Giandomenico Majone’s research while affiliated with European University Institute and other places

This volume argues that the crisis of the European Union is not merely a fiscal crisis but reveals and amplifies deeper flaws in the structure of the EU itself. It is a multidimensional crisis of the economic, legal and political cornerstones of European integration and marks the end of the technocratic mode of integration which has been dominant since the 1950s. The EU has a weak political and administrative centre, relies excessively on governance by law, is challenged by increasing heterogeneity and displays increasingly interlocked levels of government. During the crisis, it has become more and more asymmetrical and has intervened massively in domestic economic and legal systems. A team of economists, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists analyze these deeper dimensions of the European crisis from a broader theoretical perspective with a view towards contributing to a better understanding and shaping the trajectory of the EU.

Although several dimensions of the present euro-crisis have been analysed by students of European integration, the impact of the crisis on the political culture of EU leaders has been largely overlooked. The political culture of a nation, a social class or, in case of the EU, an elite consists of a system of beliefs, symbols, and values – the latter including conceptions of purpose – that defines the situation in which political action takes place. One of the roots of the traditional political culture of EU leaders was the Monnet strategy of fait accompli, which consisted in pushing ahead with integration without worrying about either public support or democratic legitimation. This approach was supported by the prevailing emphasis on the process of integration rather than on the concrete results of specific collective decisions. The most serious consequence of the political culture shared by most EU leaders was the tendency to disregard both feasibility constraints and the limits of collective action. Under the impact of the euro-crisis total optimism has been replaced by panic-driven austerity. The paper concludes by calling attention to the fact that there are various alternative approaches to regional (in particular, European) integration. One approach deserving particular attention in the present situation is the functional – rather than territorial – approach advocated by David Mitrany in the 1940s and by Ralph Dahrendorf in the 1970s.

For more than half a century Euro elites succeeded in presenting integration as a positive-sum game, with economic benefits more than compensating for the limitations of supranational democracy. Since the beginning of the euro crisis, however, even the most inattentive citizen of the EU realizes that integration entails serious normative costs as well as some economic benefits. As the crisis intensifies, all proposed ad hoc solutions tend to aggravate the democratic deficit of the Union. It is not only the citizens that are being excluded from the debate about the future of the eurozone; most national governments are forced to accept solutions proposed by a few leaders representing the major stockholders of the European Central Bank. Thus, the risk of a total normative loss – a default rather than a simple deficit of democracy at the European level – is now quite concrete.

Desde o fim dos anos 70, os governos europeus têm sido forçados a mudar seus modos tradicionais de governança como reação a tendências, tais como a crescente concorrência internacional e a integração econômica e monetária cada vez mais profunda no âmbito da União Européia. A adaptação estratégica às novas realidades resultou num papel reduzido para o Estado positivo, intervencionista, e no crescimento correspondente do papel do Estado regulador: a criação de regras está substituindo a tributação e a despesa por parte do Estado. A primeira parte do artigo identifica três conjuntos de estratégias conducentes ao crescimento do Estado regulador, como regulador externo ou de mercado e como regulador interno da administração descentralizada. A segunda parte examina mudanças estruturais importantes, induzidas por mudanças nas estratégias reguladoras.

Resumo A regulação, seus modos, níveis e escopos foram sendo revistos e lapidados através do tempo e pelas circunstâncias. Este artigo discute as formas como a mesma foi pensada, gerida, praticada e implementada. Expõe as falhas, acertos, evoluções e novas abordagens da área, principalmente na Europa e nos Estados Unidos. O autor, para tanto, alude a pensamentos de estudiosos relevantes na matéria em questão, como os economistas da Escola de Chicago, e a inúmeros códigos inerentes ao processo de regulação como a Freedom of Information Act (Foia) (Lei sobre Liberdade de Informação) e a lei Interstate Commerce Act (Lei de Comércio entre Países). The regulation, its modes, levels and scopes had been reviewed and shaped through the time and circumstances. This article discusses the ways it has been thought, managed, practiced and implemented. It exposes failures, things did right, evolutions and new approaches in the area, mainly in Europe and The USA. This way, the author alludes to relevant scholar’s thoughts in the present matter, as the economists from Chicago School, inter alia, and to various rules intrinsic to the regulatory process as, for example, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Interstate Commerce Act.

In this important new book, Giandomenico Majone examines the crucial but often overlooked distinction between the general aim of European integration and the specific method of integration employed in designing an (ill-considered) monetary union. Written with the author's customary insight and precision, this highly topical and provocative book reviews the Union's leaders' tradition of pushing through ambitious projects without considering the serious hurdles that lie in the way of their success. Regional and European integration topics are discussed, including credibility of commitments, delegation of powers, bargaining and influence activities, adverse selection and moral hazard. The author also offers a deeper examination of the specific crisis of monetary integration, arguing that it might be more effectively achieved with inter-jurisdictional competition and suggesting how integration should be managed in the globalized world.

Por varias razones, una política social redistributiva siempre ha desempeñado un papel menor en la Unión Europea. Básicamente, la única política social europea distintiva consiste en proteger al consumidor y defender a los individuos contra cualquier forma de discriminación por origen nacional o género. Semejante protección social es un ejemplo importante de integración "negativa". En cambio, el cumplimiento de los derechos sociales positivos requeriría un presupuesto mucho más amplio y una armonización de arriba hacia abajo, la cual es irrealizable en las circunstancias actuales. Con cada nueva ampliación de la Unión Europea cambia el cálculo de los costos y beneficios de la armonización de políticas. Así, los límites más importantes a la integración regional profunda son sociales, más que económicos o políticos. For several reasons, redistributive social policy has always played a minor role in the European Union. Basically, the only distinctive European social policy consists in consumer protection, and in the protection of individuals against any form of discrimination based on nationality or gender. Such social protection is an important example of "negative" integration, while the enforcement of positive social rights would require not only a much larger budget, but also a level of top-down harmonization which is unfeasible under present circumstances. Hence, each enlargement of the EU (or, more generally, of a regional bloc) changes the calculus of the benefits and costs of policy harmonization. In sum, the main limits to deep regional integration are social rather than economic or even, strictly speaking, political. Pour des raisons variées, les politiques sociales visant à la redistribution ont joué un rôle secondaire dans l'Union Européenne. En effet, la seule politique sociale caractéristique de l'Europe consiste à protéger le consommateur et l'individu contre toute forme de discrimination par l'origine sociale ou le genre. Cette protection sociale est un exemple important d'intégration "négative". Par contre, pour assurer les droits sociaux positifs il faudrait un budget considérable et une harmonisation vers le bas, qui est impensable dans les conditions présentes. À mesure que l'Union Européenne grandit, l'estimation des coûts et des avantages de l'harmonisation des politiques est modifiée. Les limites à une intégration régionale profonde sont donc d'ordre social, plutôt qu'économique ou politique.

This chapter recalls the historical origins and different national traditions of regulation, including changes in the views about the nature of the regulatory process over the last two decades. In order to analyse the privatization and regulation of pension regimes, new conceptual and institutional approaches are needed. The public/private mix which is characteristic of pension policies in Europe is foreign to the theory and practice of old-style statutory regulation, but is quite compatible with the new trends discussed in this chapter. The evolution of the regulatory state will, among other considerations, require a revision of normative criteria.