Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Explaining the Genesis of a Policy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The EU’s Policy on the Integration of Migrants

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

  • 371 Accesses

Abstract

Wedged between security concerns and a social inclusion paradigm, integration of migrants appeared on national political agendas in the 1980s. Chapter 3 shows how the issue emerged on the EU’s agenda in the 2000s. Through the application process tracing, it shows that the emergence of an EU integration policy results from the combination of three conditions: i) soft law as a necessary condition for the development of the policy; ii) the occurrence of three Presidencies of the Council with rather similar preferences within a relatively short time span as a sufficient condition; and iii) the role endorsed by the Commission as an intervening factor. It also shows how the Commission carved out a role for itself on integration through the creation of funding opportunities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The name of which has changed over the years.

  2. 2.

    European Council (1999).

  3. 3.

    In this regard, see inter alia Bigo (1996, 2002), Guiraudon (2003), and Duez (2008).

  4. 4.

    Process tracing has been the object of many articles and books in existing literature (see notably Checkel 2005; Vennesson 2008; Mahoney 2010; Collier 2011). Here I follow Mahoney (2010) and rely on mechanism causal-process observations. See appendices for more detail on data.

  5. 5.

    There are many examples in existing literature on this point but see Bigo (1996, 2002), Guiraudon (2003), and Duez (2008).

  6. 6.

    JHA Council (1999).

  7. 7.

    European Council (2001).

  8. 8.

    The three types include all EU measures but especially: treaties, secondary law, and soft steering measures.

  9. 9.

    Since the three categories encompass primary law, treaties are classified in the catch-all category for instance.

  10. 10.

    European Commission (1998).

  11. 11.

    Notably the United Kingdom, Germany, France (Schnapper 1994), Austria (Wischenbart 1994), Denmark (Mouritsen and Hovmark Jensen 2014), Belgium (Mandin 2014), and the Netherlands (Fischler 2014). In actual facts, almost all 15 member states had already taken action on integration by 2003. For more information see COM (2003) 336 final, Annex 1.

  12. 12.

    It is interesting to note in this respect that the first person that ever worked on integration in the Commission’s DG Justice and Home Affairs was not a Commission official but a national expert from a Danish Ministry detached to the Commission.

  13. 13.

    Note that in some instances, most foreign workers came from the then European periphery: southern European states such as Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Finland, or else Turkey and Maghreb countries (Castles et al. 2013). These imports of workforce were mainly organised through bilateral agreements between single European countries (Germany, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands) and the supplier countries (Guild 2001).

  14. 14.

    On this point, see notably Rubio-Marín (2004), Castles et al. (2013), Hollifield (1992), and Penninx et al. (2014).

  15. 15.

    See the German Bundesanstalt fiir Arbeit for instance or the French Office National d’Immigration.

  16. 16.

    See Castles et al. (2013), for an overview.

  17. 17.

    In this regard, see Schnapper (1994), Wischenbart (1994), Mouritsen and Hovmark Jensen (2014), Mandin (2014), and Fischler (2014); but see also Zincone et al. (2011).

  18. 18.

    This is acknowledged by numerous students of Europeanization; see inter alia Radaelli (2003b), Bache (2005), Caporaso (2007), and Richardson (2012).

  19. 19.

    I here make abstraction of the studies dealing with the divide neo-functionalism—inter-governmentalism that occupied a good deal of the discourse prior to the studies framed in terms of Europeanization. Previous studies were concerned with the emergence of a European polity and, indeed, proceeded in a bottom-up fashion.

  20. 20.

    See Chapter 2 for a more thorough description of the OMC. See also Borràs and Jacobsson (2004) and Kröger (2009).

  21. 21.

    Chapter 2 provides more detail on this. See also Caviedes (2004) and Vellutti (2007).

  22. 22.

    This is notably corroborated by one interviewee who holds that, what eased cooperation at EU level, was the fact that there was no compulsion whatsoever, the fact that member states could literally sign up for something without ever having to implement it.

  23. 23.

    This point is presented in greater detail in Chapter 2 but see also Tsebelis (2013).

  24. 24.

    Another element which probably entered into play along with the fact that law was to be soft, is the fact that the Council’s meetings were made up of representatives of ministries of the interior mostly (except for Denmark and Sweden; see above) with interests allegedly lying with security and border controls more than with integration.

  25. 25.

    European Council (2002: 7).

  26. 26.

    Danish EU Presidency (2002).

  27. 27.

    JHA Council (2002), paragraphs 10 and 11.

  28. 28.

    An idea that would be exploited by the Commission to systematise the initiative. See next section on the Commission.

  29. 29.

    An idea put forth by Commissioner Vitorino a month before. See next section on Commission.

  30. 30.

    This is how an interviewee phrased it.

  31. 31.

    JHA Council (1999).

  32. 32.

    They actually had the possibility to orchestrate advancement on the AFSJ but that did not represent much interest for them insofar as they were legally limited in their participation. Soft coordination mechanisms were therefore of greater interest for the Danes since they could push forward their own policy.

  33. 33.

    So argues an interviewee.

  34. 34.

    European Council 11638/03 (2003).

  35. 35.

    COM (2003) 336 final.

  36. 36.

    See, for example, the CBPs (Box 3.2) or else the Council Decision on the European Integration Fund (see Chapter 4).

  37. 37.

    European Council 11638/03 (2003).

  38. 38.

    Irish EU Presidency (2004).

  39. 39.

    European Council 11638/03 (2003).

  40. 40.

    See Bruquetas-Callejo et al. (2011), Blom (2014), and Fischler (2014) for more on this.

  41. 41.

    See Bourdrez (2010).

  42. 42.

    Ibid.

  43. 43.

    See document Migrapol-Integration 27. Note that Migrapol documents are not available to the public but may be requested from the European Commission via its access-to-document web interface.

  44. 44.

    Ibid.

  45. 45.

    Migrapol-Integration 33.

  46. 46.

    Council of the European Union 12258/04 (2004).

  47. 47.

    JHA Council (2004).

  48. 48.

    See notably Council of the European Union 12258/04 (2004).

  49. 49.

    For an extensive analysis of the CBPs, see Mulcahy (2011: 32).

  50. 50.

    European Council (2005).

  51. 51.

    Chapter 2 provides more detail on this.

  52. 52.

    The treaty provision the closest to integration was article 63 (3) (a) TEC providing that measures be adopted as to “conditions of entry and residence, and standards on procedures for the issue by Member States of long term visas and residence permits, including those for the purpose of family reunion”. Integration was first mentioned in primary law in the Constitutional Treaty. It notably excluded legal harmonisation in this domain. The Constitutional Treaty, however, was never adopted, making the treaty of Lisbon the first official reference to integration in primary law.

  53. 53.

    Integration was first mentioned in primary law in the Constitutional Treaty, which notably excluded legal harmonisation in this domain.

  54. 54.

    This point notably came out from the interviews conducted and documents retrieved. See also Bourdrez (2010).

  55. 55.

    COM (2003) 336 final.

  56. 56.

    JHA Council (2002).

  57. 57.

    See also COM (2003) 336 final: 29.

  58. 58.

    See documents Migrapol-Integration 2–61 notably.

  59. 59.

    See amongst other Migrapol-Integration 27; 40; 42; 43; 48.

  60. 60.

    Migrapol-Integration 4.

  61. 61.

    Migrapol-Integration 11. See also Urth (2005).

  62. 62.

    COM (2003) 336 final.

  63. 63.

    Vitorino (2002a).

  64. 64.

    COM (2003) 336 final: 18.

  65. 65.

    Ibid., p. 35.

  66. 66.

    Such initiative was immediately endorsed by the European Council of Thessaloniki (European Council 2003).

  67. 67.

    COM (2004) 508 final.

  68. 68.

    This point is corroborated by the interviews conducted for this research.

  69. 69.

    See above for more on the social inclusion paradigm. See also Murard (2002), Guiraudon (2003).

  70. 70.

    European Council (2002).

  71. 71.

    Vitorino (2002b: 8). Note that the rhetoric of a well-balanced policy that truly covered freedom and justice, and not only security, has been punctuating the documents emanating from EU institutions (see notably COM [2005] 123 final, establishing a framework programme on solidarity and the management of migration flows).

  72. 72.

    So recalled some of the interviewees.

  73. 73.

    Vitorino (2002a). See also COM (2003) 336 final.

  74. 74.

    See the yearly budgets available to the Commission, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/budget/www/index-en.htm.

  75. 75.

    Vitorino (2002a).

  76. 76.

    COM (2003) 336 final.

  77. 77.

    See notably Section 2 of COM (2003) 336 final.

  78. 78.

    COM (2003) 336 final: 53.

  79. 79.

    Ibid., p. 19.

  80. 80.

    In this respect, see also COM (2004) 508 final.

  81. 81.

    COM (2004) 101 final/2.

  82. 82.

    COM (2005) 123 final.

  83. 83.

    Ibid.

  84. 84.

    COM (2004) 101 final/2. Note that the figure for the coverage announced (here 20%) was risen to 30% in future documents; see notably SEC (2005) 435: 44.

  85. 85.

    COM (2005) 123 final: 14.

  86. 86.

    For more on this topic, see Schild (2008), Rant and Mrak (2010), and Dür and Mateo (2010).

References

Scholarship and Expert References

  • Aus, J. P. (2008). The Mechanisms of Consensus: Coming to Agreement on Community Asylum Policy. In D. Naurin & H. Wallace (Eds.), Unveiling the Council of the European Union: Games Governments Play in Brussels (pp. 99–120). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bache, I. (2005). Europeanization and Britain: Towards Multi-level Governance? Paper prepared for the EUSA 9th Biennial Conference in Austin, Texas, March 31–April 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigo, D. (1996). Polices En Réseaux: L’éxpérience Européenne. Paris: Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politiques.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigo, D. (2002). Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 27 Special Issue, 63–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blom, S. (2014). Local Migration and Integration Policies in Amsterdam. (Fondazione ISMU KING Project, In-Depth Study, No. 16).

    Google Scholar 

  • Borràs, S., & Jacobsson, K. (2004). The Open Method of Co-ordination and New Governance Patterns in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(2), 185–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börzel, T. A. (2002). Pace-Setting, Foot-Dragging, and Fence-Sitting: Member State Responses to Europeanization. JCMS. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 193–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdrez, L. (2010). The EU Policy on the Integration of Third-Country Nationals. “A Two-Way Process?”. Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruquetas-Callejo, M., Garcés-Mascareñas, B., Penninx, R., & Scholten, P. (2011). The Case of the Netherlands. In G. Zincone, R. Penninx, & M. Borkert (Eds.), Migration Policymaking in Europe: The Dynamics of Actors and Contexts in Past and Present (pp. 129–165). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantle, T. (2001). Community Cohesion: A Report of the Independent Review Team. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caporaso, J. (2007). The Three Worlds of Integration Theory. In P. R. Graziano (Ed.), Europeanization: New Research Agendas (pp. 23–34). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrera, S. (2008). Benchmarking Integration in the EU: Analyzing the Debate on Integration Indicators and Moving It Forward. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrera, S., & Wiesbrock, A. (2009). Civic Integration of Third-Country Nationals Nationalism Versus Europeanization in the Common EU Immigration Policy. Centre for European Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, S., de Haas, H., & Miller, M. J. (2013). The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World (5th ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caviedes, A. (2004). The Open Method of Co-ordination in Immigration Policy: A Tool for Prying Open Fortress Europe? Journal of European Public Policy, 11(2), 289–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, J. T. (2005). It’s the Process Stupid! Process Tracing in the Study of European and International Politics (ARENA Centre for European Studies Working Papers, University of Oslo, No. 26).

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T. (2006). The Council of Ministers: Facilitating Interaction and Developing Actorness in the EU. In J. Richardson (Ed.), European Union: Power and Policy-Making (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D. (2011). Understanding Process Tracing. PS. Political Science & Politics, 44(04), 823–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cram, L. (1997). Policy-Making in the European Union: Conceptual Lenses and the Integration Process. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Quirico, R. (2003). Italy, Europe and the European Presidency of 2003. Notre Europe, Research and European Issues, 27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duez, D. (2008). L’ Union Europeenne et L’immigration Clandestine: De La Securite Interieure a La Construction de La Communaute Politique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Universite de Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dür, A., & Mateo, G. (2010). Bargaining Power and Negotiation Tactics: The Negotiations on the EU’s Financial Perspective, 2007–2013. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(3), 557–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgström, O. (2000). Norm Negotiations. The Construction of New Norms Regarding Gender and Development in EU Foreign Aid Policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(3), 457–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ELIAMEP. (2014). Migration in Greece Recent Developments in 2014. Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Exadaktylos, T., & Radaelli, C. M. (2012). Looking for Causality in the Literature on Europeanization. In T. Exadaktylos & C. M. Radaelli (Eds.), Research Design in European Studies: Establishing Causality in Europeanization. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Faist, T., & Ette, A. (2007). The Europeanization of National Policies and Politics of Immigration: Research, Questions and Concepts. In T. Faist & A. Ette (Eds.), The Europeanization of National Policies and Politics of Immigration: Between Autonomy and the European Union (pp. 3–31). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Favell, A. (2001). Philosophies of Integration: Immigration and the Idea of Citizenship in France and Britain (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan in association with Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations, University of Warwick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Featherstone, K. (2003). Introduction: In the Name of “Europe”. In K. Featherstone & C. M. Radaelli (Eds.), The Politics of Europeanization (pp. 3–26). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fischler, F. (2014). Integration Policy Netherlands Country Report (Interact Research Report 2014/15).

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiraudon, V. (2003). The Constitution of a European Immigration Policy Domain: A Political Sociology Approach. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(2), 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guild, E. (2001). Immigration Law in the European Community. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidbreder, E. (2014). When Multiple Levels Meet Migration: The Specific Challenges of a EU Immigration Regime (Fondazione ISMU, KING Project, Desk Research Paper, No. 3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollifield, J. F. F. (1992). Immigrants, Markets, and States: The Political Economy of Postwar Europe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, L. (1996). Building a Europe with the Regions: The Changing Role of the European Commission. In L. Hooghe (Ed.), Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-level Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huysmans, J. (2000). The European Union and the Securitization of Migration. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 751–777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, D., & Rea, A. (2008). The End of National Models? Integration Courses and Citizenship Trajectories in Europe. Paper presented at the European Union Studies Association. 17–19 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantor Management Consultants. (2009). The Evaluation of the INTI Program Framework Contract for Evaluation and Evaluation Related Services. Kantor Management Consultants.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasimis, C. (2012). Greece: Illegal Immigration in the Midst of Crisis. Migration Policy Institute. Available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/greece-illegal-immigration-midst-crisis. Last Consulted November 16, 2016.

  • Kraler, A. (2011). The Case of Austria. In G. Zincone, R. Penninx, & M. Borkert (Eds.), Migration Policymaking in Europe. The Dynamics of Actors and Contexts in Past and Present (pp. 21–60). Amsterdam: IMISCOE Research Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kröger, S. (2009). The Open Method of Coordination: Underconceptualisation, Overdetermination, De-politicisation and beyond. European Integration online Papers, 13(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kundnani, A. (2012). Multiculturalism and Its Discontents: Left, Right and Liberal. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 15(2), 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laffan, B., & Lindner, J. (2005). The Budget. In H. Wallace, W. Wallace, & M. A. Pollack (Eds.), Policy-Making in the European Union (5th ed., pp. 191–212). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2010). After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research. World Politics, 62(1), 120–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandin, J. (2014). An Overview of Integration Policies in Belgium (Interact Research Report 2014/20).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieson, J., Popay, J., Enoch, E., Escorel, S., Hernandez, M., Johnston, H. and Rispel, L. (2008). Social Exclusion. Meaning, Measurement and Experience and Links to Health Inequalities. A Review of Literature (WHO Social Exclusion Knowledge Network, Vol. Background Paper 1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morjé Howard, M. (2008). The Causes and Consequences of Germany’s New Citizenship Law. German Politics, 17(1), 41–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouritsen, P., & Hovmark Jensen, C. (2014). Integration Policies in Denmark (INTERACT Research Report 2014/06).

    Google Scholar 

  • MPI. (2003). Press Release: Top Migration Experts to Meet in Athens Under the Leadership of the Migration Policy Institute and the Auspices of the Greek Presidency of the EU to Discuss Migration Issues of Concern to Europe. Migration Policy Institute. Available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/top-migration-experts-meet-in-athens. Last Consulted October 21, 2016.

  • Mulcahy, S. (2011). Europe’s Migrant Policies: Illusions of Integration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Murard, N. (2002). Guilty Victims: Social Exclusion in Contemporary France. In P. Chamberlayne, M. Rustin, & T. Wengraf (Eds.), Biography and Social Exclusion in Europe: Experiences and Life Journeys. Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noiriel, G. (2006) Le Creuset Francais: Histoire de L’immigration, XIXe–XXe Siecles. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninx, M., Garcés-Mascareñas, B., Protasiewicz, P. M., Schwarz, H., & Caponio, T. (2014). European Cities and Their Migrant Integration Policies A State of the Art Study for the Knowledge for Integration Governance (KING) Project. (Fondazione ISMU, KING Project, Overview Paper No. 5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrovic, M. (2012). Belgium: A Country of Pemanent Immigration. Migration Policy Institute. Available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/belgium-country-permanent-immigration. Last Consulted October 21, 2016.

  • Pratt, S. (2015). EU Policymaking and Research: Case Studies of the Communication on a Community Immigration Policy and the Common Basic Principles for Integration. In P. Scholten, H. Entzinger, R. Penninx, & S. Verbeek (Eds.), Integrating Immigrants in Europe: Research-Policy Dialogues (pp. 117–131). Amsterdam: IMISCOE Research Series.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Princen, S. (2007). Agenda-Setting in the European Union: A Theoretical Exploration and Agenda for Research. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, C. (2003a). The Open Method of Coordination: A New Governance Architecture for the European Union? (Vol. 1). Stockholm: Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, C. (2003b). The Europeanization of Public Policy. In K. Featherstone & C. M. Radaelli (Eds.), The Politics of Europeanization (pp. 27–56). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, C. M. (2008). Europeanization, Policy Learning, and New Modes of Governance. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 10(3), 239–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rant, V., & Mrak, M. (2010). The 2007–2013 Financial Perspective: Domination of National Interests. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(2), 347–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. (2012). Supranational State Building in the European Union. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Constructing a Policy-Making State? Policy Dynamics in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rubio-Marín, R. (2004). Immigration as a Democratic Challenge: Citizenship and Inclusion in Germany and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schain, M. (2010). Managing Difference: Immigrant Integration Policy in France, Britain, and the United States. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 77(1), 205–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play: Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schild, J. (2008). How to Shift the EU’s Spending Priorities? The Multi-annual Financial Framework 2007–2013 in Perspective. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(4), 531–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnapper, D. (1994). The Debate on Immigration and the Crisis of National Identity. West European Politics, 17(2), 127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, F. (1993). Soft Law and Institutional Practice in the European Community. In S. Martin (Ed.), The Construction of Europe: Essays in Honour of Emile Noel (pp. 197–225). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sussmuth, R. (2009). The Future of Migration and Integration Policy in Germany. Migration Policy Institute. Available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/future-migration-and-integration-policy-germany. Last Consulted January 15, 2017.

  • Tallberg, J. (2003). The Agenda-Shaping Powers of the EU Council Presidency. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2001, 27 September). Charlemagne; Antonio Vitorino. The Economist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiesse, A.-M. (2001). La Création Des Identités Nationales: Europe XVIIIe–XXe Siècle. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thränhardt, D. (2014). The State of European Integration Governance: A Comparative Evaluation (Fondazione ISMU, KING Project, Desk Research Paper, No. 7).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (2013). Bridging Qualified Majority and Unanimity Decisionmaking in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(8), 1083–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urth, H. (2005). Building a Momentum for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals in the European Union. European Journal of Migration and Law, 7(2), 163–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhercke, B. (2012). Social Policy at EU Level: From the Anti-poverty Programmes to Europe 2020. European Social Observatory, Vol. VC/2012/0658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Wolleghem, P. G. (2016). Migrations and Policy Cycle in the UK: Overview of Recent Trends (Fondazione ISMU, Working Paper Series).

    Google Scholar 

  • Velluti, S. (2007). What European Union Strategy for Integrating Migrants? The Role of OMC Soft Mechanisms in the Development of an EU Immigration Policy. European Journal of Migration and Law, 9(1), 53–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vennesson, P. (2008). Case Studies and Process Tracing Theories and Practices. In D. Della Porta & M. Keating (Eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (4th ed., pp. 223–239). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vitorino, A. (2002a). Closing Speech at the Conference on the Role of Civil Society in Promoting Integration, SPEECH/02/371. Paper presented, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitorino, A. (2002b). Interview with Mr. António Vitorino, European Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs. Immigration, Asylum and Social Integration, European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, H. (1985). The Presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Community: Tasks and Evolution. In C. O. Nuallain (Ed.), The Presidency of the European Council of Ministers. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischenbart, R. (1994). National Identity and Immigration in Austria—Historical Framework and Political Dispute. West European Politics, 17(2), 72–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zincone, G., Penninx, R., & Borkert, M. (2011). Migration Policymaking in Europe: The Dynamics of Actors and Contexts in Past and Present. Amsterdam: IMISCOE Research Series.

    Google Scholar 

EU Acts and Other Official Documents

  • COM. (2003). 336 Final—European Commission (2003). Communication from the Commission on Immigration, Integration and Employment.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2004). 101 Final/2—European Commission (2004). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Building our Common Future Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007–2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2004). 508 Final—European Commission (2004). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. First Annual Report on Migration and Integration.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2005). 123 Final—European Commission (2005). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Establishing a Framework Programme on Solidarity and the Management of Migration Flows for the Period 2007–2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union 12258/04. (2004). Common Basic Principles for Immigrant Integration Policy in the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish EU Presidency. (2002). Press Release: Informal Meeting of the Ministers in the Area of Justice and Home Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (1998). Action Plan of the Council and the Commission on How Best to Implement the Provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (1999). Tampere European Council 15 and 16 October 1999, Presidency Conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (2001). European Council Meeting in Laeken 14 and 15 December 2001, Presidency Conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (2002). Seville European Council 21 and 22 June 2002, Presidency Conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council 11638/03. (2003). Thessaloniki European Council 19 and 20 June 2003, Presidency Conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council 15915/05. (2005). Financial Perspective 2007–2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irish EU Presidency. (2004). Programme of the Irish Presidency.

    Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (1999). Action Plan of the Council and the Commission on How Best to Implement the Provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, 1999/C 19/01.

    Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (2002). 2455th Council Meeting, Luxembourg, 14/15 October 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • JHA Council. (2004). 2618th Council Meeting, 19 November 2004, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • SEC. (2005). 435 Final—European Commission (2005). Commission Staff Working Document Annex to the General Programme Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows Extended Impact Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fondazione ISMU and University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Pierre Georges Van Wolleghem

Authors
  1. Pierre Georges Van Wolleghem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Van Wolleghem, P.G. (2019). Explaining the Genesis of a Policy. In: The EU’s Policy on the Integration of Migrants. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97682-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation