@misc{DawsonJachtenfuchs, author = {Dawson, Mark and Jachtenfuchs, Markus}, title = {Autonomy without collapse in a Better European Union}, editor = {Dawson, Mark and Jachtenfuchs, Markus}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {9780192897541}, pages = {208}, abstract = {The European Union's history exhibits numerous episodes in which Member States have sought to re-enforce their national autonomy in the face of deepening integration. Efforts to re-gain autonomy, however, are often accompanied by legitimate concerns that autonomy will lead to dis-integration or will have wider destructive consequences. The EU thus faces a dilemma. Calls for autonomy cannot all be dismissed as mere populist rhetoric or national egoism but instead represent a legitimate questioning of the degree of uniformity that EU law and politics presently carry. At the same time, the fear that greater autonomy may carry dis-integrative effects is also legitimate -uniformity is not an accidental by-product of the EU's construction but intrinsically related to its policy goals. Giving too much room for autonomy might create an opportunity structure for the loss of collective goods, deficits in problem-solving, and perhaps even to self-destruction. The EU requires autonomy, but in doing so, it must also avoid collapse. Can it achieve it, and if so, how? Autonomy without Collapse is devoted to exploring innovative answers to this question. It draws together scholars in law and political science interested in exploring how to overcome the central dilemma of preserving sustainable yet real autonomy in the future European Union.}, language = {en} } @incollection{DawsonJachtenfuchs, author = {Dawson, Mark and Jachtenfuchs, Markus}, title = {Autonomy without Collapse? Towards a Better European Union.}, series = {Autonomy without Collapse in a Better European Union}, booktitle = {Autonomy without Collapse in a Better European Union}, editor = {Dawson, Mark and Jachtenfuchs, Markus}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {9780192897541}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {3 -- 20}, language = {en} } @article{GenschelJachtenfuchsMigliorati, author = {Genschel, Philipp and Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Migliorati, Marta}, title = {Differentiated integration as symbolic politics? Constitutional differentiation and policy reintegration in core state powers}, series = {European Union Politics}, journal = {European Union Politics}, doi = {10.1177/14651165221128291}, abstract = {What are the policy consequences of constitutional differentiation in core state powers? We argue that the most important consequence is not necessarily the exclusion of the constitutional outs from the policies of the ins, but their reintegration by different means. The outs often have strong functional and political incentives to re-join the policies they opted out from, and the ins have good reasons to help them back in. We develop a theoretical framework that derives the incentives for reintegration from the costs of a policy exclusion. We use a novel dataset of reintegration opportunities to map trends and patterns of reintegration across policy fields and member states. We analyze selected cases of reintegration to probe the plausibility of our theoretical argument.}, language = {en} } @techreport{JachtenfuchsGenschelMiglioratietal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Genschel, Philipp and Migliorati, Marta and Loschert, Franziska}, title = {Differentiated integration and core state powers: the EU budget and Justice and Home Affairs}, edition = {Working Paper, EUI RSC, 2022/47, Integrating Diversity in the European Union (InDivEU)}, abstract = {This paper studies two areas of Core State Powers (CSP), i.e. the EU budget and Justice and Home Affairs. The two cases have the aim to reconstruct how Differentiated Integration (DI) has developed over time in these two specific domains. While the aim is the same for both cases, the way the cases are structured is substantially different. This is due to various reasons. First, the politics of the EU budget go back to the early days of the EU, while JHA is a post-Maastricht feature. This implies that the budget case study concentrates on a much longer time span. Second, DI in the budget interests several member states, while in JHA it is a phenomenon circumscribed to fewer members. Finally, the politics of the budget are decided through intergovernmental negotiations, while JHA is a rather supranationalised policy that relies a lot on secondary legislation and EU executive bodies such as EU agencies.}, language = {en} } @techreport{JachtenfuchsGenschelMigliorati, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Genschel, Philipp and Migliorati, Marta}, title = {Report on the expanded EUDIFF 1 dataset}, edition = {EUI RSC; 2022/40; Integrating Diversity in the European Union (InDivEU) }, pages = {57}, abstract = {This report provides a general overview of the dataset under construction for WP5, EUDIFF-RES, focusing on differentiated integration in core state powers (CSP) in the European Union (EU). The report explains the rationale behind the data collection and provides an outline of the information gathered so far. The aim of the report is to make the dataset easily accessible to anyone who wishes to utlise it for further research.}, language = {en} } @techreport{JachtenfuchsGenschelMigliorati, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Genschel, Philipp and Migliorati, Marta}, title = {Report on the expansion of the EUDIFF 1 dataset}, edition = {EUI RSC; 2022/38; Integrating Diversity in the European Union (InDivEU) }, pages = {22}, abstract = {The present report makes an overview of the progresses made so far in Work Package 5. At this initial stage, the main aim was to develop a new coding for core state powers in EU legislation. Such coding serves the purpose of expanding EUDIFF1 through new information on core state powers integration. The report is structured as follows: after a brief introduction, Section I presents a tripartite categorization of core state powers modes of integration. Section II tests the plausibility of the proposed categorisations through an empirical analysis that explores primary legislation from 1952 to 2016. Section III discusses the possibility of a more fine-grained distinction.}, language = {en} } @techreport{JachtenfuchsGenschelMigliorati, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Jachtenfuchs, Markus and Genschel, Philipp and Migliorati, Marta}, title = {Report on patterns of variation in DI across areas of core state power and instruments of integration}, edition = {Working Paper, EUI RSC, 2022/39, Integrating Diversity in the European Union (InDivEU) }, pages = {22}, abstract = {The paper summarises different patterns of differentiation and reintegration in core state powers during the post-Maastricht period, based on the EUDIFF-RES dataset. Moreover, it offers a theoretical framework able to explain the observed variation. The framework is further tested by means of short empirical illustrations taken from different policy areas. Overall, the EUDIFF-RES dataset substantially contributes to our understanding of CSP differentiated integration by revealing that the behaviour of states vis-a-vis core state powers varies greatly according to the kind of resource, as well as the costs and opportunities attached to it.}, language = {en} }