首页> 外文学位 >The contradictions of supranationalism: European integration and the constitutional settlement of administrative governance, 1920s--1980s.
【24h】

The contradictions of supranationalism: European integration and the constitutional settlement of administrative governance, 1920s--1980s.

机译:超民族主义的矛盾:1920年代至1980年代的欧洲一体化与行政管理的宪法解决。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation examines, in legal-historical terms, the relationship between European integration and the twentieth-century administrative state. Part One focuses on the national level, examining efforts from the 1920s--1950s in Germany/West Germany, France, and Britain to reconcile parliamentary democracy with the transfer of normative power to the executive and administrative spheres. What this study calls the "postwar constitutional settlement" of administrative governance reflected two lessons of the interwar period: first, that increased executive and administrative power was essential to the operation of the welfare state and the regulation of modern capitalism; and second, that to preserve some semblance of separation of powers and human rights in the system, independent parliamentary and judicial checks---"mediated legitimacy"---needed to be maintained. Part Two then turns to the supranational level, asserting that European integration emerged as a viable political project in the postwar decades precisely because the constitutional foundations of administrative governance at the national level had also been secured. Part Two further asserts, however, that European integration did not merely build upon, but also seriously disrupted, the postwar constitutional settlement of administrative governance. Because the Member States remained the locus of democratic and constitutional legitimacy in the system (even as normative power was transferred to a supranational executive-technocratic process), this gave rise to a central contradiction. On the one hand, forms of nationally mediated legitimation (primarily, but not exclusively, intergovernmental control of supranational norm-production) were still necessary to advance the integration process. On the other hand, national mediation ran contrary to the Community's countervailing needs for normative autonomy, uniformity, and supremacy---i.e., the same set of "constitutional" values of integration that the European Court of Justice took it upon itself to promote and protect. This study then attempts to use this legal-historical perspective as a means of reconciling intergovernmentalist and neofunctionalist theories of integration, while also tentatively exploring normative proposals to harness the legitimacy of national constitutional structures as a means of advancing, rather than impeding, the historically administrative process of European integration.
机译:本文从法律历史的角度考察了欧洲一体化与20世纪行政国家之间的关系。第一部分着眼于国家层面,考察了1920年代至1950年代德国/西德,法国和英国在协调议会民主与将规范权转移到行政和行政领域的努力。这项研究称之为行政治理的“战后宪法解决”,反映了两次战争之间的两个教训:首先,行政和行政权力的提高对福利国家的运作和现代资本主义的规制至关重要。其次,为了在系统中保持某种三权分立的外观,需要维持独立的议会和司法检查-“调解的合法性”。然后第二部分转到超国家层面,断言欧洲一体化在战后几十年成为可行的政治项目,恰恰是因为国家层面的行政管理的宪法基础也得到了保障。然而,第二部分进一步断言,欧洲一体化不仅建立在战后宪法上的行政管理解决之上,而且还受到严重破坏。由于会员国仍然是系统中民主和宪法合法性的源头(即使规范权力已转移到超国家的行政技术官僚主义进程中),这引起了中心矛盾。一方面,为促进一体化进程,仍然需要采取国家媒介的合法化形式(主要但不是排他性的,政府间对超国家规范生产的控制)。另一方面,国家调解与欧共体对规范性自治,统一和至高无上的反要求背道而驰,也就是说,欧洲法院将其用于促进和促进社会公正的同一套“宪法”融合价值观。保护。然后,本研究尝试将这种法律历史观点用作调和政府间主义和新功能主义一体化理论的手段,同时还尝试探索规范性提案,以利用国家宪法结构的合法性作为推进而非阻碍历史行政的手段欧洲一体化的过程。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lindseth, Peter Lincoln.;

  • 作者单位

    Columbia University.;

  • 授予单位 Columbia University.;
  • 学科 History European.; Law.; Political Science International Law and Relations.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2002
  • 页码 481 p.
  • 总页数 481
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 欧洲史;法律;国际法;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号