LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Wiley
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: polsoc
\ud \ud Taking economic co-ordination in EMU as a starting point, this article explores the development of the open method of co-ordination, addressing whether it is a new form of governance from two related perspectives. First, to what extent can the method be effectively applied outside the scope of economic policy? Second, will it lead to policy transfer to the EU and hence act only as a transitional mode of governance? Identified at the Lisbon European Council, the method codified practices such as benchmarking, target-setting and peer review developed in the Luxembourg, Cardiff and Cologne processes. The method offers a new approach to governance of the EU as a heterarchical, decentred and dynamic process. It supports and radicalizes the principle of subsidiarity; offers an alternative to the treaty rules on enhanced co-operation; and addresses some of the legitimacy issues inherent in the EU. In EMU, the method arose out of a specific policy framework with a common monetary policy complemented by the coordination of national economic policies. The recent recommendation issued against Ireland is the first example of the operation of the method in EMU and shows how debate can be stimulated and how different and arguably equally valid perspectives defended. The particular experience of EMU with a sound money, sound finance paradigm, a long history of project-building by key elites and the central role of the European Council suggest similar conditions are required for the effective application of the method in other policy spheres. The context within which the method has operated to date is contingent and could change either over time or between policy fields. If so, the very openness of the method may serve to reconfigure the boundaries of competence between the Member States and the Union, after all.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Alesina, A. and Grilli, V. (1992) 'The European Central Bank: Reshaping Monetary Politics in Europe'. In Canzoneri, M., Grilli, V. and Masson, P. (eds) (1992) Establishing a Central Bank: Issues in Europe and Lessons from the US (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 43-77.
    • Allsopp, C. and Vines, D. (1998) 'The Assessment: Macroeconomic Policy After EMU'. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 1-23.
    • Arbejdsministeriet (1999) The Baltic Sea Region Sector Programme on Labour Market Policy: Report from the first Labour-Market Seminar (Copenhagen: Danish Ministry of Labour).
    • Ardy, B. (2001) 'A Question of Fit? Policy and Process in the Fiscal Domain'. Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 45-61.
    • Artis, M. and Buti, M. (2000) 'Close to Balance or in Surplus: A Policy-Makers' Guide to the Stability and Growth Pact'. Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 563-91.
    • Bayer, K. (1999) 'Perspectives on Future Policy Coordination under EMU'. Empirica, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 271-79.
    • Bean, C. (1998) 'Monetary Policy Under EMU'. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 41-53.
    • Begg, I. and Hodson, D. (2000) 'Regional Adjustment Mechanisms under EMU'.
    • Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Vol. 91, No. 1, pp. 78-84.
    • Bomberg, E. and Peterson, J. (2000) 'Policy Transfer and Europeanization: Passing the Heineken Test?'. Queen's On-Line Papers on Europeanization, No. 2/2000, at «http://www.qub.ac.uk/ies/onlinepapers/poe2.html».
    • Buti, M. and Sapir A. (eds) (1998) Economic Policy in EMU: A Study (Oxford: European Commission Services, Clarendon Press).
    • Calame, P. (2001) 'Active Subsidiarity: Reconciling Unity and Diversity'. In De Schutter et al. (eds), pp. 227-40.
    • Calingaert, M. (1999) 'Creating a European Market'. In Cram, L., Dinan, D. and Nugent, N. (eds) Developments in the European Union (Basingstoke: Macmillan), pp.
    • Commission of the European Communities (1970) Economic and Monetary Union in the Community, (Werner Report) (Brussels: CEC).
    • Commission of the European Communities (2001a) 'Diamantopoulou welcomes Estonia's agreement to shadow Community employment policy in run-up to accession'. News update from the Employment and Social Affairs DG, No 7/2001.
    • Commission of the European Communities (2001b) 'Communication on Strengthening Economic Policy Co-ordination with the Euro Area'. COM(2001) 82, final.
    • Commission of the European Communities (2001c) 'European Governance: A White Paper'. COM(2001) 428 final, 25 July.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article