A constructivist approach to european integration : social structure and state interaction from Messina to Maastricht - and beyond

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is to discuss if a constructivist approach may be better suited than traditional IR theories in understanding the European integration process and the question of what the EU is. I argue that constructivism gives a richer understanding of social change and the European integration process. Because of its ontological basis, it focuses on social structure and interaction, which is largely ignored by rational theories.

Based on Anthony Giddens structuration theory, I outline a framework of analysis that I use to discuss European transformation. For analytical purposes, Giddens defines structure to have three dimensions: regulative rules, constitutive rules and power. I discuss each of these dimensions in separate chapters.

When studying regulative rules, I focus on the community method and argue that the interaction of the member states in various committees and meetings has an effect on identity and interest formation. Furthermore, European institutions play an independent and central role in the European policy process. Practice and norms have developed into routinised and institutionalised patterns of cooperation. This has contributed to establishing the European Union as a mature constitutional political entity.

The principle of sovereignty is the most important constitutive rule, governing the state system. Integration has come so far that traditional interpretations of the concepts of state and sovereignty are no longer valid. Political action and authority has been disbursed to many levels and created an intertwined, multi-layered system of governance. I claim that federal principles have in reality replaced the principle of sovereignty as the organising concept in Europe. This does not mean that the EU has become a federal state, but that it is a new kind of political entity that can no longer be explained by a traditional concept of sovereignty.

These changes are not grasped by rational theories, which basically see the EU as an intergovernmental project where the nation states have delegated limited authority to the EU. The consequence is a gap between the developments that have actually taken place and the public perception of these. This has in my view contributed to the current legitimacy crisis concerning the EU s development.

The advantage of constructivist theory is that it is able to address questions of systemic transformation in a way that rational theories can not. These findings show that the choice of theoretical framework is important and have consequences for how we understand European integration and the nature of the European Union.