Matiaske / Brunkhorst / Grözinger The European Union as a Model for the Development of Mercosur?

1. Auflage 2007
ISBN: 978-3-86618-112-0
Verlag: Rainer Hampp Verlag
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 205 Seiten

It is rarely questioned that the European Union can be considered a model for other world regions. Comparable initiatives elsewhere are much less integrated, and up until now less successful, even if like Mercosur they are based on the European model. Although elements of the democratic rule of law in the EU are more developed than in all comparable projects and organisations, the model character of the EU is highly questionable in terms of democratic theory, and we should ask what scholars concerned with the European Union can learn from similar experiments in other world regions. Perhaps experience from the Merco-sur countries with deliberative citizen democracy at the local level, the double perspective of the still ongoing transition from a 'nominalistic' to a 'normative' constitutional regime within nation states, and the simultaneous continental net-working of law, economics, and policy could also be instructive for the current EU with its new problems in the realm of democracy and rights. Transcontinen-tal social capital can only build-up if the learning processes are opened in both directions. The individual contributions to this volume move between the poles 'effectiveness' and 'democracy'. It is the result of an international workshop or-ganized by scholars from Flensburg University and from the Fundação Getúlio Vargas in Sao Paulo.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Matiaske, Wenzel

Brunkhorst, Hauke

Grözinger, Gerd

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Contents;6
2;Introduction;8
3;Political Development and Comparative Issues with EU;14
3.1;1. Origins;14
3.2;2. The Nature of Political Institutions;17
3.2.1;2.1 The Social Market Economy: An Economical Christian Project;31
3.2.2;2.2 The Economic Constitution: “Authoritarian Liberalism” Revisited?;32
3.2.3;2.3 Ordo-liberalism in the European Community: the Decoupling of Economic Integration from the Welfare State and its Social Policy;34
3.3;3. Two Meanings of Deepening and Widening;20
3.3.1;3.1 “Invasions of the Market”?;37
3.3.2;3.2 Erosions of the Market?;40
3.3.3;3.3 Rules versus Politics? Monetary Union, the Maastricht Judgment and the Stability Pact;40
3.4;4. Are we About to Bring the Law to Trial? Some Queries with the Open Method of Co-ordination;45
3.4.1;4.1 The Career of the Concept;45
3.4.2;4.2 Output Legitimacy?;48
3.4.3;4.3 Normative Queries;49
3.5;5. A Resumé;54
3.5.1;5.1 The Constitutional Treaty;54
3.5.2;5.2 Constitutionalization as Process;56
4;European Democratic Legitimation after the Failure of the Constitution;58
4.1;Introduction;58
4.2;1. Functional constitutionalism;61
4.3;2. Rule of law constitutionalism;62
4.4;3. Democratic Constitutionalism;65
4.4.1;3.1 Terms related to “civil society” and usage in official documents;88
4.4.2;3.2 Empirical application of the terms: limits and critical points;90
4.4.3;3.3 Synthesis and observations;95
4.5;4. Forms of participation in the Mercosur decision-making process;96
4.5.1;4.1 Information as a condition for participation;97
4.5.2;4.2 Consultation as a proposal for dialogue;100
4.5.3;4.3 Cooperation: a deepening interaction;104
4.5.4;4.4 Synthesis and observations;104
4.6;Books and articles;107
4.7;Official Mercosur Documents;109
4.8;Internet Websites;110
4.9;Appendix;111
5;“People’s” Position in Regional Integration: an Alternative to the Theory of Consensus;68
5.1;1. Generalization of the inclusion principle in the economic system and its effect on politics and law;68
5.2;2. Law and politics as means of regional integration;71
5.3;3. Crises of legitimacy and attachment to values: the notion of a “ European people” as a solution?;73
5.4;4. From bi-dimensionality to tri-dimensionality of power: overcoming the “ people” value with the self- referentiality of the political system;74
5.5;5. People as an environment of the political system;77
5.6;6. The European Constitution as a reconstruction of legal and political autonomy in the supranational sphere;78
5.7;Bibliography;80
6;Civil Society Participation in Mercosur: Some Critical Points;82
6.1;Abstract;82
6.2;1. Introduction;82
6.3;2. Participation and representation mechanisms in Mercosur;84
6.4;3. The concept of “civil society” in Mercosur and concerned interests;88
6.5;4. Forms of participation in the Mercosur decision-making process;96
6.6;5. Final notes;106
6.7;Bibliography and other references;107
7;The European Union’s Social Capital;118
7.1;1. Introduction;118
7.2;2. Theoretical and Political Aspects of Social Capital;119
7.2.1;2.1 The EU Policy Framework;120
7.3;3. Generalised Reciprocity;121
7.3.1;3.1 Social Trust;121
7.3.2;3.2 Commitment;123
7.4;4. Social Connectedness;124
7.4.1;4.1 Formal Memberships;125
7.4.2;4.2 Informal Social Networks;127
7.5;5. Summary;128
7.6;Literature;129
8;From the ‚Nomos der Erde’ to a Unified European Defense System;176
8.1;1. Partition of the World;177
8.2;2. Jus Publicum Europeum;177
8.3;3. Occupation of the New World;178
8.3.1;3.1 Two different approaches;178
8.3.2;3.2 The Right to Occupy?;179
8.3.3;3.3 Thinking in global lines;179
8.4;4. A spatial regime centered on Europe;179
8.4.1;4.1 Balance between Land and Ocean;180
8.4.2;4.2 Revolution and Restoration;181
8.4.3;4.3 End of the European era;182
8.5;5. The American Century;183
8.6;6. The European Integration;184
8.6.1;6.1 Economic Community;185
8.6.2;6.2 Monetary Union;186
8.6.3;6.3 Defence Community;186
8.7;7. Europe and the USA: Strategic Partnership or Open Rivalry?;187
8.8;Bibliography;189
9;The Future of Latin America: Can the EU Help?;190
9.1;1. The Ever Changing World Order;190
9.2;2. “Democracy” vs. “Sovereignty”;196
9.3;3. A Time for Nation Building?;197
9.4;4. What, a New Imperialism?;198
9.5;5. The Resistance to Assume Further Responsibilities;199
9.6;6. Am I Idealizing the EU?;201
9.7;7. Exports and Subsidies;204
9.8;8. The Merits of EU Participation in Regional and World Public Governance;205
10;Authors;206

Leseproben

Civil Society Participation in Mercosur: Some Critical Points (S. 77-78)

Michelle Ratton Sanchez

Abstract

The Mercosur Council Working Program 2004-2006 (MERCOSUR/CMC/DEC no 26/03) employs the term "civil society" with the purpose of increasing its participation in the institutional structure of Mercosur. As such an expression has never been applied in any formal document of that regional integration process, in this article firstly I intend to investigate the concepts related to "civil society" in Mercosur, identifying the groups of actors that have participated during recent years. The analysis also comprehends an evaluation of the Mercosur institutional channels for "civil society" participation, which might be revised according to Ouro Preto 2nd Round Decisions.

1. Introduction

Due to the increasing complexity of economic relations in regional integration processes, with more interaction between the productive chains and a greater scope and technicality in the regulation of social and economic life, new forms of representation and participation are required on the different levels of political decision. Currently Mercosur is undergoing a process of questioning its economic and political viability. Among the factors that have been identified are its weak institutionalization and the poor social cohesion of the bloc.

In this article I intend to analyze the relation between these two factors. Decision No. 09/95 of the Common Market Council (CMC) – the Mercosur 1995-2000 Action Program –foresaw in paragraph 3.2 that: The strengthening of the integration process requires a more intensive participation on the part of society. To this end, the Joint Parliamentary Commission (JPC) and the Economic and Social Advisory Forum (ESAF) shall ensure the due participation of the sectors involved. After the Mercosur Relaunching Project in 2000 and its Institutional Strengthening Project in 2001, the 2004-2006 Mercosur Work Program was finally launched in 2003.1 This work program defines lines of action for affirming and expanding the integration project, articulating for the first time the idea of participation on the part of "civil society" (paragraph 2.1 of the 2004- 2006 Mercosur Work Program).

Two points are worth noting in the mentioned documents: one is the fact that in the 1995-2000 Action Program reference is made to mechanisms for both representation (JPC) and direct participation (ESAF), the other point is the employment, beginning with the 2004-2006 Mercosur Work Program, of the term "civil society." Attention is called to the use of the expression "civil society" in an official Mercosur document considering that a detailed search for its content:

(i) defines the group of interests involved (and represented), and (ii) establishes lines to identify its interlocutors. I understand that this exercise is essential when applying the concept of "civil society" in international or regional fora. In spite of there being a terminological coincidence with respect to the theory of the modern State, the political structure on which the new usage is based is distinct. Moreover, the term has been applied with specific content in each international forum. Considering the proposal for revising the institutional structure of Mercosur – known as "Ouro Preto II" and which defines the participation of "civil society" as one of its central elements –, it has yet to be confirmed if the institutional reform indeed favors the participation of "civil society."