Difference between revisions of "Institutional & Bureaucratic Dynamics"

From ScenarioThinking
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
Although the EC/EU has never had to advertise for members, one could postulate that in the
past a certain amount of institutional or bureaucratic ‘drift’ existed at various times in
respect of the issue of enlargement, particularly in terms of the wider implications of the
intimate relationship between deepening and widening. As such, one could postulate that,
on the one hand, perhaps in order simply to avoid ‘bureaucratic sclerosis’, and on the other,
driven by the desire to maintain the holy shibboleths of integration theory, that the EU
institutions themselves, and the Commission in particular, have at certain times sought to
cajole the Member States towards opening up the Union to continual expansion. The
institutions themselves then have thus acted as a subtle factor prompting evolution in this
regard. We should of course stress that this has never been a major driving force in EU
enlargement, but it is useful to consider this point nonetheless because it functions to
remind us of the important role played initially by the Commission, and now also by the
European Parliament, in the enlargement process, and in particular in respect of the
accession procedures. In essence however this is a potential driver only in particular
circumstances – such as when profound disagreement exists between the current members
over the long-term goals of the Union as was the case between 1981-84 – and thus where
the need for enlargement can be used to defray or redistribute the costs of such
disagreements to prospective new members, or to reaffirm the status of the ‘integration
project’ more generally. Similarly such an issue surfaced again as Prodi sought to ensure
that the Western Balkans were, as a group, promoted from the antechamber of the
Neighbourhood Policy to be given a full ‘entry perspective’ into the EU.
Associated with: [[Future of the European Union in 2030]]
Associated with: [[Future of the European Union in 2030]]


==Description:==
==Description:==
Political stability factors have been of fundamental importance in the foundation of the European Union as well as its ongoing enlargement process. When looking beyond economical benefits, there is a strong case to be made that membership to the union brings political stability to each member and to Europe as a whole. When looking in particular at the EU enlargement process it can be seen as a way to bring stability to the neighboring sates as it brings a politico-administrative lock-in on the part of the potential new member states. [1]
Although Institutional & Bureaucratic Dynamics is not one of the major driving forces behind the European Union it is noticeable that it is always becoming more and more important factor in the political decision making process. As the European Union has built a very large institutional system, that in many cases govern policy creation, it can have the effect that the institutions start to maintain them self. As an example, one could assume that in the past a certain amount of institutional or bureaucratic desire existed at various times in respect of the issue of enlargement, particularly in terms of the wider implications of the intimate relationship between deepening and widening. As such, one could postulate that, on the one hand, perhaps in order simply to avoid ‘bureaucratic sclerosis’, and on the other, driven by the desire to maintain the holy shibboleths of integration theory, that the EU institutions themselves, and the Commission in particular, have at certain times sought to cajole the Member States towards opening up the Union to continual expansion [1]. The institutions themselves then have thus acted as a subtle factor prompting evolution in this regard.
 
Political stability is also perceived as a dynamic issue for the EU, as the failure to stability is seen as merely an invitation to introduce instability. As such, this point relates in particular to the broad acknowledgement of the significant changes that have occurred at the global political level since the end of the Cold War. In particular the process of European integration has been fundamental in bringing stability to the region. [1]


When looking beyond the beginning of the Cold War, Europe has been one of the most instable regions in the world. The past 65 years represent the longest period of peace in European history. This is despite the fact that during these years Europe saw one major ethnic war (the Yugoslavia breakup 1991-1995), and only two minor conflicts (the 1956 Soviet intervention in Hungary and the 1974 Greco-Turkish war in Cyprus). The early years of the Cold War (1945-63) were marked by a handful of major crises, although none brought Europe to the brink of war. Since 1963, however, there have been no East-West crises in Europe. Although, during these 65 years there have not been many instances that Europe has been facing instability, history does not favor that state to continue forever. Therefore, political stability is one of the most vital driving forces behind the European Union. [2, 3]
Of course this is a potential driver only in particular circumstances – such as when profound disagreement exists between the current members over the long-term goals of the Union as was the case between 1981-84 – and thus where the need for enlargement can be used to defray or redistribute the costs of such disagreements to prospective new members, or to reaffirm the status of the ‘integration project’ more generally. Similarly such an issue surfaced again as Prodi sought to ensure that the Western Balkans were, as a group, promoted from the antechamber of the Neighborhood Policy to be given a full ‘entry perspective’ into the EU.  
It is useful to consider this point because it functions to remind us of the important role played initially by the Commission, and now also by the European Parliament both in the in the enlargement process as well as when we consider the force that keeps the European Union unified.  


The objectives of Europe Political Stability:
The objectives of Institutional & Bureaucratic Dynamics:
*Avoid War
*Maintain Institutions 
*Increase Economic Growth
*Continues Territorial Expansion
*Self governing force for European Union continuing unification


==Enablers:==
==Enablers:==
* Will to avoid war
*  
* Trade
* Economical growth


==Inhibitors:==
==Inhibitors:==
* Boarder Disputes
*  
* Civilian War
* Finical Crisis 
* Changes in Religion/Society Makeup


==Paradigms:==
==Paradigms:==
Due to the history of Europe political stability ????


==Experts:==
==Experts:==

Revision as of 14:20, 17 September 2009

Associated with: Future of the European Union in 2030

Description:

Although Institutional & Bureaucratic Dynamics is not one of the major driving forces behind the European Union it is noticeable that it is always becoming more and more important factor in the political decision making process. As the European Union has built a very large institutional system, that in many cases govern policy creation, it can have the effect that the institutions start to maintain them self. As an example, one could assume that in the past a certain amount of institutional or bureaucratic desire existed at various times in respect of the issue of enlargement, particularly in terms of the wider implications of the intimate relationship between deepening and widening. As such, one could postulate that, on the one hand, perhaps in order simply to avoid ‘bureaucratic sclerosis’, and on the other, driven by the desire to maintain the holy shibboleths of integration theory, that the EU institutions themselves, and the Commission in particular, have at certain times sought to cajole the Member States towards opening up the Union to continual expansion [1]. The institutions themselves then have thus acted as a subtle factor prompting evolution in this regard.

Of course this is a potential driver only in particular circumstances – such as when profound disagreement exists between the current members over the long-term goals of the Union as was the case between 1981-84 – and thus where the need for enlargement can be used to defray or redistribute the costs of such disagreements to prospective new members, or to reaffirm the status of the ‘integration project’ more generally. Similarly such an issue surfaced again as Prodi sought to ensure that the Western Balkans were, as a group, promoted from the antechamber of the Neighborhood Policy to be given a full ‘entry perspective’ into the EU. It is useful to consider this point because it functions to remind us of the important role played initially by the Commission, and now also by the European Parliament both in the in the enlargement process as well as when we consider the force that keeps the European Union unified.

The objectives of Institutional & Bureaucratic Dynamics:

  • Maintain Institutions
  • Continues Territorial Expansion
  • Self governing force for European Union continuing unification

Enablers:

Inhibitors:

Paradigms:

Experts:

  • Politicians
  • Global Executives
  • Reporters
  • Heads of Civil Movements

Resources:

Retrieved from "https://www.scenariothinking.org/index.php?title=Institutional_%26_Bureaucratic_Dynamics&oldid=29073"