Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction: Europe and the politics of capabilities
- Part I Products, territories and economic activity in Europe
- Part 2 Assessing EU procedures and European initiatives
- 8 The European Employment Strategy: from ends to means?
- 9 Regional growth, national context and the European Structural Funds: an empirical appraisal
- 10 Sketching European social dialogue freehand
- 11 The fourth dimension in collective bargaining and social co-operation
- 12 The nature of the open method of co-ordination
- Part 3 What politics of capabilities?
- Appendix 1 EU bibliography
- Appendix 2 Information on EU official documents
- Index
- References
12 - The nature of the open method of co-ordination
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction: Europe and the politics of capabilities
- Part I Products, territories and economic activity in Europe
- Part 2 Assessing EU procedures and European initiatives
- 8 The European Employment Strategy: from ends to means?
- 9 Regional growth, national context and the European Structural Funds: an empirical appraisal
- 10 Sketching European social dialogue freehand
- 11 The fourth dimension in collective bargaining and social co-operation
- 12 The nature of the open method of co-ordination
- Part 3 What politics of capabilities?
- Appendix 1 EU bibliography
- Appendix 2 Information on EU official documents
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Issues such as the struggle against poverty and social exclusion or pensions are now the focus of discussion and practices aimed at stepping up co-operation between the Member States, or even at applying the open method of co-ordination (OMC) to them. In the name of the principle of subsidiarity adopted by the Treaty of Maastricht, they were previously essentially, if not exclusively, treated at the national or infra-national level, and not, other than marginally, at the EU level. Could OMC be the answer for the ideal implementation of subsidiarity?
We will begin by retracing various sources of influence that gave rise to the debates on the vertical and horizontal dimensions of subsidiarity. To this end, section 2 will reflect on subsidiarity's application to the social domain from the early 1990s.
In section 3, we will look at OMC, its development and whether it could be a suitable method for the implementation of subsidiarity. Conversely, we will examine to what degree OMC (as a principle of governance) may undermine the principle of subsidiarity (as a principle guiding the distribution of competencies).
To conclude, we will indicate in section 4 the possible impact of these developments on social dialogue and its actors.
Maastricht and subsidiarity: a brief reminder of the debates of the early 1990s
The set of issues surrounding subsidiarity emerged at the beginning of the 1990s.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Europe and the Politics of Capabilities , pp. 185 - 202Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005
References
Begg, D., J. Crémer, J. P. Danthine, J. Edwards, V. Grilli, D. J. Neven, P. Seabright, H. W. Sinn, A. J. Venables and C. Wyplosz, 1993. ‘Making Sense of Subsidiarity: How Much Centralization for Europe?’, Monitoring European Integration, 4, London, Centre for Economic Policy Research
Benedictus, H., R. de Boer, M. van der Meer, W. Salverda, J. Visser and M. Zijl, 2002. ‘The European Social Dialogue: Development, Sectoral Variation and Prospects’, Report to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies, The Hague, December
Bercusson, B., 2000. ‘The European Employment Strategy and the EC, Institutional Structure of Social and Labour Law’, draft contribution at the workshop ‘Legal dimensions of the European Employment Strategy’, Brussels, SALTSA (a programme of partnership in European working life research run in Sweden), 9–10 October
Bercusson, B., S. Deakin, P. Koistinen, Y. Kravaritou, U. Mückenberger, A. Supiot and B. Veneziani, 1996. A Manifesto for Social Europe, Brussels, ETUI
Bosco, A., 2000. ‘Are National Social Protection Systems under Threat? Observations on the Recent Case Law of the Court of Justice’, European Issues, 7, Notre Europe, July, http://www.notre-europe.asso.fr/fichiers/Probl7-en.pdf
Branch, A. and J. Greenwood, 2001. ‘European Employers: Social Partners?’, in J. Compston and J. Greenwood (eds.), Social Partnership in the European Union, New York, Palgrave, 41–70
1997. ‘The Principle of Subsidiarity and the Court of Justice as an Institutional Actor’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 36(2), 217–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Búrca, G. 1999. ‘Reappraising Subsidiarity's Significance after Amsterdam’, Harvard Jean Monnet Working Paper, 7/99, Cambridge, MA, Harvard Law School
de la Porte, C. and P. Pochet, 2003. ‘The OMC Intertwined with the Debates on Governance, Democracy and Social Europe’, Research on OMC and European integration prepared for Minister Frank Vandenbroucke, Minister for Social Affairs and Pensions, April
and 2004. ‘European Briefing: Existing Research and Remaining Questions’, Journal of European Social Policy, 14(1), 71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2001. ‘Social Benchmarking, Policy-Making and the Instruments of New Governance in the EU’, Journal of European Social Policy, 11(4), 291–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degimbe, J., 1999. La politique sociale européenne, du traité de Rome au traité d'Amsterdam (European Social Policy from the Treaty of Rome to the Treaty of Amsterdam), Brussels, ETUI
Degryse, C., 2003. ‘Cross-Industry Social Dialogue in 2002: A Testing Year’, in C. Degryse and P. Pochet (eds.), Social Developments in the European Union 2002, Brussels, ETUI, Observatoire social européen and SALTSA, 177–207
D/lvik, J. E., 1997. Redrawing Boundaries of Solidarity's ETUC, Social Dialogue and the Europeanisation of the Trade Unions in the 1990s, Oslo, FAFO
, 2000. ‘EMU as Europeanization: Convergence, Diversity and Contingency’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(4), 645–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1996. ‘Italy and EMU as a “Vincolo Esterno”: Empowering the Technocrats, Transforming the State’, South European Society and Politics, 1(2), 272–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkner, G., 1998. EU Social Policy in the 1990s: Towards a Corporatist Policy Community, London, Routledge
Ferrera, M. and Gualmini, E., 1999. Salvati dall'Europa?, Bologna, Il Mulino
Ferrera, M., A. Hemerijck and M. Rhodes, 2000. The Future of Social Europe: Recasting Work and Welfare in the New Economy, Oeiras, Celta editora
, 1999. ‘The European Employment Strategy: Genesis and Development’, European Journal of Industrial Relations, 5(2), 117–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1999. ‘The EC Employment Title and the “Third Way”: Making Soft Law Work’, The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 15(1), 33–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebessis, N. and J. Paterson, 2000. ‘Developing New Modes of Governance’, Working Paper, 2000, Forward Studies Unit, Brussels, European Commission, http://europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/working-paper/nouveauxgouvernanceen.pdf
Leibfried, S. and P. Pierson, 1995. European Social Policy: Between Fragmentation and Integration, Washington DC, Brookings Institution
Martin, A. and G. Ross, 2004. Euros and Europeans: EMU and the European Social Model, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Millon-Delsol, C., 1992. L'Etat Subsidiaire. Ingérence et Non-Ingérence de l'Etat. Le Principe de la Subsidiarité aux Fondements de l'Histoire Européenne, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France
, 1993. ‘The Social Programme: Review and Assessment’, Working Paper, 5, Observatoire social européen, MayGoogle Scholar
2000. ‘Le nouvel agenda social européen’ (The New European Social Agenda), Revue belge de sécurité sociale, 4, 1059–1074Google Scholar
Pochet, P. 2003. ‘Subsidiarity, Social Dialogue and the Open Method of Co-ordination: The Role of the Trade Unions’, in D. Foster and P. Scott (eds.), Trade Unions in Europe: Meeting the Challenges, Brussels, PIE–Peter Lang, 87–113
Raveaud, G., 2001. ‘La dimension européenne des politiques d'emploi françaises. Une analyse de la participation des partenaires sociaux à l’élaboration du PNAE 2001', Etude pour le ministère de l'Emploi et de la Solidarité, November
Rodrigues, M. J., 2001. ‘The Open Method of Co-ordination as a New Governance Tool’, Europa Europe, Special Issue, 2–3, Rome, Fondazione Istituto Gramsci, 96–107
Salais, R., 2001. ‘Filling the Gap between Macro-Economic Policy and Situated Approaches to Employment: A Hidden Agenda for Europe?’, in B. Strth, and L. Magnusson (eds.), From the Werner Plan to the EMU: A European Political Economy in Historical Light, Brussels, PIE/Peter Lang, 413–446
Scharpf, F., 2000. ‘Notes Towards a Theory of Multilevel Governing in Europe’, MPIfg Discussion Paper, 00/5, Cologne, Max-Planck-Institute for the Study of Societies
, 1991. ‘La subsidiarité: principe directeur de la future Europe’ (Subsidiarity: A Guiding Principle for Future Europe), Revue du Marché commun, 344, 138–140Google Scholar
, 1991. ‘The Principle of Subsidiarity and the Social Policy of the European Community’, Journal of European Social Policy, 1(1), 3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telò, M., 2002. ‘Governance and Government in the European Union: The Open Method of Co-ordination’, in M. J. Rodrigues (ed.), The New Knowledge Economy in Europe: A Strategy for International Competitiveness and Social Cohesion, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 242–272
Wallace, H., 2000. ‘Some Observations on the Illusions of Institutional Balance and the Representation of States’, in E. Best, M. Gray and A. Stubb (eds.), Rethinking the European Union: IGC 2000 and Beyond, Maastricht, European
Zeitlin, J., 2002. ‘The Open Method of Co-ordination and the Future of the European Employment Strategy’, Presentation prepared for the mini-hearing of the Employment and Social Affairs Committee of the European Parliament on the first five-year evaluation of the Employment Guidelines, 8 July
- 3
- Cited by