Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?

Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?

This paper examines how the European Commission interprets and applies the participatory norm in practice according to constructed strategic contexts. By taking a historical comparative approach and focusing on two examples it shows how, following the Maastricht ‘crisis’ (1992-1998), the participato...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Dans:URI:https://journals.openedition.org/irpp,
Auteur principal: Pukallus, Stefanie
Format: Article ou chapitre numérique
Langue:Anglais
Publié: International Review of Public Policy 2019
Sujets:
dialogue
general public
democratic deliberation
public communication
Maastricht crisis
single market
constitutional crisis
publics
public debate
European Commission
Accès en ligne:Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM
Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM
id openedition-oai:revues.org:irpp_293
record_format openedition
spelling openedition-oai:revues.org:irpp_293 https://doi.org/10.4000/irpp.293 urn:doi:10.4000/irpp.293 en https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/293 2019-06-18T02:00:00Z info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article info:eu-repo/semantics/article urn:handle:20.500.13089/h5fp https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators? International Review of Public Policy International Public Policy Association info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/2706-6274 info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/2679-3873 URI:https://journals.openedition.org/irpp Pukallus, Stefanie dialogue general public democratic deliberation public communication Maastricht crisis single market constitutional crisis publics public debate European Commission This paper examines how the European Commission interprets and applies the participatory norm in practice according to constructed strategic contexts. By taking a historical comparative approach and focusing on two examples it shows how, following the Maastricht ‘crisis’ (1992-1998), the participatory norm in the form of debate and dialogue referred simply to a restricted discussion of Single Market rights (DD1). This was a rather limited, one-phased technical discussion on a single issue with an attendant conception of the public as single-issue ratifiers of already existing policies. In contrast, the aftermath of the Constitutional ‘crisis’ (2005-09) led to a conception of debate and dialogue as ‘open-ended’ (DD2); that is, a reflexive wide-ranging amorphous discussion on various and almost randomly chosen topics. DD2 assumed a public of able political discussants, of reflexive and skilful deliberators. What DD1, DD2 and their respective publics show is that when the participatory norm is applied, neither the form of debate and dialogue nor the publics are necessarily defined through universal democratic principles of political involvement and entitlements but rather in terms of expediency and contingent abilities to meet the needs of the European Commission’s strategic agenda at any one time.
collection OpenEdition Journal
language Anglais
format Article ou chapitre numérique
building 0/Bibliothèque numérique/
1/Bibliothèque numérique/OpenEdition Journals/
topic dialogue
general public
democratic deliberation
public communication
Maastricht crisis
single market
constitutional crisis
publics
public debate
European Commission
spellingShingle dialogue
general public
democratic deliberation
public communication
Maastricht crisis
single market
constitutional crisis
publics
public debate
European Commission
Pukallus, Stefanie
Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
description This paper examines how the European Commission interprets and applies the participatory norm in practice according to constructed strategic contexts. By taking a historical comparative approach and focusing on two examples it shows how, following the Maastricht ‘crisis’ (1992-1998), the participatory norm in the form of debate and dialogue referred simply to a restricted discussion of Single Market rights (DD1). This was a rather limited, one-phased technical discussion on a single issue with an attendant conception of the public as single-issue ratifiers of already existing policies. In contrast, the aftermath of the Constitutional ‘crisis’ (2005-09) led to a conception of debate and dialogue as ‘open-ended’ (DD2); that is, a reflexive wide-ranging amorphous discussion on various and almost randomly chosen topics. DD2 assumed a public of able political discussants, of reflexive and skilful deliberators. What DD1, DD2 and their respective publics show is that when the participatory norm is applied, neither the form of debate and dialogue nor the publics are necessarily defined through universal democratic principles of political involvement and entitlements but rather in terms of expediency and contingent abilities to meet the needs of the European Commission’s strategic agenda at any one time.
author Pukallus, Stefanie
author_facet Pukallus, Stefanie
author_sort Pukallus, Stefanie
title Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
title_short Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
title_full Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
title_fullStr Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
title_full_unstemmed Single-issue Ratifiers or Political Deliberators?
title_sort single-issue ratifiers or political deliberators?
publisher International Review of Public Policy
publishDate 2019
container_title URI:https://journals.openedition.org/irpp
url https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://doi.org/10.4000/irpp.293
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/293
_version_ 1877241590376824832

Documents similaires