Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:39:27.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction—The EU and Its “Constitution”: Public Opinion, Political Elites, and Their International Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 April 2006

Alberta Sbragia
Alberta Sbragia
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The European Union is going about its regular business. It is putting forth proposals to keep the Doha Round alive, continuing to negotiate a major trade agreement with Mercosur in South America, keeping peace-keeping troops in Bosnia and Herzegovina, spending development aid in numerous poor countries, financially supporting the Palestine Authority while giving Israel preferential access to the EU market, investigating Microsoft's business practices, and battling over the reach and scope of an ambitious new legislative attempt to regulate the chemical industry. The EU Greenhouse Trading Scheme, the largest greenhouse emissions trading scheme in the world, is up and running. The European Central Bank is making monetary policy decisions while the euro makes up almost 20% of central banks' foreign currency holdings. The European Medicines Agency (EMEA) has called for suspending the sale of the children's vaccine Hexavac. The European Court of Justice, for its part, has recently declared illegal a high profile Italian law designed to prevent foreign takeover of Italian energy companies. And the commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection is playing a leading role in the EU's response to the threat of a pandemic of avian bird flu.

Type
SYMPOSIUM
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 237 - 241
Copyright
© 2006 The American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gabel, Matthew J. 1998. Interest and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion, and European Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
German Marshall Fund of the United States et al. 2005. Transatlantic Trends: Key Findings 2005. Washington, D.C.: German Marshal Fund of the United States.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Mark. 2003. Surpassing Realism: The Politics of European Integration since 1945. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Howorth, Jolyon. 2005. “Transatlantic Perspectives on European Security in the Coming Decade.” Yale Journal of International Affairs (summer/fall): 8–22.Google Scholar
Imig, Doug, and Sidney Tarrow, eds. 2001. Contentious Europeans: Protest and Politics in the New Europe. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Langhammer, Rolf J. 2005. “The EU Offer of Service Trade Liberalization in the Doha Round: Evidence of a Not-Yet-Perfect Customs Union.” Journal of Common Market Studies 51 (2): 311–325.Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 1996. Regulating Europe. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 2006. “The Common Sense of European Integration.” Presented at the Princeton International Relations Faculty Colloquium, March 13.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 2005. “Wars and American Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 3 (September): 473–493.Google Scholar
Patterson, Lee Ann. 1997. “Agricultural Policy Reform in the European Community: A Three-Level Game Analysis.” International Organization 51 (1): 135–165.Google Scholar
Sandholtz, Wayne, and John Zysman. 1989. “1992: Recasting the European Bargain.” World Politics 42: 95–128.Google Scholar
Sbragia, Alberta. 1993. “The European Community: A Balancing Act.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 23 (summer): 23–38.Google Scholar
Sbragia, Alberta. 2000. “Governance, the State, and the Market: What Is Going On?” Governance 13 (April): 243–250.Google Scholar
Stubb, Alexander C-G. 1996. “A Categorization of Differentiated Integration.” Journal of Common Market Studies 13 (2): 283–295.Google Scholar