IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Explaining visa, asylum and immigration policy Treaty revision: insights from a revised neofunctionalist framework

Listed author(s):
  • Arne Niemann
Registered author(s):

    This paper seeks to explain the varying, and sometimes intriguing, outcomes of the past three Treaty revision negotiations of European Union/Community visa, asylum and immigration policy. Regarding this policy area, I focus on the substantial constitutional issues of decision rules and institutional set-up. The results of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) negotiations leading to the Amsterdam Treaty, the Treaty of Nice and the Constitutional Treaty are subjected to causal analysis. The paper draws on a revised neofunctionalist framework and argues that five explanatory factors can account for the Treaty outcomes: (1) functional pressures; (2) the role of supranational institutions; (3) socialisation, deliberation and learning processes; (4) exogenous pressures; and (5) countervailing forces.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science in its series The Constitutionalism Web-Papers with number p0005.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 09 May 2006
    Handle: RePEc:erp:conweb:p0005
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Andrew Moravcsik & Kalypso Nicolaïdis, 1999. "Explaining the Treaty of Amsterdam: Interests, Influence, Institutions," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 59-85, 03.
    2. Schimmelfennig, Frank, 2001. "The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(01), pages 47-80, December.
    3. Martin Baldwin-Edwards, 1997. "The Emerging European Immigration Regime: Some Reflections on Implications for Southern Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 497-519, December.
    4. Andrew Moravcsik, 1993. "Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 473-524, December.
    5. Schmitter, Philippe C., 1969. "Three Neo-Functional Hypotheses About International Integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(01), pages 161-166, December.
    6. Mark Gray & Alexander Stubb, 2001. "Keynote Article: The Treaty of Nice - Negotiating a Poisoned Chalice?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(s1), pages 5-23, 09.
    7. Haas, Ernst B., 1961. "International Integration: The European and the Universal Process," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(03), pages 366-392, June.
    8. Jeffrey Lewis, 1998. "Is the 'Hard Bargaining' Image of the Council Misleading? The Committee of Permanent Representatives and the Local Elections Directive," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 479-504, December.
    9. Sandra Lavenex, 2001. "The Europeanization of Refugee Policies: Normative Challenges and Institutional Legacies," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 851-874, December.
    10. Pieter Bouwen, 2004. "The Logic of Access to the European Parliament: Business Lobbying in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 473-495, 09.
    11. Sophie Meunier & Kalypso Nicolaïdis, 1999. "Who Speaks for Europe? The Delegation of Trade Authority in the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 477-501, 09.
    12. John Peterson, 1991. "Technology Policy in Europe: Explaining the Framework Programme and Eureka in Theory and Practice," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 269-290, 03.
    13. Wolfgang Wessels, 1997. "An Ever Closer Fusion? A Dynamic Macropolitical View on Integration Processes," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 267-299, 06.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erp:conweb:p0005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jan WILKENS)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.