Schimmelfennig Frank
ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Eur Public Policy. 2024 Feb 5;31(10):3396-3420. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2024.2313107. eCollection 2024.
Ernst Haas initially formulated neofunctionalism as a theory of incremental regional polity formation, treating crises as anomalies. Subsequent revisions of the theory incorporated crises as recurring phenomena. This paper introduces a novel conceptualisation and analysis of recent European Union crises, framing them as effects of and challenges to its regulatory polity. It distinguishes between 'failures' and 'attacks', aligning them with the capacity and community-building dimensions of polity formation. Failures, rooted in capacity deficits, prompt capacity development to sustain common policies, varying with international interdependence among member states. In contrast, attacks arise from contestations of constitutive values, necessitating community demarcation through enhanced unity among defenders and exclusion of attackers. The speed and scope of demarcation depend on the attacker's membership position. Through a comparative analysis of the euro, migration, Covid, Brexit, rule of law, and Russia crises, the study illustrates and substantiates its theoretical argument.
恩斯特·哈斯最初将新功能主义表述为一种渐进的区域政体形成理论,将危机视为异常情况。该理论随后的修订将危机纳入为反复出现的现象。本文引入了一种对近期欧盟危机的新颖概念化和分析,将它们界定为欧盟监管政体的影响和挑战。它区分了“失败”和“攻击”,并将它们与政体形成的能力和共同体建设维度联系起来。源于能力不足的失败促使能力发展以维持共同政策,其程度随成员国之间的国际相互依存度而变化。相比之下,攻击源于对构成性价值观的争议,这就需要通过捍卫者之间加强团结以及排除攻击者来划定共同体界限。划定界限的速度和范围取决于攻击者的成员身份地位。通过对欧元、移民、新冠疫情、脱欧、法治和俄罗斯危机的比较分析,该研究阐明并证实了其理论观点。