IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v58y2004i01p137-174_58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Government Preferences for Institutional Change in EU Foreign and Security Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias

Abstract

Some member-states of the European Union (EU) want a supranational foreign and security policy, while other member-states oppose any significant limitation of national sovereignty in this domain. What explains this variation? Answering this question could help us to better understand not only the trajectory of European unification, but also the conditions and prospects of consensual political integration in other regional contexts and territorial scales. The main research traditions in international relations theory suggest different explanations. I examine the roles of relative power capabilities, foreign policy interests, Europeanized identities, and domestic multilevel governance in determining the preferences of the fifteen EU member governments concerning the institutional depth of their foreign and security policy cooperation. I find that power capabilities and collective identities have a significant influence, but the effect of ideas about the nature and locus of sovereignty, as reflected in the domestic constitution of each country, is particularly remarkable.A previous version of this article was presented at the 4th ECPR Pan-European International Relations Conference, Canterbury, 8–10 September 2001. For their valuable comments, I would like to thank Filippo Andreatta, Daniele Archibugi, Simone Borra, Nicola Dunbar, Fabio Franchino, Alkuin Kölliker, Leonardo Morlino, Angelo Panebianco, Eiko Thielemann, Ben Tonra, the editors of IO, and three anonymous reviewers. I am responsible for any mistakes.

Suggested Citation

  • Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, 2004. "Explaining Government Preferences for Institutional Change in EU Foreign and Security Policy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 137-174, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:58:y:2004:i:01:p:137-174_58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818304581055/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernd Schlipphak, 2013. "Action and attitudes matter: International public opinion towards the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(4), pages 590-618, December.
    2. Kiratli, Osman Sabri, 2015. "The role of identity in support for supranational integration in EU Foreign and Security Policies," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 19, February.
    3. Thomas Bernauer & Steffen Mohrenberg & Vally Koubi, 2020. "Do citizens evaluate international cooperation based on information about procedural and outcome quality?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 505-529, April.
    4. Zachary Selden, 2010. "Power is Always in Fashion: State-Centric Realism and the European Security and Defence Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 397-416, March.
    5. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2013. "Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority," TranState Working Papers 171, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    6. Mayer, Sebastian, 2010. "Kollidieren die Güter? Juridische und politische Reaktionen auf Zielkonflikte internationalisierter Sicherheitspolitk," TranState Working Papers 130, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    7. Sophia Lee, 2013. "Fuzzy-set method in comparative social policy: a critical introduction and review of the applications of the fuzzy-set method," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1905-1922, June.
    8. Bear F. Braumoeller, 2017. "Aggregation Bias and the Analysis of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions in fsQCA," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(2), pages 242-251, March.
    9. Daniel Finke, 2009. "Domestic Politics and European Treaty Reform," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 482-506, December.
    10. Osman Sabri Kiratli, 2012. "Greece," International Studies, , vol. 49(3-4), pages 263-284, July.
    11. Vis, Barbara & Woldendorp, Jaap & Keman, Hans, 2007. "Do miracles exist? Analyzing economic performance comparatively," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 531-538, May.
    12. Flemming Splidsboel Hansen, 2013. "Integration in the post-Soviet space," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 16(2), pages 142-159, June.
    13. Deniz Aksoy & Dino Hadzic, 2019. "Political institutions and collective attachments," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 584-607, December.
    14. Daniel Finke, 2009. "Estimating the Effect of Nonseparable Preferences in Eu Treaty Negotiations," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 543-569, October.
    15. Daniele Archibugi & Marco Cellini & Mattia Vitiello, 2019. "Refugees in the European Union: from emergency alarmism to common management," Management Working Papers 17, Birkbeck Department of Management, revised Feb 2021.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:58:y:2004:i:01:p:137-174_58. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.