Transverse Integration in European Economic Governance: Between Unitary and Differentiated Integration
Transverse Integration in European Economic Governance: Between Unitary and Differentiated Integration
复制标题
欧洲经济治理的横向一体化：单一一体化与差异化一体化之间
DOI：
10.1080/07036330903375107
复制
发表时间：
2010
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Martin Marcussen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Dyson;Martin Marcussen
经过十多年的欧元，我们对正在形成的欧洲宏观经济治理结构有了一个很好的了解--它的基本原则及其与欧盟“深化”和“扩大”的关系，尤其是与全球化的关系。关于经济联盟，首先是单一市场，单一一体化原则提供了一个总体框架，其理论基础由关税同盟理论提供。相比之下，货币联盟则体现了差异化一体化的原则，其理论基础建立在“意愿和能力”的基础上。在欧盟，这种二元性表现为与多种货币共存的“一个市场”，欧元就是其中之一。我们将结果概念化为“横向一体化”，以捕捉欧洲宏观经济治理的混合、多维和动态特征。这一概念旨在表明，欧洲的宏观经济治理超越了传统的分类，比如在加入欧元区时，欧元区的“局内人”与“局外人”、“领跑者”与“落后者”。它提供了一个工具，用来批判性地检查这些分类。横向一体化在捕捉欧洲宏观经济治理的输入方(舆论)、治理结构(“制度模糊性”)和输出方(绩效)方面也是多维的。最后，它突出了欧洲宏观经济治理的动态特征，展示了单一和差异化一体化原则之间的平衡是如何随着时间的推移而变化的。文章认为，将一元化和差异化一体化作为欧洲宏观经济治理中的交叉现象来研究更有意义。经验表明，分化不应被视为一种暂时现象，因此横向一体化将继续存在。
Abstract After more than a decade of the euro, we have a good idea about what sort of European macro‐economic governance structure is in the making — its underlying principles and its relationship to EU ‘deepening’ and ‘widening’ and, not least, to globalization. In relation to economic union, above all the single market, the principle of unitary integration provides an overarching framework, its rationale provided by customs union theory. In contrast, monetary union exhibits the principle of differentiated integration, its rationale founded on ‘will and capability’. This duality is expressed in the EU as ‘one market’ co‐existing with several currencies, one of which is the euro. We conceptualize the outcome as ‘transverse integration’ to capture the hybrid, multidimensional and dynamic character of European macro‐economic governance. This concept seeks to show that European macro‐economic governance transcends traditional classifications such as euro ‘insiders’ versus ‘outsiders’ and ‘frontrunners’ versus ‘laggards’ in euro entry. It offers a tool with which to critically examine these classifications. Transverse integration is also multidimensional in capturing the input side (public opinion), governance structures (‘institutional fuzziness’), and output side (performance) of European macro‐economic governance. Finally, it highlights the dynamic character of European macro‐economic governance, showing how the balance between the unitary and differentiated integration principles changes over time. The article argues that it makes more sense to study unitary and differentiated integration as cross‐cutting phenomena in European macro‐economic governance. Experience suggests that differentiation should not be seen as a temporary phenomenon and hence that transverse integration is here to stay.