EXTENDING GOVERNANCE:THE EU’S ENLARGEMENT AND NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICIES

Dimitar Bechev St Antony’s College, Oxford

Visiting Associate Professor, Hitotsubashi University

REGULATION CROSSING BORDERS31 March 2010

QUESTIONS

• How does the EU extend rules, institutions and policies towards ‘third countries’?

• What are the political dynamics and limits of the Union’s ‘transformative power’?

NORMATIVE POWER

Ian Manners (2002): “the ability to define what passes for ‘normal’ in a globalized world”.

Norms vary: political (e.g. democratic governance, cooperation), economic (western European welfare state?), functional/regulatory (the Single Market, the acquis as a whole).

EASTERN ENLARGEMENT

• Google “enlargement” “most successful” “EU”: 2,150,000 results;

• Western Balkans – Croatia negotiating accession since 2005; the rest – antechamber;

• Turkey – negotiating accession.• Regulatory convergence (the third

Copenhagen Criterion 1993) – is key, though much attention is paid on political conditionality.

ACQUIS COMMUNAUTAIRE

Added to that – political chapters, e.g. Judicial reform; Foreign, security and defence policy.

1. Free movement of goods 2. Freedom of movement for workers 3.Right of establishment and freedom to provide services4. Free movement of capital5. Public procurement6. Company law7. Intellectual property8. Competition policy9. Financial services10. Agriculture and rural development11. Food safety, vererinary and phytosanitary protection12. Fisheries13. Transport14. Energy

15. Taxation16. Economic and monetary policy17. Statistics18. Social policy and employment19. Enterprise and industrial policy20. Trans-European networks21. Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments22. Justice, freedom and security 23. Environment25. Consumer and health protection26. Customs union27. Financial control

EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY

• ENP seeks to reproduce enlargement – similar goals, similar instruments (see handout);

• EU policies are generic – because of institutional inertia and hub-and-spoke structure of relations with peripheral countries and regions.

• Differentiation: Eastern dimension (Eastern Partnership) vs. Southern Dimension (Union for the Mediterranean); political incentives

• Economic incentives: “Deep free trade” and “stake in the Single Market” vs. membership vs. trade liberalization;

• Institutional incentives: participation in EU bodies – e.g. in executive agencies – for frontrunner countries: Ukraine, Moldova, Israel, Morocco;

ACCESS VS. CONVERGENCE

Bechev and Nicolaidis, Journal of Common Market Studies, 2010.

MODES OF GOVERNANCE

• Conflict management: ESDP missions in Western Balkans, ENP area;

• Gatekeeping: access/convergence, esp. regarding the Single Market;

• Policy networks: external governance stricto sensu (cf. Lavenex), especially in areas where acquis is weak.

CAVEATS AND CONSTRAINTS

• How consistent and coherent are the EU demands to proximate countries?

• How significant is the reward relative to the costs?

• Sequencing: which parts of the acquis when?• Is there sufficient institutional capacity to take

onboard EU regulatory frameworks?• Does the EU have the capabilities to monitor

compliance and enforce rules?

WIDER EUROPE: A SNAPSHOPCountry Bertelsmann

Transformation Index/rank 2010

Freedom House score, political/

civil rights,category, 2009

Transparency International

corruption perceptionindex/rank, 2009

GDP per capita (PPP, USD)

Percentage of EU27 average

Croatia 8.30/15 1/2, free 4.1/66 17,876 54.67

Turkey 7.54/20 3/3, partly free 4.4/61 12,339 37.73

Macedonia 7.53/21 3/3, partly free 3.8/71 9,047 27.67

Serbia 7.39/24 2/2, free 3.5/83 10,540 32.23

Montenegro 7.35/25 3/2, free 3.9/69 10,833 33.13

Albania 7.17/30 3/3, partly free 3.2/95 7,019 21.46

Ukraine 6.55/37 3/2, free 2.2/146 6,461 19.76

Kosovo 6.48/38 5/4, partly free n.a. n.a. n.a.

Bosnia 6.49/39 4/3, partly free 3.0/99 7,490 22.9

Georgia 6.03/52 4/4, partly free 4.1/66 4,747 14.51

Moldova 5.79/61 3/4, partly free 3.3/89 2,766 8.46

Armenia 5.75/62 6/4, partly free 2.7/120 4,916 15.17

Azerbaijan 4.85/86 6/5, not free 2.3/143 9,352 28.6

Belarus 4.52/96 7/6, not free 2.4/139 12,486 38.18

SECTORAL CASE STUDIESEnergy Community

- Set up by EU and Western Balkans in Oct 2005. Liberalization of energy sector based on EU directives adopted in 1996/2003/2009 – unbundling, third-party access; Electricity and gas. Policy dialogue on oil, social issues;

- Reproduces EU institutions on a subregional level;- Depends on reform progress across policy areas,

physical infrastructure, coherence of EU framework;- Implementation problems – e.g. in Macedonia;- Enlargement: Moldova (March 2010), potentially

Ukraine.

SECTORAL CASE STUDIES

Transport Community- Launched by the Slovene Presidency of the

Council (2008);- Future treaty - harmonization with the acquis

reciprocal access to transport services market;- acquis is particularly extensive: market access

and social, technical, fiscal, safety and environmental requirements;

- Political vs. economic logic.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

• Multilateral arrangements – early adoption of the acquis in core areas expected to yield economic and political benefits;

• Functional bridge between the Western Balkans (enlargement) and the western CIS (ENP/EaP) area;

• As enlargement is slowing down after Croatia and Iceland (2012?), regional cooperation might become more prominent instrument for regulatory convergence.