Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Müller, Manuel
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326
Resumo: In May 2022, the European Parliament (EP) launched a procedure to amend the EU treaties and began drafting a report with concrete reform proposals. In their resolution, EP members explicitly described this as a necessary response to recent crises (notably the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Covid-19 pandemic, and climate change) as well as a follow-up to the Conference on the Future of Europe. However, the stated objectives of the reform, in particular more efficient and democratic EU decision-making, were not new but followed long-standing discourses on deepening EU integration. This raises the question of to what degree the EP’s initiative really reflected a lesson from recent crises—in line with a “failing forward” approach towards EU reform—or rather a “backlog” of reforms which had already been proposed before but whose implementation had been blocked by member states, and for which the crises only represented a window of opportunity. The article assesses the development of treaty change proposals by the EP and bodies close to it, comparing three comprehensive plans for institutional reform: the federalist Spinelli Group’s Fundamental Law for the EU (2013), the EP’s Verhofstadt Report (2017), and the EP’s latest Article 48 Report (2023). The comparison shows that, while the crises had an impact on the level of ambition in some policy areas, the EP’s general approach, especially on institutional issues, was characterised by a high degree of continuity.
id RCAP_15c8efcb81f1fb1e63ea35b989e22de0
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/7326
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisiscrisis learning; European Parliament; EU treaty reform; institutional reform; polycrisisIn May 2022, the European Parliament (EP) launched a procedure to amend the EU treaties and began drafting a report with concrete reform proposals. In their resolution, EP members explicitly described this as a necessary response to recent crises (notably the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Covid-19 pandemic, and climate change) as well as a follow-up to the Conference on the Future of Europe. However, the stated objectives of the reform, in particular more efficient and democratic EU decision-making, were not new but followed long-standing discourses on deepening EU integration. This raises the question of to what degree the EP’s initiative really reflected a lesson from recent crises—in line with a “failing forward” approach towards EU reform—or rather a “backlog” of reforms which had already been proposed before but whose implementation had been blocked by member states, and for which the crises only represented a window of opportunity. The article assesses the development of treaty change proposals by the EP and bodies close to it, comparing three comprehensive plans for institutional reform: the federalist Spinelli Group’s Fundamental Law for the EU (2013), the EP’s Verhofstadt Report (2017), and the EP’s latest Article 48 Report (2023). The comparison shows that, while the crises had an impact on the level of ambition in some policy areas, the EP’s general approach, especially on institutional issues, was characterised by a high degree of continuity.Cogitatio Press2023-12-29info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326Politics and Governance; Vol 11, No 4 (2023): Governing the EU Polycrisis: Institutional Change After the Pandemic and the War in Ukraine; 311-3232183-246310.17645/pag.i374reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/7326https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/7326/3552Copyright (c) 2023 Manuel Müllerinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMüller, Manuel2024-01-11T15:50:36Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/7326Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T01:30:02.290057Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
title Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
spellingShingle Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
Müller, Manuel
crisis learning; European Parliament; EU treaty reform; institutional reform; polycrisis
title_short Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
title_full Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
title_fullStr Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
title_full_unstemmed Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
title_sort Crisis Learning or Reform Backlog? The European Parliament’s Treaty‐Change Proposals During the Polycrisis
author Müller, Manuel
author_facet Müller, Manuel
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Müller, Manuel
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv crisis learning; European Parliament; EU treaty reform; institutional reform; polycrisis
topic crisis learning; European Parliament; EU treaty reform; institutional reform; polycrisis
description In May 2022, the European Parliament (EP) launched a procedure to amend the EU treaties and began drafting a report with concrete reform proposals. In their resolution, EP members explicitly described this as a necessary response to recent crises (notably the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Covid-19 pandemic, and climate change) as well as a follow-up to the Conference on the Future of Europe. However, the stated objectives of the reform, in particular more efficient and democratic EU decision-making, were not new but followed long-standing discourses on deepening EU integration. This raises the question of to what degree the EP’s initiative really reflected a lesson from recent crises—in line with a “failing forward” approach towards EU reform—or rather a “backlog” of reforms which had already been proposed before but whose implementation had been blocked by member states, and for which the crises only represented a window of opportunity. The article assesses the development of treaty change proposals by the EP and bodies close to it, comparing three comprehensive plans for institutional reform: the federalist Spinelli Group’s Fundamental Law for the EU (2013), the EP’s Verhofstadt Report (2017), and the EP’s latest Article 48 Report (2023). The comparison shows that, while the crises had an impact on the level of ambition in some policy areas, the EP’s general approach, especially on institutional issues, was characterised by a high degree of continuity.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-12-29
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326
url https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i4.7326
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/7326
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/7326/3552
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Manuel Müller
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Manuel Müller
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio Press
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio Press
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Politics and Governance; Vol 11, No 4 (2023): Governing the EU Polycrisis: Institutional Change After the Pandemic and the War in Ukraine; 311-323
2183-2463
10.17645/pag.i374
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799136782684520448