005 |
|
20221101103659.0 |
020 |
|
|a0230240895
|
020 |
|
|a9780230240896
|
024 |
7
|
|a10.1057/9780230240896|2doi
|
040 |
|
|aUKPGM|beng|cUKPGM|dNOU
|
049 |
|
|aAPTA
|
050 |
14
|
|aJN30|b.G568 2009
|
082 |
04
|
|a341.242/2|222
|
100 |
1
|
|aGlencross, Andrew.
|
245 |
10
|
|aWhat makes the EU viable?|h[electronic resource] :|bEuropean integration in the light of the antebellum US experience /|cAndrew Glencross.
|
260 |
|
|aBasingstoke [England] ;|aNew York :|bPalgrave Macmillan,|c2009.
|
300 |
|
|axii, 232 p. ;|c23 cm.
|
504 |
|
|aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
|
505 |
0
|
|aIntroduction: Questioning What Makes the EU Viable -- The Problem ofViability in a Compound Polity -- Developing an Analogical Comparison between the EU and the Antebellum US Republic -- Comparing how the Rules of the Game are Contested -- The Struggle to Maintain a Compound System: Creating and Contesting the Rules of the Game in European Integration -- Contrasting and Explaining the Viability of Two Compound Systems -- The Future Evolution of the EU Compound Polity: The Obstacles to Voluntary Centralization -- Conclusion: Implications for EU Studies and the Debate over the Future of Integration.
|
520 |
|
|aThis book is distinguished by its use of the antebellum US experience as a foil to address the under-explored question of what makes the EUviable. The nature of political conflict in both casesis defined in terms of four contested rules of the game: state sovereignty, federal competences, political representation and decision-making procedures. Hence, viabilty is conceptualized as the ability to find an agreement overthese four elements. The analysis shows that, to remain viable,the antebellum USA resorted to an ultimately untenable voluntary centralization of these rules of thegame. Conversely, the EU has maintaineda dynamic equilibrium, although this is not a self-reinforcing process. The transatlantic contrast is then used to examine proposals for reforming the EU, especially its system of political representation. The comparison reveals that, despite high expectations, changing the system of representation is no shortcut solution for the EU's constitutional woes.
|
533 |
|
|aElectronic reproduction.|bBasingstoke, England :|cPalgrave Macmillan,|d2010.|nMode of access:World Wide Web.|nSystem requirements: Web browser.|nTitle from title screen (viewed on Jan. 11, 2010).|nAccess may be restricted to users at subscribing institutions.
|
610 |
20
|
|aEuropean Union.
|
650 |
0
|
|aEuropean federation.
|
650 |
0
|
|aPolitical culture|zUnited States|xHistory|y19th century.
|
651 |
0
|
|aEurope|xEconomic integration|xPolitical aspects.
|
651 |
0
|
|aUnited States|xPolitics and government|y1783-1865.
|
655 |
7
|
|aElectronic books.|2local
|
710 |
2
|
|aPalgrave Connect (Online service)
|
776 |
1
|
|cOriginal|z9780230224506|z0230224504|w(DLC) 2009013630|w(OCoLC)317926821
|
809 |
|
|pEB|dJN30|eG558|y2009
|
856 |
40
|
|3Palgrave Connect|uhttp://www.palgraveconnect.com/doifinder/10.1057/9780230240896|zaccess to fulltext (Palgrave)
|