The Internal Relations of the European Union: governance in the EU (INRE)
Block 1, Semester 1, Academic year 2012-2013
- Read and re-read this syllabus very carefully
- Failing to read (and act upon) the syllabus may influence your grade negatively in borderline cases
Content and learning objectives
- How is policymaking formulated in the European Union (EU)?
- What innovations have taken place in recent years to improve the policymaking process?
- Is European integration an unstoppable process?
- In what ways are citizens engaged in the EU’s policymaking processes?
All these and more questions will be addressed in ‘The Internal Relations of the EU: governance in the EU’ (hereafter INRE). This course will deepen our understanding of how developments in the EU have changed our perception of democracy and policymaking in the context of the European Information Society policy domain. It does so by focusing on the ‘governance’ turn in literature on the contemporary EU in this policy area.
The module is heavily research-oriented and as such should be considered a work in progress. The three-hour long seminars will be organised in a discussion format, with each participant talking ‘to’ the literature that has been read by everyone in the group.
Part of the course will require group work: students will be put into four groups in the first week of the course and will subsequently work with their colleagues to develop policy ‘dossiers’ and present their findings in the last class. Students will be required – individually – to write final papers related to the topic of new modes of governance in the EU. A study trip to Brussels is organised in the context of this course: we shall spend two days visiting different EU institutions to learn more about policymaking in the EU in the policy area of information society.
By the end of the course, students will:
- understand the mechanisms of policymaking in the EU
- have a broader understanding of the ‘governance turn’ in empirical and theoretical research on the EU
- be able to carry out in-depth policy analysis on a given subject.
Study load and time required
It is estimated you will need to allocate 35-45% of your working time as a minimum (i.e. 13-20 hours per week) for this course. This will be spent on preparation for and participation in the group seminars, group work, completing the deliverables for this course, and the study trip. The amount of effort may vary from week to week, but you should manage your time effectively by starting to work on the final assignments by the second or third week of the course.
You are required to read all the articles in the [course schedule] for each week of the course, and to summarise these texts in ‘QSQ’ papers that are no longer than one page for each article (see [Assessment] (Section 3) for more details). In addition, you should be constantly filling up your policy ‘dossiers’ on the chosen topic with your colleagues. You should also be thinking about your final paper’s topic, structure and bibliography.
Given the nature of the seminars, participation is compulsory in all the meetings mentioned in the [course schedule]. A medical certificate or documentation provided by a University official will be required in cases of absence.
Contact and feedback
(See [Assessment] section below for details on grading)
In addition to the office hours, I am primarily available primarily through email for queries about the course. Please put [INRE] at the beginning of your subject heading if your email relates to the course: failure to do so may delay a response to your question. Feel free to resend your email after five working days if you have not yet received a response. I will use my office hours to try to respond to as many emails as possible.
Please use email sensibly: questions that can be more efficiently dealt with in class should be raised there.
Your QSQs (20% of your final grade) will be graded twice throughout the course. Feedback including grades and comments, will be provided in written form on blackboard two weeks after submission.
Immediate feedback will be given on the presentations: the grade for these will be announced on blackboard within a week after they have taken place.
Feedback on the final papers, including grades and comments, will be provided in written form on blackboard at latest two weeks after submission. The course coordinator will organise a date (most likely to be in the first week of Block 2 of Semester 1) for students to view their papers and receive more detailed feedback if requested.
Unless mentioned below, all classes take place on Fridays between 2pm and 5pm in Bungehuis K.06.
All literature in the list must be read before the class. This is an absolute prerequisite for participation in the seminar: you will be asked to leave the room and be marked as absent if you have not done the work.
7 September: Introduction to the course Allocation of groups, EU integration discussion, discussion of European Governance White Paper
Core questions to be addressed:
- What is the EU? Who are its members and what institutions comprise the EU?
- How was it born? What does it do?
- How has policymaking traditionally been carried out in the EU? What has changed in recent years?
- What is governance, particularly of the EU?
- European Commission. 2001. European Governance: A White Paper Brussels: European Commission. COM(2001) 428 final.
- Bulmer, Simon. 1983. “Domestic Politics and European Community Policy-Making..” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 21(4): 349-363.
For background, please read: Wallace, Helen, and William Wallace. 2000. Policy Making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, or any subsequent edition for more information on the basics of EU policy-making. Also read: Dinan, Desmond. 1999. Ever Closer Union? 2nd ed: An Introduction to European Integration. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan or Dinan, Desmond. 2000. Encyclopedia of European Union. 6th ed. Palgrave Macmillan.
14 September: EU integration and EU Governance literature review (home work - submit QSQs on blackboard, each student to submit one single document of length four pages maximum).
- What is an institutionalist theory?
- What is the ‘governance approach’?
- Are these models better at answering contemporary questions?
- Bulmer, Simon J. 1998. “New Institutionalism and the Governance of the Single European Market.” Journal of European Public Policy 5(3): 365–386.
- Dowding, K. 2000. “Institutionalist Research on the European Union: A Critical Review.” European Union Politics 1(1): 125–144.
- Majone, Giandomenico. 2006. “The common sense of European integration.” Journal of European Public Policy 13(5): 607–626.
- Winn, Neil. 1998. “Who Gets What, When, and How? The Contested Conceptual and Disciplinary Nature of Governance and Policy-Making in the European Union.” Politics 18(2): 119–132.
21 September: Alternatives to the Community Method
- What’s wrong with the Community Method?
- How did these new models evolve?
- What are networks in EU governance?
- Are borders still important in EU policymaking?
- Borrás, Susana, and Kerstin Jacobsson. 2004. “The open method of co-ordination and new governance patterns in the EU.” Journal of European Public Policy 11(2): 185–208.
- Hodson, Dermot, and Imelda Maher. 2001. “The Open Method as a New Mode of Governance: The Case of Soft Economic Policy Co-ordination.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 39(4): 719–746.
- Idema, Timo, and Daniel R. Kelemen. 2006. “New modes of governance, the Open Method of Co-ordination and other fashionable red herring.” Perspectives on European Politics and Society 7(1): 108–123.
- Jönsson, Christer, Bo Bjurulf, Ole Elgström, A Sannerstedt, and M Strömvik. 1998. “Negotiations in Networks in the European Union.” International Negotiation 3(3): 319–344.
- Perkmann, Markus. 1999. “Building Governance Institutions Across European Borders.” Regional Studies 33(7): 657–667.
- Pfetsch, Frank R. 1998. “Negotiating the European Union: A Negotiation-Network Approach.” International Negotiation 3(3): 293–317.
- Radaelli, Claudio. 2003. The Open Method of Coordination: A new governance architecture for the European Union? Report published by the Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies.
- Regent, Sabrina. 2003. “The open method of coordination: a new supranational form of governance?.” European Law Journal 9(2): 190–214.
28 September: Brief history of the European information society; preparation for Brussels visit
NB: QSQs will NOT be required for this week. Instead, you must come prepared for a discussion about potential questions we shall be asking to our hosts in Brussels - based on the literature below. Hint: it would be wise to work in your groups on this, due to the amount of literature required.
- What are the driving principles of the EU’s Information Society Policy, and have these changed at all over time?
- What are the differences between the impact of telecommunications (de-)regulation and the impact of the internet on European society/economy/politics?
- How are EU information society policies implemented? Is one toolkit used?
Berben, Cor, and Bernard Clements. 1995. “The European Framework for Competition in Telecommunications: The Benefits for Peripheral Countries.” Telecommunications Policy 19(4): 273–283.
Burgelman, Jean-Claude, and Jan Servaes. 1996. “European Approaches to the Information Society: A Gold Rush over Bumpy Roads?.” Telematics and Informatics 13(2-3): 63–66.
Henten, Anders, Knud Erik Skouby, and Morten Falch. 1996. “European Planning for an Information Society.” Telematics and Informatics 13(2-3): 177–190.
Schoof, Hans, and Adam Watson Brown. 1995. “Information Highways and Media Policies in the European Union.” Telecommunications Policy 19(4): 325–338.
Sandholtz, Wayne. 1993. “Institutions and Collective Action: The New Telecommunications in Western Europe.” World Politics 45(2): 242–270.
Servaes, Jan, and Jean-Claude Burgelman. 2000. “In Search of a European Model for the Information Society.” Telematics and Informatics 17(1-2): 1–7.
Schmidt, Susanne K. 1998. “Commission activism: subsuming telecommunications and electricity under European competition law.” Journal of European Public Policy 5(1): 169–184.
Simpson, Seamus. 2000. “Intra-institutional Rivalry and Policy Entrepreneurship in the European Union.” New Media and Society 2(4): 445–466.
Bangemann, Martin, Enrico Cabral da Fonseca, Peter Davis, Carlo Benedetti, Pehr Gyllenhammar, Lothar Hunsel, Pierre Lescure, Pascual Maragall, Gaston Thorn, Candido Velazquez-Gastelu, Peter Bonfield, Etienne Davignon, Jean-Marie Descarpentries, Brian Ennis, Hans-Olaf Henkel, Anders Knutsen, Constantin Makropoulos, Romano Prodi, Jan Timmer, and Heinrich von Pierer. 1994. Europe and the Global Information Society - Recommendations to the European Council.
European Commission. 1993. White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment: The Challenges and Ways Forward into the 21st Century. Brussels: European Commission. COM(1993) 700 final.
European Commission. 2000a. eEurope 2002: An Information Society for All - Draft Action Plan Prepared by the European Commission for the European Council in Feira 19-20 June 2000. Brussels: European Commission. COM(2000) 330 final.
In addition to the above documents, students are requested to have looked at the following as well: eEurope 2005, i2010, Digital Agenda.
3-4 October: Brussels visit
Information regarding the trip will be provided separately. In short, on Wednesday afternoon, we shall attend the European Parliament and speak with Marietje Schaake, MEP. On Thursday morning, we shall then have a discussion with staff from the European Commission’s DG CONNECT, who are specialised in our topics of research for this course. On Thursday we shall also hold a briefing session after the trip to the EC.
12 October: Dossier and presentation preparation; essay titles (home work)
During this week, you are requested to carry out the following activities:
- Finalise your dossiers and be aware of all the documentation therein: complete your summaries of the policy documents and analysis.
- Email the course coordinator with a proposal for a title for your essay.
19 October: Citizenship and the EU; presentations of policy dossiers and discussion on final papers
- What is the relationship between civil society and citizenship?
- Who listens to the European citizen?
- What role does the citizen have in EU policymaking?
- Power, Andrew. 2010. “EU Legitimacy and New Forms of Citizen Engagement.” Electronic Journal of e-Government 8(1): 45–54.
- Sheehy, Helen. 1997. “A Community Closer to Its Citizens: The European Union’s Use of the Internet.” Government Information Quarterly 14(2): 117–142.
- Smismans, Stijn. 2009. “European civil society and citizenship: Complementary or exclusionary concepts?” Policy and Society 28(1): 59–70.
- Armstrong, Kenneth A. 2002. “Rediscovering Civil Society: The European Union and the White Paper on Governance.” European Law Journal 8(1): 102–132.
- European Commission. 2002. Towards a reinforced culture of consultation and dialogue - General principles and minimum standards for consultation of interested parties by the Commission. Brussels: European Commission. COM(2002) 704 final.
- European Commission. 2000b. Reforming the Commission: A White Paper - Part II: Action Plan. Brussels: European Commission. COM(2000) 200 final.
- European Commission. 2000c. Reforming the Commission: A White Paper - Part I. Brussels: European Commission. COM(2000) final/2
- Lord, Christopher. 2000. Legitimacy, Democracy and the EU: when abstract questions become practical problems. ESRC.
This course will be run in English.
This course is not taught by a legal scholar: most of the discussions will take place in the context of political innovations.
Course evaluations are an important tool for improving the quality of courses and study programmes. At the end of a teaching period, questionnaires are distributed among the course participants. The results of these questionnaires are discussed by the Programme Committee, and ideas for improvement are communications to the course coordinator. More information on the Programme Committees is available at http://www.student.uva.nl/fgw-oc/start.cfm.
You should not feel as though you have to wait until the end of the course in order to voice any issues that you may have. The course coordinator invites you to engage either during office hours, prior of immediately after a class, or via email to discuss any concerns you may have.
Study material and costs
All study materials for this course are available through the UvA digital library, through subscriptions available to UvA students via the library, on the shelves in one of the UvA libraries, or through the Internet. You are encouraged to develop your own list of reading materials in parallel to those on the list in this course manual. Feel free to share these with the entire group.
Students are strongly encouraged to visit and use the resources physically available in the University’s libraries. Although most material for the course is available on your computer, books should be consulted. High grades are impossible to award for papers written through Worldwide Web resources alone.
A study trip to Brussels takes place from 3 to 4 October. This is compulsory for participants of the course. The Faculty provides a subsidy for the trip (travel and accommodation), but please be aware that you will need your own personal spending money for meals and other expenditures.
Your overall grade for the course must be above a 6.0: this means that individual elements of the course may not reach this threshold.
This course is assessed by several different assignments noted below. In all cases, please note the [document submission] guidelines below.
A final paper (50% of the final grade, approximately 2000 words (±10%) relating to the topic of the course. The question to be addressed in the paper will be determined by the student in collaboration with the course coordinator. It can be related to one of the core questions raised in each of the seminars. Final papers do not need to be exclusive to each individual student; similar issues can be broached by more than one student. The essay must be within the realms of the course topic (new modes of governance). You are not bound to the policy topic.
The essays may not be resubmitted after the grade has been given: if you are in doubt about your paper, please contact the course coordinator well in advance of the deadline, preferably with a rough draft. We shall discuss them during our time in Brussels in any case.
A policy ‘dossier’ (20% of the final grade), comprised of collections of policy documents and other source material (including newspaper and journal articles, possibly interviews or other information) on the chosen topic for the course. These will be collated by students in groups. They will be presented digitally to the course coordinator, and will be fully and accurately referenced, with a list of references and a summary document describing the content of the dossier (c. 3000 words) at the beginning. The list of references and the summary document should be printed out and placed in the course coordinator’s on or before the deadline.
Early versions of the dossiers will be seen prior to/during the study trip; there will be no chance for a third submission of this work.
For each of the ‘literature’ weeks, you will need to submit a ‘QSQ’ (quote, summary, question) paper for each of the articles in the reading list for that week.
QSQ papers must be prepared for each article listed in the reading in weeks 2, 3 and 7. A QSQ paper requires, for each piece of literature:
- a key Quote
- a short Summary of the argument made in the article (i.e. NOT a summary of the article, but a critical analysis of the argument)
- a Question for discussion in the group
The QSQ paper may not exceed one page per article (please use standard margins and a font no smaller than size 9). Prepare these assignments with a word processor and bring them to class on paper: you can be asked to hand the assignment in at any time (and will be asked at least twice); this will count for 20% of your final grade.
These will need to be submitted every week where reading is indicated (unless otherwise stated in the [Course Schedule]) via blackboard prior to class: you will also need to bring a paper copy along to the seminars in order to facilitate discussion. The paper copies will be graded. If QSQs are not submitted prior to the seminar, a zero will be awarded.
Your engagement with the literature and policy debates will be graded through a final presentation that you will make of your policy dossiers (10%). These should be structured in a way that will enable you to highlight key trends and conflicts in the specific policy area: rather than simply describing policies, you are expected to analyse and draw conclusions as to how this policy issue has evolved over time in a European context. The grading of the presentation will take the following into consideration:
- Coherence of presentation
- Fluidity of presentation
- Analytical skills and the ability to present these clearly
- Content of presentation
- Quality of presentation materials
- Innovation (how you present the topic, whether you stimulate your peers)
- Response to questions from the audience
The grade for the presentation will be awarded to the group (one grade will be given to all members), and will take into consideration the deliberations by group members on the course material throughout the course.
Documents submitted on paper should conform to the following rules: A4, printed on both sides of the page, with single line spacing. The pages in the document should be attached together in the top left hand corner with a single staple; no binding and no plastic coverings should be used. Only one copy should be provided. As a minimum, the following information should be clearly marked on the front page of the submission:
- student number
- course title, block, semester and academic year
- item name
- title of piece
- date of submission
Written work should be submitted on or before the date specified in the syllabus, in the course coordinator’s in tray next to the European Studies Secretariat (PCH6.48) or given to the instructor immediately prior to class. If you will not be able to submit written work on time, you should notify the course coordinator in advance or as soon as possible. Requests for additional time must be accompanied by documentation from a physician or university official.
A digital copy of all submissions should be provided via Blackboard (‘Ephorus assignment’ for the individual essay), in either RTF or PDF format. This electronic document should be identical to the printed copy.
The penalty for late written work is 0.5 grade-points per day, beginning immediately after the deadline. Computer, transport, and/or printer problems are not a valid excuse for handing in work late. Work overdue for more than one week will not be accepted. Personal problems are only accepted with medical certificate or documentation from a university official.
Deliverables and deadlines
|Final paper||50%||19 Oct, 2pm||2000 words|
|QSQ papers||20%||min. 2x during Weeks 2, 3 and 7 at 5pm||1p/article|
|Policy dossier||20%||First draft: 3 Oct |
Final draft: 12 Oct, 5pm
|2000 words summary|
plus reference list
|Group presentation||10%||19 Oct, during class||10 mins p/group|
[Deliverables and deadlines]