dc.contributor.author
Börzel, Tanja A.
dc.contributor.author
Hüllen, Vera van
dc.date.accessioned
2018-06-08T07:56:45Z
dc.date.available
2012-01-19
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/19049
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-22721
dc.description
1\. Introduction 6 2\. Membership Matters, but When and How? 7 3\. Zooming
into the European Neighborhood: Going Against the Tide? 11 4\. EU External
Governance – Does it Make a Difference? 14 5\. Conclusions 17 Literature 19
dc.description.abstract
The EU’s Eastern Enlargement is considered to be one of the (few) successful
experiments of promoting good – both effective and legitimate – governance. By
contrast, the EU’s transformative power appears to be weak or non-existent
vis-à-vis its (old) neighbors in the South and its (new) neighbors in the
East. Both are not only marked by ‘bad governance’ but also lack a (credible)
membership perspective. While the Western Balkans and Turkey have made
significant progress towards good governance, both with regard to government
effectiveness and democratic legitimacy, the European Neighborhood Countries
(ENCs) appear to be stuck in transition or never got that far in the first
place. Even when the effectiveness of their governance institutions has
improved, they remain well behind the other regions and especially their
democratic legitimacy is still wanting or even in decline. The paper shows
that there is a correlation between an EU membership perspective and the
successful transformation of neighboring countries. Therefore, it has been
argued that the ineffectiveness of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) is
due to the lack of this ‘golden carrot’. However, we argue that the prospects
of EU membership stabilizes rather than drives the move towards effective and
legitimate governance in candidate countries. Thus, a membership perspective
is unlikely to either turn around negative or speed up positive developments
in the EU’s neighborhood. Even if the ENCs received a membership perspective,
it would be unlikely to push them significantly towards democratic and
effective governance as long as there is no endogenously driven process of
change. Given the EU’s preference for stability and state-building, the ENP
does not provide an alternative for promoting good governance either. The ENP
clearly lacks transformative power and where it might have some domestic
impact, it risks consolidating rather than undermining authoritarian regimes
by helping to strengthen their capacities for effective governance.
de
dc.relation.ispartofseries
urn:nbn:de:kobv:188-fudocsseries000000000055-9
dc.rights.uri
http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen
dc.subject.ddc
300 Sozialwissenschaften::320 Politikwissenschaft
dc.title
Good governance and bad neighbors?
dc.title.subtitle
The limits of the transformative power of Europe
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
http://www.polsoz.fu-berlin.de/en/v/transformeurope/publications/working_paper/WP_35_B__rzel_VanH__llen.pdf
refubium.affiliation
Politik- und Sozialwissenschaften
de
refubium.affiliation.other
Kolleg-Forschergruppe "The Transformative Power of Europe"
refubium.mycore.fudocsId
FUDOCS_document_000000012767
refubium.series.issueNumber
35
refubium.series.name
KFG working paper
refubium.mycore.derivateId
FUDOCS_derivate_000000001809
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access