1 / 30

Enlargement of the European Union

Enlargement of the European Union. Ref: EUenlargement332cbs2010 Feb10. Introduction. Any European country can join Treaty of Rome art 232 First 4 enlargements 5th enlargement issues central and eastern European countries (CEECs), plus Malta & Cyprus optimum size of EU?

iden
Download Presentation

Enlargement of the European Union

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Enlargement of the European Union Ref: EUenlargement332cbs2010 Feb10

  2. Introduction • Any European country can join • Treaty of Rome art 232 • First 4 enlargements • 5th enlargement issues • central and eastern European countries (CEECs), plus Malta & Cyprus • optimum size of EU? • Enlargement and business

  3. Candidates for EU membership • Accession countries assessed by EU • must be able to operate within the EU framework • Pre-accession agreements • 5th enlargement - a new challenge • CEECs • former centrally planned economies (CPEs) in transition to market economies • significantly changing the nature of EU • generally small, poor countries p 87

  4. Copenhagen Summit 1993 set out criteria, • functioning market economy • democratic political system • acceptance of acquis communautaire

  5. Forces behind enlargement • Benefits of economic integration incl. • comparative advantage • trade creation ( but possibly trade diversion) • investment & other dynamic economic benefits from integration • Papazoglou et al (2006): • Gravity models suggests New 10 increased imports from EU15 > rise exports to EU15 • Reorientation of trade to EU15 • Papazoglou, Pentecost, Marques, ‘A gravity model forecast of the potential trade effects of EU enlargement: Lessons from 2004 and path-dependency in integration’. The World Economy(2006)

  6. REVIEW: Competitive pressures & efficiency in the single market (note: you can use other theories) euros price Home market only Mark-up BE D BEFT E’ 1 E’ E’ m' p’ p’ E” W E” E” p” p” A A mA pA AC COMP MC Number of firms n’ n” 2n’ Sales per firm x” Total sales C’ C” x’

  7. Review: Growth effects of integration in the single market Euro/L Y/L1 GDP/L 1 Medium term growth bonus E Y/Lc C Allocation effect B Y/L* Depreciation / worker d (K/L) D s(GDP/L)1 A K/L K/L* K/L1

  8. Political benefits

  9. Widening v deepening debate • Since 1st enlargement • EU15 optimum size? EU27 beyond optimum size? THEORY OF CLUBS – see later • Two approaches to enlargement • traditional ‘classical’ method • adaptive method • Can widening & deepening be mutually complementary?

  10. p7a • 5th enlargement - adaptive perspective • Is EU currently progressing at 1 rate? • Schengen Agreement / EMU/ Tax ? • Variable geometry • multi-speed EU • Multi-tier EU • EU of concentric circles

  11. Enlargement - even more variable geometry • Widening v deepening debate outdated???

  12. Theory of Clubs: summary • See handout & references • Assume M* optimal size of EU • Was EU 15 optimal? • Institutional changes (eg move to QMV) can shift MC & increase optimal size (to Mx) • Consequences for enlargement & Depth of integration

  13. Theory of Clubs Benefits and costs MC MB M* No. of members

  14. Theory of Clubs Benefits and costs MC MC1 MB No. of members M* Mx

  15. Subsidiarity principle • Subsidiarity important • Task allocation in EU guided by subsidiarity principle (Maastricht Treaty) • Decisions should be made as close to the people as possible, • EU should not take action unless doing so is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level. • Background: “creeping compentencies” • Range of tasks where EU policy matters was expanding. • Some Member States wanted to limit this spread.

  16. Similar analysis for Depth of integration • see handout

  17. Enlargement issues for the EU • Agriculture • Structural funds • Budget • Migration • Voting – see later • Poor new members • 20% rise in EU population, BUT • New 10’s GDP equivalent to Netherlands Sources: Eurostat and EU Commission 2003.

  18. Voting rules • Since 1993 Eastern enlargement was inevitable & EU institutional reform required. • 3 C’s: CAP, Cohesion & Control. • Here the focus is on Control, i.e. decision making. • Nice Treaty (2000)and & LISBON (Reform) TREATY 2007 (in force 1 Dec 2009) • Nice Treaty; temporary until new Treaty was ratified • No final decision made re: voting after enlargement • Focus on Council of Ministers voting rules.

  19. Voting rules • Voting rules can be complex, especially as number of voters rises. • Number of yes-no coalitions is 2n. • EU9 • 512 possible coalitions. • EU 27 • 134 million coalitions.

  20. Voting rules over time Pre-Nice rules (from the SEA) • Council of Ministers voting rule changes Nice rules (1Nov 2004) Lisbon Reform Treaty Rules (1 Dec 2009)

  21. Pre-Nice Treaty Voting Rules • No longer used since 1 November 2004, but important as a basis of comparison. • “Qualified Majority Voting” (QMV): • ‘weighted voting’ in place since 1958, • Each member has number of votes, • Populous members more votes, but far less than population-proportional. • e.g. Germany 10, Luxembourg 2 • Majority threshold about 71% of votes to win.

  22. Nice Treaty Voting Rules • 3 main changes for Council of Ministers: • Majority threshold raised • Votes re-weighted. • Big & ‘near-big’ members gain a lot of weight. • Added 2 new majority criteria: • Population (62%) and members (50%).

  23. Winners & Losers from Nice “Aznar bonus” Poland Spain Italy France UK Germany • Source: Baldwin & Widgren (2005)

  24. Nice reforms: 1 step forward, 2 steps backward • Step Forward: • Re-weighting improves decision-making efficiency. • 2 Steps Backwards: EU decision-making extremely difficult. • 2 new majority criteria worsens efficiency. • raising vote threshold worsens efficiency. • Main point is Vote Threshold raised. • Pop & member criteria almost never matter. • About 20 times out of 2.7 million winning coalitions. • Even small increases in threshold around 70% lowers passage probability • The number of blocking coalitions expands rapidly compared to the number of winning coalitions.

  25. Lisbon Treaty rules • Lisbon Reform : Double Majority. • Approve requires ‘yes’ votes of a coalition of members that represent at least: • 55% of members, • 65% of EU population.

  26. Lisbon Treaty rules very efficient 25 20 15 Passage probability 10 5 0 EU6 EU9 EU10 EU12 EU15 EU25 EU27 EU29 21.9 14.7 13.7 9.8 7.8 Historical 2.8 Status quo: May 04 to Nov 04 3.6 2.8 2.3 Nice rules: Nov 04 to Nov 09 10.1 12.9 12.2 Lisbon rules Dec’09 onwards • Source: Baldwin & Widgren (2005)

  27. Do power measures matter?

  28. 5th enlargement and business • Increased trade • Larger internal (single) market • Opportunites and threats • Does this impact on certain EU15 States? • Pre-accession benefits may ‘reduce’ initial impact of enlargement

  29. Other European countries • EEA - includes Norway • Switzerland • Will Turkey ever join? • Further eastern enlargement?

  30. Conclusion • Economic and political motivations for enlargement • Has the EU exceeded its optimum size? • Are reforms sufficient to accommodate the 5th enlargement? • Implications for business must be considered

More Related