Advertisement

Comparative Economic Studies

, Volume 59, Issue 4, pp 433–471 | Cite as

The Evolving Architecture of Europe: Functioning or Dysfunctional for the Twenty-First Century?

  • Paul HareEmail author
  • Richard Stoneman
Symposium Article
  • 129 Downloads

Abstract

From modest beginnings in 1957, the EU has since evolved both by deepening – adding new tasks and responsibilities to the Commission’s remit – and by widening – adding new members in a series of accessions, to arrive at the present 28 member states. A new complication was the UK’s referendum in June 2016 that opted for Brexit. The EU’s evolution by enlargement is examined, followed by an outline of the major EU institutions and the links between them. This includes EU engagement with the wider world via trade deals and aid. The suitability of the EU’s acquis for applicant states and countries in the EU neighbourhood is reviewed, followed by an assessment of the overall EU ‘Model’. Having appeared to function well and deliver significant benefits to the member states, the ‘Model’ has performed far less well since the 2007–2009 financial crisis, revealing major weaknesses in the Union’s capabilities. The EU needs new, more flexible economic models, as well as new modes of engagement, both internally and with its various partners. In addition, the EU’s political model needs reform, both to deal with the democratic deficit and to provide for more effective decision-making.

Keywords

growth enlargement EU institutions neighbourhood Brexit economic models 

JEL Classification

O52 P48 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Conan Fischer and Richard Pomfret for helpful comments on an earlier draft of the conference version of this paper, participants at the Warsaw Conference where the paper was presented, and three anonymous referees for very detailed comments that have enabled us to improve this final, journal version. Paul Wachtel, editor of the journal, also provided detailed comments and suggestions for which we are most grateful. Remaining errors and infelicities are entirely our own responsibility.

References

  1. Borissova, L. 2007: Enforcement actions under EU law: The new member states. European Institute of Public Administration: Maastricht.Google Scholar
  2. Borsi, MT and Metiu, N. 2013: The evolution of economic convergence in the European Union. Bundesbank Discussion Paper No. 28/2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2796921.
  3. Burda, MC and Hunt, J. 2001: From reunification to economic integration: Productivity and the labor market in Eastern Germany. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, No. 2. The Brookings Institution: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  4. Carlin, W. 2010: Good institutions are not enough: Ongoing challenges of east German development. CESifo Working Paper No. 3204, Munich.Google Scholar
  5. Council. 2014: Council Decision of 26 May 2014 on the system of own resources of the European Union’, Council of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union L168: 105–111.Google Scholar
  6. Csaba, L. 2005: The new political economy of emerging Europe. Akadémiai Kiadó: Budapest.Google Scholar
  7. Dustmann, C, Casanova, M, Fertig, M, Preston, I and Schmidt, CM. 2003: The impact of EU enlargement on migration flows. Online Report 25/03. The Home Office: London.Google Scholar
  8. EC. 2010: Lisbon strategy evaluation document. SEC (2010) 114 final. European Commission: Brussels.Google Scholar
  9. EC. 2014: The Cotonou agreement. As most recently updated in Ouagadougou in 2010. DevCo: Brussels.Google Scholar
  10. EC. 2015: The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Report 2015. SWD (2015) 212 final. European Commission: Brussels.Google Scholar
  11. EC. 2016: Infringement cases by country. Taxation and Customs Union. European Commission: Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/infringements/infringement-cases-press-releases/infringement-cases-country_en.
  12. EC. 2017: ANNEX to the recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION authorising the opening of the negotiations for an agreement with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal from the European Union. COM (2017) 218 final. European Commission: Brussels.Google Scholar
  13. Elliott, L and Atkinson, D. 2016: Europe isn’t working. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  14. European Economy. 2002: Germany’s growth performance in the 1990’s. Economic Paper No. 170. European Commission: DG for Economic and Financial Affairs.Google Scholar
  15. Eurostat. 2017: Unemployment statistics (to March 2017), on the Eurostat official website. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics.
  16. GPW. 2016: Should Poland join the Euro? An economic and political analysis. Graduate policy workshop. Authors: Michael Carlson et al. In: Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Princeton University: Princeton.Google Scholar
  17. Gürkaynak, RS and Tille, C. 2017: DSGE models in the conduct of policy: Use as intended. A VoxEU.org book. CEPR Press: London.Google Scholar
  18. Hare, P. 2012: Vodka and Pickled Cabbage. CreateSpace (esp. ch.9).Google Scholar
  19. Hare, P. 2013: Institutions in transition. In: Hare, P and Turley G (eds). Handbook of the economics and political economy of transition, chapter 2. Routledge: London.Google Scholar
  20. Hartwell, CA. 2016: Two roads diverge: The transition experience of Poland and Ukraine. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. HC. 2017: Legislating for Brexit: The Great Repeal Bill. House of Commons Briefing Paper No. 7793. Parliament: London (by Jack Caird).Google Scholar
  22. HL. 1997: The financial consequences of enlargement. Select Committee on European Communities Tenth Report, Session 1997–1998, HL36, House of Lords. Parliament: London.Google Scholar
  23. IMF. 2012: The liberalization and management of capital flows: An institutional view. International Monetary Fund: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. IMF. 2013: Guidance note for the liberalization and management of capital flows. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. IMF. 2017: World economic outlook: Gaining momentum? International Monetary Fund: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. Juncker, J-C, et al. 2016: Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union. European Commission: Brussels (often referred to as the 5 Presidents’ Report).Google Scholar
  27. Kołodko, G. 2000: From shock to therapy: The political economy of postsocialist transformation. UNU/WIDER Studies in Development Economics. Oxford University Press: Oxford.Google Scholar
  28. Mexico. 2000: Economic partnership, political coordination and cooperation agreement between the European Community and its member states, of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part. Official Journal of the European Communities L276: 45–61.Google Scholar
  29. Migration Watch. 2015: Immigration under labour. MW 355. Migration Watch: London.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, V. 2010: How much legislation comes from Europe? Research Paper 10/62. House of Commons Library: London.Google Scholar
  31. MNB. 2011: Hungary and the euro area: Challenges and prospects. Analysis of the Convergence Process. Magyar Nemzeti Bank: Budapest.Google Scholar
  32. PM. 2017: Prime Minister’s letter to European Council President Donald Tusk. Prime Minister’s Office: London.Google Scholar
  33. Ratto, M, Roeger, W and in’t Veld J. 2008: QUEST III: An estimated open-economy DSGE model of the Euro area with fiscal and monetary policy. European Economy – Economic Papers No. 335. European Commission: Brussels.Google Scholar
  34. Scheller, HK. 2004: The European Central Bank: History, role and functions. ECB: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  35. Scheuer, S. (ed.) 2005: EU environmental policy handbook: A critical analysis of EU environmental legislation. European Environmental Bureau: Brussels.Google Scholar
  36. Sinn, H-W. 2000: Germany’s economic unification: An assessment after ten years. NBER Working Paper 7586. NBER: Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  37. Sinn, H-W. 2014: The Euro trap: On bursting bubbles, budgets, and beliefs. OUP: Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sinn, H-W. 2016: The global economy is caught in a trap. The only way out is creative destruction. The Guardian: London.Google Scholar
  39. Stiglitz, JE. 2016: The Euro and its threat to the future of Europe. Allen Lane: London.Google Scholar
  40. TFEU. 2012: Consolidated version of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union. OJEU (commonly referred to as the Lisbon Treaty, signed December 2007).Google Scholar
  41. TEEU. 2014: Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Moscow; came into force 1/1/2015.Google Scholar
  42. TEU. 2012: Consolidated version of the treaty on European Union. OJEU (often referred to as the Maastricht Treaty, agreed in 1992, coming into force 1993).Google Scholar
  43. Varoufakis, Y. 2016: And the weak suffer what they must? Europe, Austerity and the threat to global stability. The Bodley Head: London.Google Scholar
  44. World Bank. 2015: Doing business 2016: Measuring regulatory quality and efficiency. The World Bank: Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Comparative Economic Studies 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Emeritus Professor of Economics, School of Social SciencesHeriot-Watt UniversityEdinburghUK
  2. 2.International ConsultantOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations