1. The Historical Evolution of the EU
Slides to support Chapters 1-4 of The Government and Politics of the European Union, 7th ed., by Neill Nugent

2. Background 1: The impact of World War II on Europe
Economic devastation (massive war debts, infrastructural damage)
Political weakness (newly established political systems, loss of empires)
The Continent was quickly divided in two, with Western Europe facing a new menace to the East
There was a consciousness that the Versailles approach had not resolved ‘the German problem’
These factors combined to produce a situation wherein there was a willingness on the part of many decision-makers to explore new forms of inter-state relations

3. Background 2: Differences between the Western European states
Although they had much in common post-World War II, there were major differences between West European states
No state participated in the integration process for idealistic reasons: hard-headed national calculations always prevailed
In Milward’s phrase, integration helped to ‘rescue’ the European nation-state

4. Early developments
Differences between the states meant (and indeed still mean) that there could not be a general agreement on what was to be done. Hence:
The Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), established in April 1948
The Council of Europe, created in May 1949
NATO, created in 1949
ECSC, created by the 1951 Treaty of Paris
EDC (not ratified) and the WEU which was created in 1954
EEC, created by the 1957 Treaty of Rome

5. From cooperation to integration
Frustration in some quarters with the prevailing intergovernmentalism
The role of the ‘founding fathers’: Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi
Why coal and steel?

6. Approaches to the study of the history of European integration
How is the history of European integration since the Treaty of Paris to be studied? There are many possible approaches, including:
via chronology
via the treaties
via increasing economic integration
via increasing political integration
via deepening and widening
via integration theory
These approaches are not alternatives, but rather are potentially mutually reinforcing

7. The history as viewed via a chronological approach
One way of ‘sorting out’ chronological developments is to view integration as being made via:
Grand steps, notably: the treaties; enlargements
Incremental steps such as:
Economic (interdependence)
Political decision (e.g. development of policy area that have not had a clear treaty basis)
Court judgements

8. The history as viewed via the treaties
A key part of the chronology has been the treaties, which provide a useful framework for tracing the historical development
The treaties have all reflected, but also have advanced, the unfolding integration process. None has contained any significant element of ‘rolling back’, either in terms of ‘widening’ or ‘deepening’
Since the ‘re-launch’ of the integration process in the mid-1980s, there have been major rounds of treaty reform every four or five years
Some treaties have been more important than others
The treaties have been based on intergovernmental bargaining and compromises and as such reflect the ‘messy’ nature of the integration process

9. The history as viewed via increasing economic integration
Economists tend to think of economic integration as passing through stages:
A free trade area
A customs union
An integrated internal market
Economic and monetary union
Much of this economic modelling, which can serve as a framework for tracing the EU’s economic evolution, draws on the early 1960s work of the Hungarian economist, Bela Balassa:

10. Removal
of Internal
Tariffs
Common
External
Tariff
Free Flow
of Capital
and
Labour
Harmonization
of Social &
Economic
Policy
Single
Currency
Political
Integration
Free Trade
Area X
Customs
Union
Market
Federalism

11. The history as viewed via increasing political integration
The increasing political integration of the EU can be viewed in terms of:
The (constantly growing?) decision-making powers and procedures of the EU’s institutions
The EU’s increasing policy responsibilities
European level-member state level relationships (has the integration process ‘rescued’ the nation-state?)
The increasingly complex mix of intergovernmentalism and supranationalism
The movement towards a quasi-federal system?

12. The history as viewed via widening 1
Widening is refers to the increasing number of members of the EU. From the original 6 founding members (France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg), the EU (as the EC has been known since 1993) has grown in size to 27 members. It has done so in a series of enlargement rounds
the first enlargement of 1973: UK, Denmark and Ireland
The Mediterranean round: Greece (1983) and Spain and Portugal (1986)
The EFTAn round of 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden
The CEECs + 2 round of 2004/2007

13. The history as viewed via widening 2
Why has the EU been willing to enlarge? Why, in particular, was it willing to risk enlargement to CEECs? There are two broad explanations?
1. Rationalists emphasize that although the economic benefits of admitting CEECs are less compelling than they had been with most previous acceding states, the EU still has more to gain economically, as well as in respect of security
2. Constructivists point to the values shaping the behaviour of EU enlargement policy actors, and stress their inclinations to support geographically near states attempting to ‘Westernize’, ‘Europeanize’ or ‘democratize’ themselves

14. The history as viewed via deepening 1
This refers to the progressive unfolding of the integration process. There are two dimensions of deepening:
1. Institutional deepening
This covers the growing institutional supranationalism of the EU, and especially the powers of the European Commission, and the use of Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) in the Council of Ministers. The supranational character of the EU makes it very different from IGOs such as the UN, NATO and the IMF

15. The history as viewed via deepening 2
2. Policy deepening
This covers the growth in policy competence of the EU. The original policy remit was largely focused on the creation of a customs union and a common market.
Today, the EU has some involvement in just about every area of public policy e.g. ‘pure’ market policies have been increasingly supplemented by involvement in policy areas such as employment, worker conditions, environmental impact and consumer protection

16. The history as viewed via integration theory
Two approaches have dominated the theoretical debate:
1. Intergovernmentalism: National governments have been the key actors; integration has proceeded when the preferences of governments have converged
2. Neofunctionalism: Non-governmental actors – including supranational ones – have also been important driving forces; integration has not just proceeded via ‘history making’ decisions; key role of ‘spillover’
Both approaches seek to act as broad explanatory frameworks.