January 26, 2015

CNRS Summer School-Call for proposals (due Feb 1): Political constructions of Europe: New historical and sociological approaches

CNRS Summer School - Call for proposals

Political constructions of Europe: 
New historical and sociological approaches

Project Coordinators:
Didier Georgakakis (University Paris 1, Cnrs-Cessp)
Jay Rowell (University of Strasbourg, Cnrs-Sage)
Antoine Vauchez (University of Paris 1, Cnrs-Cessp)

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique-CNRS
European School of European Studies, University of Strasbourg
Project supported by:
TEPSIS Laboratory of Excellence

Date: June 9-12 2015

Context

The Summer school will bring together senior scholars, postdoctoral students, and Ph.D candidates for an intensive four-day exchange on new historical and sociological approaches to European Studies. The school will be held in the extraordinary setting of the Moulin d’Andée (http://www.moulinande.com) located on the banks of the Seine in Normandy, one hour outside of Paris. It will be a unique opportunity for in-depth empirical, methodological and conceptual discussions on the study of the European Union and an occasion to strengthen and broaden existing European networks of scholars.

The Summer school will take stock of the rapid evolutions of the past 10 years in the field of EU studies and will sketch out shared research agendas. Until quite recently, work in history, political science and sociology developed quite independently, but disciplinary boundaries have gradually softened and shifted. A number of political scientists developed approaches inspired by political sociology and socio-historical perspectives ; simultaneously, a new historiography of European integration has emerged with a generation of historians from Germany, Denmark, France and elsewhere, who developed and explored more sociological perspectives and methods (transnational networks, field theory, etc...). These historians have called for closer collaboration between the disciplines as a way to renew the field of EU studies and study the blind spots of existing paradigms. Sociology had until recently remained on the sidelines, but recent research on professions and configurations of elites in their relationship to the “European project” have provided new avenues for closer cooperation with political sociology and history.

Overall, these innovations have generated several new insights: a more historically-grounded perspective which places contemporary transformations in their context of historical possibility; a more actor-centered orientation which questions the porosity of social spaces affected by European institutions while embedding “European actors” in wider social spaces; a more empirically-focused research agenda, opening black boxes and conceptualizing central ideas of the European process as the result of actor mobilization and legitimation strategies; last but not least, a more reflexive posture able to question forms of entanglement and circulation between an emerging transnational academic field and EU-implicated fields.

Objectives

The residential Summer school follows three objectives. The first is the diffusion of new research concepts, methods and research techniques which have developed in parallel within the different disciplines (historical sociology, field-theory, prosopography, articulation between quantitative and qualitative methodologies, etc.). The second is the development of forms of reflexivity of EU academics, a domain which has remained for the most part a blind spot of EU Studies, but which has recently become a topic of research interest regarding the “making of the European Union”. The third is to consolidate and to take stock of recent developments in cross-disciplinary research and identify some shared research agendas and objects for future research.

The Summer school will be organized around 6 half-day themes and a final round table spanning over 4 days (9-12 June 2015). Each half-day (3 hours) will be dedicated to a theme which will follow the same structure: a keynote presentation of 45 minutes by a senior researcher will focus on the state of the art, methodological questions, research practice and perspectives; a discussion of two or three papers which operationalize the concept or method being discussed; an open discussion with all the participants. The sessions will be structured as follows:

1) Socio-historical approach of EU polity formation
2) EU Studies and the “European project”: “dangerous liaisons”?
3) Field-theory in Brussels: opportunities and difficulties
4) Sociography and prosopography of European actors
5) Studying European public spaces
6) Transnational circulations and transfers
7) Final Round table

Application Process

The Summer school is open to all members of the European academic community interested in developing their skills or participating in these interdisciplinary discussions and perspectives. This includes senior researchers or lecturers, post-doctoral students, PhD students and research engineers. We plan to bring together a total of 30-35 participants. Discussions will be held in French and English.

Please send a CV and one-page description of current research topics to the organizers (didier.georgakakis@univ-paris1.fr; jay.rowell@misha.fr; antoine.vauchez@univ-paris1.fr) by February 1, 2015. Participants will be rapidly informed and paper givers will be asked to send their papers by May 15, 2015.

Inscription fees are 150€ for senior researchers and 75€ for PhD students and Post-doctoral researchers. All travel costs, lodging and food will be covered by the organizers.

January 16, 2015

Book Announcement: William Phelan, In Place of Inter-State Retaliation: The European Union's Rejection of WTO-style Trade Sanctions and Trade Remedies (OUP)


Network member William Phelan (Trinity College Dublin) has a new book out from OUP entitled In Place of Inter-State Retaliation: The European Union's Rejection of WTO-style Trade Sanctions and Trade Remedies.  For those interested, there will be a book rountable at the upcoming EUSA Conference in Boston (see the full program here), in which two network members will be providing comments, Daniel Kelemen (Rutgers) and Peter Lindseth (UConn), along with Peter Hall (Harvard), Alexandra Hennessy (Seton Hall), and Jonathan Slapin (Houston).  For those who want to learn more now, the publisher's blurb is below and more information can be found here.


* * *

Unlike many other trade regimes, the European Union forbids the use of inter-state retaliation to enforce its obligations, and rules out the use of common 'escape' mechanisms such as anti-dumping between the EU member states. How does the EU do without these mechanisms that appear so vital to the political viability of other international trade regimes, including the World Trade Organization? How, therefore, is the European legal order, with the European Court of Justice at its centre, able to be so much more binding and intrusive than the legal obligations of many other trade regimes?

This book puts forward a new explanation of a key part of the European Union's legal system, emphasising its break with the inter-state retaliation mechanisms and how Europe's special form of legal integration is facilitated by intra-industry trade, parliamentary forms of national government, and European welfare states.

It argues first that the EU member states have allowed the enforcement of EU obligations by domestic courts in order to avoid the problems associated with enforcing trade obligations by constant threats of trade retaliation. It argues second that the EU member states have been able to accept such a binding form of dispute settlement and treaty obligation because the policy adjustments required by the European legal order were politically acceptable. High levels of intra-industry trade reduced the severity of the economic adjustments required by the expansion of the European market, and inclusive and authoritative democratic institutions in the member states allowed policy-makers to prioritise a general interest in reliable trading relationships even when policy changes affected significant domestic lobbies. Furthermore, generous national social security arrangements protected national constituents against any adverse consequences arising from the expansion of European law and the intensification of the European market.

The European legal order should therefore be understood as a legalized dispute resolution institution well suited to an international trade and integration regime made up of highly interdependent parliamentary welfare states.

January 6, 2015

Book Announcment: Klemen Jaklic, Constitutional Pluralism in the EU (OUP)




Many of you may already know that network member Klemen Jaklic (Harvard) has a book out from OUP, Constitutional Pluralism in the EU.  What you may have overlooked was that it just received a very nice end-of-year review from Joseph Weiler (EUI) on EJIL: Talk, who called it "an important and tremendously useful book."  For readers seeking to learn more, the publisher's blurb is below and more information (including a downloadable Chapter One), can be found here.


* * *

Where does the law and political power of any given territory come from? Until recently it was believed that it came from a single and hierarchical source of constitutional authority, a sovereign people and their constitution. However, how can this model account for the new Europe? Where state constitutions and the European Constitution, which are ultimately equally self-standing sources of constitutional authority, overlap heterarchically over a shared piece of territory.

Constitutional pluralism is a new branch within constitutional thought that argues sovereignty is no longer the accurate and normatively superior constitutional foundation. It instead replaces this thought with its own foundation. It emerged on the basis of contributions by the leading EU constitutionalists and has now become the most dominant branch of European constitutional thought. Its claims have also overstepped the European context, suggesting that it offers historic advantages for further development of the idea of constitutionalism and world order as such.


This book offers the first overarching examination of constitutional pluralism.Comprehensively mapping out the leading contributions to date and solving the complicated labyrinth they currently form, Klemen Jaklic offers a complete assessment against existing and new criticisms while elaborating his own original vision. Constitutional pluralism thus refined has the potential to rightfully be considered the superior new approach within constitutional thought.

December 13, 2014

Section News: The Newsletter of the European Law Section of AALS (Fall 2014)

Through the great work of network member Erin Delaney (Northwestern), the European Law Section of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) has published its annual newsletter (see below).  The newsletter includes plenty of information of interest to section members, including notices of the Section's sponsored and co-sponsored panels at this year's AALS Annual Meeting in Washington (January 2-5, 2015) -- the first on US-EU trade relations (notably TTIP) and the second on transatlantic economic law and governance more generally.  In addition, there is a notice of a panel at this year's EUSA Conference in Boston (March 5-7, 2015) on the challenges of teaching EU law in US law schools, which will feature several Section members. Check it out, if you haven't seen it previously.




December 12, 2014

The Network on SSRN: Neil Walker on Secession Movements and EU Membership

Network member Neil Walker (Edinburgh, visiting this term at Yale) has alerted us to a new piece posted on SSRN entitled "Beyond Secession? Law in the Framing of the National Polity," which is forthcoming in a collective volume on nationalization and globalization from Hart Publishing.  The abstract is below and the full article can be downloaded here.

* * *

This paper examines the legal and political course of contemporary secession struggles within the European Union, with particular reference to the recent Scottish referendum, the 'consultation' in Catalonia, and the developing situation in Flanders. The focus is upon the way in which secession debates have become tied up with the question of the EU membership prospects of the potentially seceding state. The EU institutions themselves have adopted an attitude of 'conservative neutrality' to these prospects and to the legitimacy of secession more generally – a minimalist approach which largely defers to the various and differing domestic constitutional arrangements of the ‘parent’ state and which, at best, does not exclude new membership where secession may be compatible with these domestic arrangements. The paper contrasts the unwillingness of the EU to assume a directorial role in the theatre of European secession – an attitude which has some anomalous consequences but which accurately reflects the EU’s weak legitimacy over such a ‘high political’ question – with its highly significant role in the more elementary matter of stage (re) design. For the very existence and development of the EU as a supranational entity, alters the basic calculus through which we attribute value – both instrumental and expressive – to forms of political life at, above and below the level of the state. And while the full historical consequences of the EU’s reframing exercise remain unsettled and unpredictable, they are already reshaping political expectations and aspirations in ways that alter our very sense of the significance of 'secession' and associated statuses.

The Network on SSRN: Joanna Glowacki and Christoph Henkel on Hydraulic Fracturing in the EU

Network member Christoph Henkel (Mississippi) has posted a new article on SSRN, co-authored with Joanna Glowacki, entitled "Hydraulic Fracturing in the European Union: Leveraging the U.S. Experience in Shale Gas Exploration and Production."  The article is forthcoming in the Indiana International & Comparative Law Review.  The abstract is below and the full article may be downloaded here.


* * *

Hydraulic fracturing has been the subject of much debate recently, both in the United States and increasingly in Europe. Advances in hydraulic fracturing technology have led to a shale gas boom in the United States, significantly lowering natural gas prices, and causing some foreign businesses to move manufacturing plants from Europe to the United States. In the United States, approximately 11,000 new wells are “fracked” each year, adding to the currently existing 35,000 wells. When compared to these numbers, European shale gas exploration remains in its infancy and commercial scale gas extraction has yet to be established. At the same time, many Member States in the European Union consider the exploration of unconventional fossil fuels essential for their energy security and independence from Russian gas.

While natural gas is a cleaner burning fossil fuel than oil, the fracking process itself, as well as its requisite infrastructure, brings with it numerous environmental and health concerns. As shale gas exploration progresses further and is commercially developed, many previously unrecognized and underestimated concerns have become more prevalent. The use of fresh water during the process of fracturing and the potential for pollution of surface and groundwater are only two examples of such concerns. In fact, a clear picture of the types and quantities of chemicals being used as additives in fracking fluids injected into the ground and the risks they may pose for the environment or human health has been lacking. In the United States, under the Safe Drinking Water Act, a permit is required only if diesel fuels are used as additives in fracking fluids. Yet, there is no definite clarity with respect to whether operators are actually using diesel fuels as additives or how much is being used.

With little or no experience in shale gas development, Europe is looking toward the United States as a potential model for its nascent regulatory framework. While there is a patchwork of EU directives that address fracturing, there are specific shortcomings due to the fact that shale gas development has not been pursued in Europe. The European Commission and the European Parliament continue to evaluate the impact of fracturing on the environment and human health, and have already released numerous studies and reports. It is the objective of these initiatives to ensure that the environmental risks arising from shale gas projects and cumulative developments are adequately identified and managed in Europe. In addition, the European Union is attempting to establish a common regulatory approach allowing for a comparable and coherent regulatory environment across the European Union and all its Member States.

This article analyzes the existing regulatory frameworks in the United States and European Union as they relate to hydraulic fracturing of shale gas. It is argued that while the United States’ experience may serve as an example for the European Union, the shale gas boom in the United States has raised a host of environmental and health concerns that need to be addressed. At the same time, the United States may be well advised to consider some of the developments in Europe, where, for example, mutual non-disclosure agreements regarding damages to the environment and human health may not be allowed.

November 30, 2014

"Futures of the European Union" at NYU (Dec. 12): Dieter Grimm, Miguel Poaires Maduro, Gráinne de Búrca, and Christine Landfried

Network member Gráinne de Búrca asked us to pass along the information below regarding "Futures of the European Union," which will take place on December 12 at the Deutches Haus at NYU.  The gathering will feature Dieter GrimmMiguel Poiares Maduro, and Christine Landfried, as well as Gráinne herself. Details are below.  If you are in the New York area, please give consideration to attending.


* * *

Max Weber Guest Lectures: Futures of the European Union
Friday, December 12, 6:00 p.m.
Deutsches Haus, New York University

Deutsches Haus at NYU and the NYU Center for European and Mediterranean Studies present "Futures of the European Union" featuring presentations by Dieter Grimm and Miguel Poiares Maduro with a commentary by Gráinne de Búrca. The event will be moderated by Christine Landfried and is part of the Max Weber Guest Lectures 2014 series.

Dieter Grimm is Professor Emeritus of Law at Humboldt University in Berlin and Visiting Professor at Yale Law School. He was a Justice of the Constitutional Court of Germany as well as the Rector of the Wissenschaftskolleg (Institute for Advanced Study) in Berlin.

Miguel Poiares Maduro is the Portuguese Minister for Regional Development. He was a Professor of Law at the European University Institute in Florence and a Visiting Professor at Yale Law School. He was also an Advocate General of the European Court of Justice.

Gráinne de Búrca is the Florence Ellinwood Allen Professor of Law at NYU and Director of the Jean Monnet Center for International and Regional Economic Law & Justice. She was a Professor at Harvard Law School and at the European University Institute in Florence.

Christine Landfried is the Max Weber Professor at NYU.

Events at Deutsches Haus are free of charge. If you would like to attend this event, please send us an email to deutscheshaus.rsvp@nyu.edu. Space at Deutsches Haus is limited; please arrive ten minutes prior to the event. Thank you!


This event is sponsored by the NYU Center for European and Mediterranean Studies, the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), and Deutsches Haus at NYU.

November 24, 2014

The Network on SSRN: Gráinne de Búrca, International Law Before the Courts: The European Union and the United States Compared

Network member Gráinne de Búrca (NYU Law) has alerted us to a new article she has posted on SSRN, entitled “International Law Before the Courts: the EuropeanUnion and the United States Compared.”  The article is forthcoming from the Virginia Journal ofInternational Law.  The abstract is below and the full article may be downloaded here.

* * *

Against the background of a broadly shared perception of the US and the EU as very different kinds of international actors, and a related assumption that the approaches of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice towards the internalization of international law are also very different, this article takes a systematic look at the approaches of the European Court of Justice and the US Supreme Court to the internalization of international law over the decade 2002-2012. The perception of the US in recent decades has been as a frequently unilateralist and exceptionalist actor in international relations, with the Supreme Court remaining resistant to law which emanates from outside the American legislative process, or which lacks a clear domestic imprimatur as applicable US law. The EU, by comparison, is seen as having a greater commitment to multilateralism and to the development and observance of international law, and the case-law of the Court of Justice has until recently been broadly viewed – with WTO jurisprudence seen as an exception – as actively contributing to shaping that image through its embrace and internalization of international law norms. The analysis over a ten-year period of the case law of the two courts dealing with international law suggests that, rather than a simplified picture of the Supreme Court as the skeptical judicial arm of an internationally exceptionalist United States and the CJEU as the embracing judicial arm of an open and internationalist European Union, there are many more commonalities between the approaches of the two courts than conventional depictions acknowledge.


November 18, 2014

Announcement from the SEALS International Committee: Two International Conferences in April

Network member Patrick Hugg (Loyola-New Orleans) has alerted us that the International Committee of the Southeastern Association of Law Schools (SEALS) has announced two special international conferences in 2015:

1) A three-day research conference entitled Searching for Solutions in Cyprus, jointly presented by SEALS, the European Law Faculties Association, and Eastern Mediterranean University, conducted in Famagusta and Lefkosa, Northern Cyprus, April 13 - 15, 2015. 

and immediately following that:

2) SEALS international member and current President of ELFA, Dean Haluk Kabaalioglu cordially invites all SEALS members to join us for the European Law Faculties Association Annual Meeting, in Istanbul, April 16 - 18, 2015.

For more information about these exceptional opportunities to meet international colleagues, as well as engage in research, contact Prof. Patrick Hugg at hugg@loyno.edu, and for specifics about the ELFA Annual Meeting, see http://elfa-afde.eu/annual-general-meeting/agm-istanbul-2015/.

November 7, 2014

Job Opportunity: Executive Director of HEC-NYU EU Regulatory Policy Clinic in Paris (deadline: Nov 9)

Network member Alberto Alemanno (HEC-Paris/NYU) has asked us to forward the following notice of a job opportunity.  Please pass on to potentially interested parties and also note the (extended) deadline for applying is November 9:


New York University School of Law and HEC Paris are seeking qualified applicants for a full-time term-limited non-faculty position as the Executive Director of HEC-NYU EU Regulatory Policy Clinic in Paris. The Executive Director will be responsible for engaging in case selection and advocacy to promote the clinic's mission and goals; supervising students in all aspects of the clinic's work; and teaching clinical skills under close faculty supervision. The initial term of the appointment will be January 1, 2015 to June 30 2015. Subsequently the agreement will be evaluated for renewal annually.

The candidate must hold a law degree with a specialization in European Union Law, be a qualified lawyer in at least one jurisdiction, and have a good understanding of EU policymaking, a public interest vocation and an entrepreneurial attitude. A PhD, a record of relevant publications and teaching and previous exposure to US legal education would be a plus.

Please note that this opportunity closes on November 9, 2014 (extended deadline). 

Candidates for this position should provide:  a cover letter; a one page statement of interest and vision for the position; and a resume or C.V. to Prof. Alberto Alemanno, Scientific Director of the HEC-NYU EU Regulatory Policy Clinic at alemanno@hec.fr. NYU School of Law and HEC Paris are committed to a policy of equal opportunity.


For more information about the clinical program, visit the HEC-NYU EU Regulatory Policy Clinic webpage: http://elabeurope.eu/hec-nyu-clinic/