IR Theories Debate of European Integration

Jing Xu; Shiyong Shen

doi:10.4236/ojps.2014.44022

Home > Journals > Social Sciences & Humanities > OJPS

Open Journal of Political Science > Vol.4 No.4, October 2014

IR Theories Debate of European Integration ()

Jing Xu^*, Shiyong Shen

Shanghai University of Engineering Science, Shanghai, China.

DOI: 10.4236/ojps.2014.44022 PDF HTML XML 3,767 Downloads 4,487 Views Citations

Abstract

Since the Peace Treaty of Westphalia, the nation-states have been always important actors in international relations and on the international stage. However with the process of European integration, the traditional attitudes have brought out great challenges to existing theories and generated an academic debate. Deepening and enlargement of European integration have also led to the development of IR theories. Now three competing theories emerged from IR to dominate the debate over the development in European integration and there were the neo-functionalism, the inter-governmentalism and the multi-level governance.

Keywords

Neo-Functionalism, Inter-Governmentalism, Multi-Level Governance

Share and Cite:

Xu, J. and Shen, S. (2014) IR Theories Debate of European Integration. Open Journal of Political Science, 4, 216-220. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2014.44022.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Hass, E. (1958). The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces 1950-1957. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[2]	Hass. E. (1976). Turbulent Fields and the Theory of Regional Integration. International Organization, 30, 173-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300018245
[3]	Hix, S. (1998). The Study of the European Union II: The “New Governance” Agenda and Its Rival. Journal of European Public Policy, 5, 38-65.
[4]	Hoffmann, S. (1964). The European Process at Atlantic Cross Purposes. Journal of Common Market Studies, 85-101.
[5]	Hoffmann, S. (1966). Obstinate or Obsolete? The Fate of the Nation-State and the Case of West Europe. In Hoffmann (Ed.), Conditions of World Order (pp. 110-163). New York: Simon & Schuster.
[6]	Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2001). Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
[7]	Kohler-Koch, B. (1999). The Evolution and Transformation of European Governance. In B. Kohler-Koch, & R. Eising (Eds.), The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. London: Routledge.
[8]	Kohler-Koch, B., & Eising, R. (1999). The Transformation Governance in the European Union. London: Routledge.
[9]	Majone, G. (1994). The Rise of the Regulatory State in European. West European Politics, 17, 77-101.
[10]	Marks, G. (1993). Structural Policy and Multilevel Governance in the EC. In A. Cafruny, & G. Rosenthal (Eds.), The State of the European Community (pp. 391-411). Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
[11]	Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. (1996). European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v. Multi-Level Governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34, 341-378.
[12]	Moravcsik, A. (1993). The Choice of Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina and Maastricht. Cornell: Cornell University.
[13]	Moravcsik, A. (1998). The Choice of Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina and Maastricht. New York: Cornell University Press.
[14]	Pierre, J. (2000). Introduction: Understanding Governance. In J. Pierre (Ed.), Debating Governance (pp. 1-10). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[15]	Pierre, J., & Peters, G. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
[16]	World Bank (1997). World Development Report—The State in a Changing World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.