Samenvatting leeswerk EU Politics and Policy
Week 1: Hoofdstuk 4, 5 en 29(30)
Chapter 4: Neo-functionalism
4.2 What is neo-functionalism?
Neo-functionalism: a theory of regional integration, primarily applied to the
European Union, developed by Ernst B. Haas and others in the 1950’s and
60’s.
Neo-functionalism’s core concept is spillover. Spillover refers to a situation in
which cooperation in one field necessitates cooperation in another. A second
point that helps to explain neo-functionalism concerns the role of societal groups
in the process of integration. Interest groups and political parties would be key
actors in driving integration forward. Finally, neo-functionalism is often
characterized as a rather elitist approach. It tends to be driven by functional and
technocratic needs.
4.3 A brief history of neo-functionalism
An early objective was to formulate a general or grand theory of international
relations, based on observations of regional integration processes. Functionalism
is understandable because it seemed that the theory explained well the reality of
the European integration process. At the time.
4.4 Supranationalism and spillover
Realist positions stress the power games that occur among states.
By contrast, neo-functionalists believe that economic integration would
strengthen all states involved and that this would lead to political integration.
Economic integration leads to economic growth which in the long run implies
increased welfare among EU citizens.
The fundamental idea was that international relations should not be considered a
zero-sum game, and that everybody wins when countries become involved in
economic and political integration.
- Neo-functionalist theory also sheds light on the development of
supranational institutions and organizations, which are likely to have their
own political agendas.
“Political integration is the process whereby political actors in several distinct
national settings are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political
activities towards a new center, whose institutions possess or demand
jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of
political integration is a new political community, superimposed over the pre-
existing ones.” (Haas, 1958: 16)
Neo-functionalist writers developed at least three different arguments about the
dynamics of the integration processes:
1. The spillover hypothesis
2. The elite socialization hypothesis
3. The hypothesis on supranational interest groups
Spillover: refers to a process in which political cooperation conducted with a
specific goal in mind leads to the formulation of new goals in order to assure
the achievement of the original goal.
Ex. The original aim may be the free movement of workers across EU borders, but
it may soon become obvious that different national rules on certification prevent
workers from gaining employment in other EU states. Nurses educated in one
member state may not be allowed to work in another because of difference in
,national education. – This process of generating new political goals is the very
essence of the neo-functionalist concept of spillover
Three different kinds of spillover process:
1. Functional spillover
o Where one step towards cooperation functionally leads to another.
o Ex. From the single market to the treaty on stability, coordination,
and governance. (common currency to reduce risks related to
expanding trade)
2. Political spillover
o Occurs in situations characterized by a more deliberated political
process, in which national political elites or interest groups argue
that supranational cooperation is needed to solve specific problems.
o This type of spillover is closely related to a theory that argues that
European integration promotes shifts of loyalty among civil servants
and other elite actors
o Ex. Brexit process. (it may encourage supranational actors to argue
for increased political integration among the remaining member
states, they might argue that there is too little political integration)
3. Cultivated spillover
o Refers to situations in which supranational actors (European
Commissions in particular) push the process of political integration
forward when they mediate between the member states.
o Ex. In the area of health policy – the use of antibiotics in the
veterinarian sector. (the Commission has deliberately tried to create
a new agenda to resolve a cross-border problem in an area where
EU competences are weak)
Spillover processes may be seen partly as the result of unintended
consequences. Member states might deliberately accept political integration and
the delegation of authority to supranational institutions on an issue. However, as
a result of that decision, they may suddenly find themselves in a position where
there is a need for even more delegation.
- Political integration need not be the declared end goal for member states
engaging in this process.
Elite socialization: over time, people involved on a regular basis in the
supranational policy process will tend to develop European loyalties and
preferences.
Ex. Commission officials are expected to hold a European perspective on
problem-solving so that their loyalty may no longer be to any one national polity,
but rather to the supranational level of governance.
- Participants may come to value the system and their role within it, either
for itself, or for the concrete rewards and benefits it has produced or that it
promises.
Thus, neo-functionalists predicted that the European integration process would
lead to the establishment of elite groups loyal to the supranational institutions
that hold pan-European norms and ideas. These elites would try to convince
national elites of the advantages of supranational cooperation.
- The institutionalization of the interaction between national actors and the
continued negotiations between different member states would make it
more and more difficult for states to adhere to their political arguments
and retain credibility. As a result, it was expected that the agenda would
, tend to shift towards more technical problems upon which it was possible
to forge agreement.
4.5 The formation of supranational interest groups
Organized interest groups are also expected to become more European as
corporations and business groups formulate their own interests with an eye to the
supranational institutions.
- Neo-functionalists believe that interest groups also become Europeanized,
placing demands on their national governments for more integration.
The Basel Committee is a good example of the kind of international
institution/organization that neo-functionalist theory predicts would develop. It is
an international organization that creates international standards within the
financial area without having any formal legal competence.
Furthermore, neo-functionalists believed that interest groups would put pressure
on governments to force them to speed up the integration process. These groups
were expected to develop their own supranational interest in political and
economic integration, which would ally them to supranational institutions, such
as the European Commission. Thus, in the process of reformulating expectations
and demands, the interest groups in question approach one another
supranationally while their erstwhile ties with national friends undergo
deterioration.
Transnational organized interests can also be observed in policy areas such as
climate policy. Environmental organizations such as Greenpeace often try to
influence policy-making, while cutting across national boundaries and national
interests. They act as transnational organized interests in the way in which neo-
functionalists predicted and argue that it is necessary to increase the
competences of the Eu in relation to climate issues to push forward the climate
agenda.
4.6 Critiques of neo-functionalism
At an empirical level, the criticism focuses on the absence (or slow pace) of
political integration in Western Europe during the 1970s and early 1980s. Haas
even talked about the possibility that there might be a disintegrative equivalent
to spillover: Spillback. The Brexit crisis indicates that it is difficult for a country to
break out of the European Union. The cost of disintegration is very high, as it
implies leaving the common market.
- The Brexit deal can be seen as a process where the UK leaves and stays in
the EU at the same time due to the functional ties that exists between the
UK and the EU.
The second set of objections was based on criticism of the theories formulated by
Haas himself. By the late 1960s, Haas had accepted that his prediction (that
regional organizations such as the EU would develop incrementally, propelled
forward by various dynamics such as spillover) had failed to encapsulate the
reality of European cooperation. He recommended a different approach to
regional integration, based on the theories of interdependence that were
developed in the mid-1970s by Keohane and Nye, among others. This approach
argued that institutions such as the EC/EU should be analyzed against the
background of the growth in international interdependence, rather than as
regional political organizations.
, Thirdly, it was argued that neo-functionalism had placed undue emphasis on the
supranational component of regional integration. Critics suggested that greater
importance should be attached to the nation state and that regional forms of
cooperation should be analyzed as intergovernmental organizations. This line of
attack was adopted by Moravcsik under the rubric of liberal
intergovernmentalism.
- Whereas neo-functionalism stresses the autonomy of supranational
officials, liberal intergovernmentalism stresses the autonomy of national
leaders.
- Intergovernmentalists argue that although the president of the European
Commission plays an important role in EU decision-making, it is the
German Chancellor, who, together with other heads of government from
the largest member states, has the decisive say.
The assumption was that if the elites started to cooperate, then the population
would follow. The experiment of ‘no’ votes in national referendums on the EU
treaties and on Brexit demonstrates that this focus on political elites is a major
weakness in neo-functionalist theory.
- One could say that neo-functionalism as a theoretical tradition has a blind
spot in its lack of understanding of the need for the EU to establish
legitimacy among the people of Europe.
Key points:
- Neo-functionalism has been criticized on both empirical and theoretical
grounds
- On empirical grounds, neo-functionalism has been criticized for failing to
live up to the reality of the EC.
- On theoretical grounds, critics have denied the existence of elite
socialization and have stressed the importance of the global dimension of
integration.
- Critiques of neo-functionalism have also sought to reposition the nation
state at the heart of the study of the European integration process.
4.7 The revival of neo-functionalism
There are several reasons for the theory’s renewed popularity (beginning of the
1990s)
- General developments in the European Community. SEA and the creation
of the Single Market marked a new phase of economic and political
cooperation. This seemed in line with the sort of spillover predicted by neo-
functionalist theory.
- Many accepted it only as a partial theory. Stone Sweet and Sandholtz claim
that their theoretical considerations have important affinities with neo-
functionalism. They argue that the traditional distinction made in the
theoretical literature on European integration is no longer sufficient. Some
things are characterized by intergovernmentalism and other by
supranationalism.
o They do not use the spillover concept, but they developed what they
call a transaction-based theory of integration. This draws attention
to the increasing levels of transactions across EU borders.
- References to neo-functionalist theory have increased dramatically.
Different authors have discussed neo-functionalism as a possible frame for
explaining specific forms of integration.
- During the 2000s, there have also been some important attempts at
further developing the original neo-functionalist framework.
Week 1: Hoofdstuk 4, 5 en 29(30)
Chapter 4: Neo-functionalism
4.2 What is neo-functionalism?
Neo-functionalism: a theory of regional integration, primarily applied to the
European Union, developed by Ernst B. Haas and others in the 1950’s and
60’s.
Neo-functionalism’s core concept is spillover. Spillover refers to a situation in
which cooperation in one field necessitates cooperation in another. A second
point that helps to explain neo-functionalism concerns the role of societal groups
in the process of integration. Interest groups and political parties would be key
actors in driving integration forward. Finally, neo-functionalism is often
characterized as a rather elitist approach. It tends to be driven by functional and
technocratic needs.
4.3 A brief history of neo-functionalism
An early objective was to formulate a general or grand theory of international
relations, based on observations of regional integration processes. Functionalism
is understandable because it seemed that the theory explained well the reality of
the European integration process. At the time.
4.4 Supranationalism and spillover
Realist positions stress the power games that occur among states.
By contrast, neo-functionalists believe that economic integration would
strengthen all states involved and that this would lead to political integration.
Economic integration leads to economic growth which in the long run implies
increased welfare among EU citizens.
The fundamental idea was that international relations should not be considered a
zero-sum game, and that everybody wins when countries become involved in
economic and political integration.
- Neo-functionalist theory also sheds light on the development of
supranational institutions and organizations, which are likely to have their
own political agendas.
“Political integration is the process whereby political actors in several distinct
national settings are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political
activities towards a new center, whose institutions possess or demand
jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of
political integration is a new political community, superimposed over the pre-
existing ones.” (Haas, 1958: 16)
Neo-functionalist writers developed at least three different arguments about the
dynamics of the integration processes:
1. The spillover hypothesis
2. The elite socialization hypothesis
3. The hypothesis on supranational interest groups
Spillover: refers to a process in which political cooperation conducted with a
specific goal in mind leads to the formulation of new goals in order to assure
the achievement of the original goal.
Ex. The original aim may be the free movement of workers across EU borders, but
it may soon become obvious that different national rules on certification prevent
workers from gaining employment in other EU states. Nurses educated in one
member state may not be allowed to work in another because of difference in
,national education. – This process of generating new political goals is the very
essence of the neo-functionalist concept of spillover
Three different kinds of spillover process:
1. Functional spillover
o Where one step towards cooperation functionally leads to another.
o Ex. From the single market to the treaty on stability, coordination,
and governance. (common currency to reduce risks related to
expanding trade)
2. Political spillover
o Occurs in situations characterized by a more deliberated political
process, in which national political elites or interest groups argue
that supranational cooperation is needed to solve specific problems.
o This type of spillover is closely related to a theory that argues that
European integration promotes shifts of loyalty among civil servants
and other elite actors
o Ex. Brexit process. (it may encourage supranational actors to argue
for increased political integration among the remaining member
states, they might argue that there is too little political integration)
3. Cultivated spillover
o Refers to situations in which supranational actors (European
Commissions in particular) push the process of political integration
forward when they mediate between the member states.
o Ex. In the area of health policy – the use of antibiotics in the
veterinarian sector. (the Commission has deliberately tried to create
a new agenda to resolve a cross-border problem in an area where
EU competences are weak)
Spillover processes may be seen partly as the result of unintended
consequences. Member states might deliberately accept political integration and
the delegation of authority to supranational institutions on an issue. However, as
a result of that decision, they may suddenly find themselves in a position where
there is a need for even more delegation.
- Political integration need not be the declared end goal for member states
engaging in this process.
Elite socialization: over time, people involved on a regular basis in the
supranational policy process will tend to develop European loyalties and
preferences.
Ex. Commission officials are expected to hold a European perspective on
problem-solving so that their loyalty may no longer be to any one national polity,
but rather to the supranational level of governance.
- Participants may come to value the system and their role within it, either
for itself, or for the concrete rewards and benefits it has produced or that it
promises.
Thus, neo-functionalists predicted that the European integration process would
lead to the establishment of elite groups loyal to the supranational institutions
that hold pan-European norms and ideas. These elites would try to convince
national elites of the advantages of supranational cooperation.
- The institutionalization of the interaction between national actors and the
continued negotiations between different member states would make it
more and more difficult for states to adhere to their political arguments
and retain credibility. As a result, it was expected that the agenda would
, tend to shift towards more technical problems upon which it was possible
to forge agreement.
4.5 The formation of supranational interest groups
Organized interest groups are also expected to become more European as
corporations and business groups formulate their own interests with an eye to the
supranational institutions.
- Neo-functionalists believe that interest groups also become Europeanized,
placing demands on their national governments for more integration.
The Basel Committee is a good example of the kind of international
institution/organization that neo-functionalist theory predicts would develop. It is
an international organization that creates international standards within the
financial area without having any formal legal competence.
Furthermore, neo-functionalists believed that interest groups would put pressure
on governments to force them to speed up the integration process. These groups
were expected to develop their own supranational interest in political and
economic integration, which would ally them to supranational institutions, such
as the European Commission. Thus, in the process of reformulating expectations
and demands, the interest groups in question approach one another
supranationally while their erstwhile ties with national friends undergo
deterioration.
Transnational organized interests can also be observed in policy areas such as
climate policy. Environmental organizations such as Greenpeace often try to
influence policy-making, while cutting across national boundaries and national
interests. They act as transnational organized interests in the way in which neo-
functionalists predicted and argue that it is necessary to increase the
competences of the Eu in relation to climate issues to push forward the climate
agenda.
4.6 Critiques of neo-functionalism
At an empirical level, the criticism focuses on the absence (or slow pace) of
political integration in Western Europe during the 1970s and early 1980s. Haas
even talked about the possibility that there might be a disintegrative equivalent
to spillover: Spillback. The Brexit crisis indicates that it is difficult for a country to
break out of the European Union. The cost of disintegration is very high, as it
implies leaving the common market.
- The Brexit deal can be seen as a process where the UK leaves and stays in
the EU at the same time due to the functional ties that exists between the
UK and the EU.
The second set of objections was based on criticism of the theories formulated by
Haas himself. By the late 1960s, Haas had accepted that his prediction (that
regional organizations such as the EU would develop incrementally, propelled
forward by various dynamics such as spillover) had failed to encapsulate the
reality of European cooperation. He recommended a different approach to
regional integration, based on the theories of interdependence that were
developed in the mid-1970s by Keohane and Nye, among others. This approach
argued that institutions such as the EC/EU should be analyzed against the
background of the growth in international interdependence, rather than as
regional political organizations.
, Thirdly, it was argued that neo-functionalism had placed undue emphasis on the
supranational component of regional integration. Critics suggested that greater
importance should be attached to the nation state and that regional forms of
cooperation should be analyzed as intergovernmental organizations. This line of
attack was adopted by Moravcsik under the rubric of liberal
intergovernmentalism.
- Whereas neo-functionalism stresses the autonomy of supranational
officials, liberal intergovernmentalism stresses the autonomy of national
leaders.
- Intergovernmentalists argue that although the president of the European
Commission plays an important role in EU decision-making, it is the
German Chancellor, who, together with other heads of government from
the largest member states, has the decisive say.
The assumption was that if the elites started to cooperate, then the population
would follow. The experiment of ‘no’ votes in national referendums on the EU
treaties and on Brexit demonstrates that this focus on political elites is a major
weakness in neo-functionalist theory.
- One could say that neo-functionalism as a theoretical tradition has a blind
spot in its lack of understanding of the need for the EU to establish
legitimacy among the people of Europe.
Key points:
- Neo-functionalism has been criticized on both empirical and theoretical
grounds
- On empirical grounds, neo-functionalism has been criticized for failing to
live up to the reality of the EC.
- On theoretical grounds, critics have denied the existence of elite
socialization and have stressed the importance of the global dimension of
integration.
- Critiques of neo-functionalism have also sought to reposition the nation
state at the heart of the study of the European integration process.
4.7 The revival of neo-functionalism
There are several reasons for the theory’s renewed popularity (beginning of the
1990s)
- General developments in the European Community. SEA and the creation
of the Single Market marked a new phase of economic and political
cooperation. This seemed in line with the sort of spillover predicted by neo-
functionalist theory.
- Many accepted it only as a partial theory. Stone Sweet and Sandholtz claim
that their theoretical considerations have important affinities with neo-
functionalism. They argue that the traditional distinction made in the
theoretical literature on European integration is no longer sufficient. Some
things are characterized by intergovernmentalism and other by
supranationalism.
o They do not use the spillover concept, but they developed what they
call a transaction-based theory of integration. This draws attention
to the increasing levels of transactions across EU borders.
- References to neo-functionalist theory have increased dramatically.
Different authors have discussed neo-functionalism as a possible frame for
explaining specific forms of integration.
- During the 2000s, there have also been some important attempts at
further developing the original neo-functionalist framework.
