived to be large enough to accommodate the representatives of all groupings, which favor the project. Since its foundation, however, the European Commission was granted major visibility on the European scene as its mission was deemed, in the troubled after-war period, to forge compromise in a context of reciprocal diffidence (Magnette, 2001, p. 31). Empowered with a treaty-bound role as agenda setter for the Council of Ministers, the Commission has had a monopoly of regulatory legislation modeled along consensus-oriented decision-making lines where alternative paths are often neglected in favor of thoroughgoing compromise (Kohler-Koch, 2001; Magnette, 2001). Yet the integrationist influence of the Commission is often limited by the ability of national governments, in the IGCs or in the Council of Ministers sessions, to alter the proposals or to disregard the suggestions of the Commission when drafting treaties or directives. Prerogatives transferred to EU level...