Taking Advantage of Institutional Possibilities and Network Opportunities : Analyzing Swedish Strategic Action in EU Negotiations
(2008) In Lund Political Studies- Abstract
- When core national interests are at stake, EU member states optimize their strategic activities on the European level in order to advance national preferences. Two cases are used in this study to shed light on such dynamics. The first case is Sweden’s strategic action within the transparency issue area, which in part defined the country’s Council Presidency in early 2001. The second case is the EU chemicals policy where Sweden, as in the transparency case, harbours strong interests.
The two studies provide opportunities for in-depth studies of the complex institutional setting and related EU negotiations within the co-decision context. Armed with a theoretical framework based on what is labelled institutional... (More) - When core national interests are at stake, EU member states optimize their strategic activities on the European level in order to advance national preferences. Two cases are used in this study to shed light on such dynamics. The first case is Sweden’s strategic action within the transparency issue area, which in part defined the country’s Council Presidency in early 2001. The second case is the EU chemicals policy where Sweden, as in the transparency case, harbours strong interests.
The two studies provide opportunities for in-depth studies of the complex institutional setting and related EU negotiations within the co-decision context. Armed with a theoretical framework based on what is labelled institutional possibilities and network opportunities, the author proceeds to analyze Swedish strategic activities in the studied cases. These activities are categorized as framing; the use of expertise; manipulation; procedural tactics; leadership; mediation and coalition-building.
The framework developed to analyze Sweden’s strategies is additionally used to trace and analyze the activities of other member states (i.e., France, Italy, the UK and Finland), EU bodies, and non-governmental actors. This multi-actor approach significantly broadens the empirical and theoretical scope of analysis and understanding. The theoretical contribution consists of a synthesis of rational institutionalism and network theory – informed by the sizable literature about negotiations in international relations.
The author concludes that within co-decision procedures, the European Parliament has become an important ally – or opponent – for member states advancing national interests. The role and influence of the Council Presidency is identified as a uniquely powerful when promoting national interests through the European system. The study also demonstrates that strategies vary greatly across stages of decision-making, and that tactical approaches are configured differently depending on the context. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Popular Abstract in Swedish
Avhandlingens utgångspunkt är att EU:s medlemsstater agerar mer taktiskt när starka nationella intressen står på spel. I den här studien analyseras Sveriges strategiska agerande i öppenhetsfrågan och i relation till en ny europeisk kemikalielagstiftning. Det första fallet, öppenhetsfrågan, slutförhandlades under Sveriges ordförandeskap våren 2001. Det andra fallet, kemikalielagstiftningen (förkortad REACH, vilket står för Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals), är ett omfattande lagstiftningsförslag där Sverige, liksom i öppenhetsfrågan, har haft starka intressen.
Det teoretiska ramverket baseras på nyckelbegreppen institutional possibilities och network... (More) - Popular Abstract in Swedish
Avhandlingens utgångspunkt är att EU:s medlemsstater agerar mer taktiskt när starka nationella intressen står på spel. I den här studien analyseras Sveriges strategiska agerande i öppenhetsfrågan och i relation till en ny europeisk kemikalielagstiftning. Det första fallet, öppenhetsfrågan, slutförhandlades under Sveriges ordförandeskap våren 2001. Det andra fallet, kemikalielagstiftningen (förkortad REACH, vilket står för Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals), är ett omfattande lagstiftningsförslag där Sverige, liksom i öppenhetsfrågan, har haft starka intressen.
Det teoretiska ramverket baseras på nyckelbegreppen institutional possibilities och network opportunities. Rationell institutionalism kombinerat med nätverksteori och teoribildning kring internationella förhandlingar ligger till grund för analysen. Strategiskt agerande för att tillvarata institutionellt givna möjligheter (institutional possibilities) och nätverka (network opportunities) med andra aktörer kategoriseras utifrån begreppen framing, tillhandahållande av expertis, manipulation, proceduriell taktik, ledarskap, medling samt koalitionsbyggande. Detta ramverk används även för att diskutera andra staters agerande inom samma områden liksom för att inkludera EUs institutioner samt andra ickestatliga aktörer.
Författaren kommer fram till att när ministerrådet och parlamentet gemensamt fattar beslut (co-decision procedures), så har parlamentet blivit en allt viktigare samarbetspartner och en central förhandlingsarena jämte rådet för medlemsstaterna. Vikten av ordförandeskapet i Ministerrådet för medlemsländernas möjlighet att agera taktiskt belyses. Studien visar också på att medlemsstaternas strategiska agerande varierar under olika stadier av beslutsfattande samt att olika strategier används i kombination beroende på hur beslutsproceduren utvecklas. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1050333
- author
- Broman, Matilda LU
- supervisor
-
- Ole Elgström LU
- opponent
-
- Associate Professor Ekengren, Magnus, Försvarshögskolan
- organization
- publishing date
- 2008
- type
- Thesis
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- tactics, mediation, framing, coalition-building, expertise, procedural tactics, manipulation, leadership, co-decision procedures, networks, rational institutionalism, openness, European Parliament, transparency, REACH, Sweden, Council Presidencies, negotiations, EUrationell institutionalism, EU, förhandlingar, Sverige, öppenhet, ordförandeskap, Europaparlamentet, ledarskap, expertis, medling och koalitionsbyggande
- in
- Lund Political Studies
- issue
- 152
- pages
- 296 pages
- publisher
- Department of Political Science, Lund University
- defense location
- Edens Hörsal
- defense date
- 2008-04-19 10:15:00
- ISSN
- 0460-0037
- ISBN
- 978-88306-71-5
- 91-88306-71-2
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- c2fb7592-67b9-4280-87ce-49beffceed12 (old id 1050333)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 13:18:06
- date last changed
- 2019-07-03 22:01:11
@phdthesis{c2fb7592-67b9-4280-87ce-49beffceed12,
abstract = {{When core national interests are at stake, EU member states optimize their strategic activities on the European level in order to advance national preferences. Two cases are used in this study to shed light on such dynamics. The first case is Sweden’s strategic action within the transparency issue area, which in part defined the country’s Council Presidency in early 2001. The second case is the EU chemicals policy where Sweden, as in the transparency case, harbours strong interests. <br/><br>
<br/><br>
The two studies provide opportunities for in-depth studies of the complex institutional setting and related EU negotiations within the co-decision context. Armed with a theoretical framework based on what is labelled institutional possibilities and network opportunities, the author proceeds to analyze Swedish strategic activities in the studied cases. These activities are categorized as framing; the use of expertise; manipulation; procedural tactics; leadership; mediation and coalition-building. <br/><br>
<br/><br>
The framework developed to analyze Sweden’s strategies is additionally used to trace and analyze the activities of other member states (i.e., France, Italy, the UK and Finland), EU bodies, and non-governmental actors. This multi-actor approach significantly broadens the empirical and theoretical scope of analysis and understanding. The theoretical contribution consists of a synthesis of rational institutionalism and network theory – informed by the sizable literature about negotiations in international relations. <br/><br>
<br/><br>
The author concludes that within co-decision procedures, the European Parliament has become an important ally – or opponent – for member states advancing national interests. The role and influence of the Council Presidency is identified as a uniquely powerful when promoting national interests through the European system. The study also demonstrates that strategies vary greatly across stages of decision-making, and that tactical approaches are configured differently depending on the context.}},
author = {{Broman, Matilda}},
isbn = {{978-88306-71-5}},
issn = {{0460-0037}},
keywords = {{tactics; mediation; framing; coalition-building; expertise; procedural tactics; manipulation; leadership; co-decision procedures; networks; rational institutionalism; openness; European Parliament; transparency; REACH; Sweden; Council Presidencies; negotiations; EUrationell institutionalism; EU; förhandlingar; Sverige; öppenhet; ordförandeskap; Europaparlamentet; ledarskap; expertis; medling och koalitionsbyggande}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{152}},
publisher = {{Department of Political Science, Lund University}},
school = {{Lund University}},
series = {{Lund Political Studies}},
title = {{Taking Advantage of Institutional Possibilities and Network Opportunities : Analyzing Swedish Strategic Action in EU Negotiations}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/3286968/4770580.pdf}},
year = {{2008}},
}