European solidarity and multi-speed integration: Results of a laboratory experiment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu05.2024.204Abstract
The conflict around grain and flour imports from Ukraine to the European Union, which made the interests of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia contradict the interests of the majority of member states, and which was taking place having mass farmers’ protests in the background, invites revisiting European solidarity. Any political decision adopted on the EU level by voting of all member states indicates solidarity among them. Authors of this article, however, suggest distinguishing between two types of solidarity, namely the solidarity of the majority with the minority, and the solidarity of the minority with the majority. Game theory provided with the means allowing suggesting the behavioral matrix, which helps distinguishing between the two types of solidarity. Negotiations preceding formal voting help achieving solidarity of both types; those negotiations can be bilateral or multilateral.The results of the experiment staged, again, with the help of game theory demonstrate that solidarity with the majority emerges more often after bilateral negotiations, while solidarity with the minority emerges more often after multilateral negotiations. That conclusion allows recommending choosing the format of negotiations depending on the expected outcome of consequent voting. Based on the experience of the European Union, that recommendation is applicable to all cases of regional integration, first of all, to the Eurasian Economic Union. It also helps explaining why despite the mounting number of the demands for solidarity that the majority of EU member states places on the minority, the latter fails to consolidate and thus to endanger the future of the entire European integration project.
Keywords:
European Union, solidarity, minimum hamonization, maximum harmonization, bilateral negotiations, minilateral negotiations, multilateral negotiations, game theory
Downloads
References
Agamagomedova, S.A. (2023) ‘Eurasian economic solidarity: Justification from the standpoint of judicial practice’, Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics, 17 (3), рр. 101 108. https://doi.org/10.22394/2073-2929-2023-03-101-108 (In Russian)
Asal, V. (2005) ‘Playing Games with International Relations’, International Studies Perspectives, 6 (3), pp. 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3577.2005.00213.x
Bátora, J. and Hocking, B. (2009) ‘EU-oriented Bilateralism: Evaluating the Role of Member State Embassies in the European Union’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22 (1), pp. 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557570802683938
Blockmans, S. (2014) ‘L’Union fait la Force: Making the Most of the Solidarity Clause (Article 222 TFEU)’, in Govaere, I. and Poli, S. (eds) EU Management of Global Emergencies. Leiden, Boston: Brill, pp. 111–135.
Bolkestein, F. and Gerken, L. (2015) ‘The EU Single Market: Free Markets, Protectionism and Excessive Regulation’, Centrum für Europäische Politik. Available at: https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/sop-cep.de/SOP/SOP-Presse/Presse-Archiv/EU_Single_Market_by_Bolkestein_and_Gerken.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).
Bratberg, Ø. (2008) ‘Bilateral Embassies in an Integrated Europe: A Case of Institutional Robustness?’, Journal of European Integration, 30 (2), pp. 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036330802005441
Brunazzo, M. (2022) ‘The Politics of EU Differentiated Integration: Between Crises and Dilemmas’, The International Spectator, 57 (1), pp. 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2022.2014103
Butcher, C. (2012) ‘Teaching Foreign Policy Decision Making Processes Using Role-Play Simulations: The Case of US-Iranian Relations’, International Studies Perspectives, 13 (2), pp. 176–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00457.x
Cooper, I. and Fabbrini, F. (2022) ‘Regional Groups in the European Union: Mapping an Unexplored Form of Differentiation’, European Papers, 7 (2), pp. 949–968. https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/588
Dahlberg, E., Naess-Schmidt, S., Virtanen, L., Marcus, S., Di Silva, M., Pelkmans, J., Dalla Pozza, V. and Kubovicova, K. (2020) ‘Legal Obstacles in Member States to Single Market Rules’. Study requested by the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament. Paper provided by the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, Directorate General for Internal Policies, PE 658.189, November. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/ RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658189/IPOL_STU(2020)658189_EN.pdf (accessed: 20.12.2023).
Degterev, D.A. and Degterev, A.Kh. (2011) ‘Game theory and international relations’, World Economy and International Relations, 2, pp. 79–89. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227 2011-2-79-89 (In Russian)
Diesen, G. (2023) ‘The geoeconomic power of Europe: The rise and fall of the European Union’, Modern World Economics, 1 (1), pp. 33–51. https://doi.org/10.17323/2949-5776 2023-1-1-33-51 (In Russian)
Dinan, D. (2012) ‘The Arc of Institutional Reform in Post-Maastricht Treaty Change’, Journal of European Integration, 34 (7), pp. 843–858. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2012.726018
Dougan, M. (2000) ‘Minimum Harmonization and the Internal Market’, Common Market Law Review, 37 (4), pp. 853–885. https://doi.org/10.54648/272669
Federico, V. and Lahusen, C. (eds) (2018) Solidarity as a Public Virtue? Law and Public Policies in the European Union. Baden-Baden: Nomos
Genschel, P. and Hemerijck, A. (2018) ‘Solidarity in Europe’. School of Transnational Governance Policy
Brief, European University Institute. Available at: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/ publication/db3d580c-b248-11e8-99ee-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (accessed: 20.12.2023).
Genschel, P. and Jachtenfuchs, M. (2017) ‘From Market Integration to Core State Powers: The Eurozone Crisis, the Refugee Crisis and Integration Theory’, Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies Working Paper No. 26. European University Institute. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/46424 (accessed: 20.12.2023).
Grimmel, A. and Giang, S.M. (eds) (2017) Solidarity in the European Union: A Fundamental Value in Crisis. Cham: Springer. Hess, F.M. (1999) Bringing The Social Sciences Alive. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
Heyes-Renshaw, F. and Wallace, H. (2006) The Council of Ministers. 2nd ed. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hinarejos, A. (2015) The Euro Area Crisis in Constitutional Perspective. Oxford: Oxford Academic.
Jervis, R.L. (1988) ‘Realism, Game Theory and Cooperation’, World Politics, 40 (3), pp. 317–349. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010216
Johnston, M.T. (1994) The European Council: Gatekeeper of the European Community. New York: Routledge.
Kahler, M. (1992) ‘Multilateralism with Small and Large Numbers’, International Organization, 46 (3), pp. 681–708. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027867
Kassim, H., Peterson, J., Bauer, M., Connolly, S., Hooghe, L., Dehousse, R. and Thomson, A. (2013) The European Commission of the Twenty‐first Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Korosteleva, E.A. and Flockhart, T. (2020) ‘Resilience in EU and International Institutions: Redefining Local Ownership in a New Global Governance Agenda’, Contemporary Security Policy, 41 (2), pp. 153–175.https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2020.1723973
Lanko, D. (2022) ‘Modelling Negotiations on the Nordic Economic Area: Uncertainty and Absolute Gains as Factors of International Solidarity’, Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. International relationships, 15 (3), pp. 243–261. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu06.2022.302
Lewis, J. (2005) ‘The Janus Face of Brussels: Socialization and Everyday Decision Making in the European Union’, International Organization, 59 (4), pp. 937–971. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050320
Mazier, J. and Valdecantos, S. (2015) ‘A Multi-Speed Europe: Is It Viable? A Stock-Flow Consistent Approach’, European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies, 12 (1), pp. 93 112. https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2015.01.08
McIntosh, D. (2001) ‘The Uses and Limits of Model United Nations in an International Relations Classroom’, International Studies Perspectives, 2 (3), pp. 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/1528-3577.00057
Moxnes, E. and van der Heijden, E. (2003) ‘The Effect of Leadership in a Public Bad Experiment’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 47 (6), pp. 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002703258962
Mulford, M. and Berejikian, J. (2002) ‘Behavioral Decision Theory and the Gains Debate in International Politics’, Political Studies, 50 (2), pp. 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467 9248.00367
Müller, H. and Van Esch, F.A.W.J. (2020) ‘The Contested Nature of Political Leadership in the European Union: Conceptual and Methodological Cross-Fertilisation’, West European Politics, 43 (5), pp. 1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1678951
Novotný, V. (2012) ‘The Harmless Spectre of a Multi-speed Europe’, European View, 11 (1), pp. 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-012-0209-3
Potemkina, O.Yu. (2016) ‘The Visegrad Group and “flexible solidarity”’, Modern Europe, 6 (72), pp. 43–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/soveurope620164352 (In Russian)
Rabinovych, M. and Pintsch, A. (2022) ‘EU Differentiated Integration as a Tangible’, in Hoerber, T., Weber, G. and Cabras, I. (eds), Routledge Handbook of European Integrations. Abington: Routledge, pp. 376–393.
Redei, L. and Romanyshyn, I. (2019) ‘Non-Parliamentary Diplomacy: The European Parliament’s Diplomatic Mission to Ukraine’, European Foreign Affairs Review, 24 (1), pp. 61–79. https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2019005
Reisinger, W.L. (1989) ‘2x2 Games of Commitment in World Politics’, International Studies Quarterly, 33 (1), pp. 111–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600496
Romanova, T.A. (2017) ‘The category of “stress resistance” in the European Union’, Modern Europe, 4 (76), pp. 17–28. (In Russian)
Romanova, T.A. and Gudalov, N.N. (2019) ‘Role-Play Simulation of Negotiations between the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union: Teaching While Enhancing a Transnational Dialogue’, Journal of Contemporary European Research, 15 (4), pp. 410–424. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v15i4.1093
Sangiovanni, A. (2013) ‘Solidarity in the European Union’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 33 (2), pp. 213–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqs033
Scharrer, H.E. (1994) ‘A Hard Core for the European Union?’, Intereconomics, 29 (September/October), pp. 209–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02926378
Schuette, L.A. (2021) ‘Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 59 (5), pp. 1142–1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13171
Snyder, G.H. (1971) ‘“Prisoner’s Dilemma” and “Chicken” Models in International Politics’, International
Studies Quarterly, 15 (1), pp. 66–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/3013593
Stubb, A. (1996) ‘A Categorization of Differentiated Integration’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 34 (2), pp. 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1996.tb00573.x
Votoupalová, M. (2019) ‘Solidarity as a Necessary Precondition for the Resilience of Schengen? Discourse of the EU Institutions’, Politologický časopis — Czech Journal of Political Science, 26 (2), pp. 102–121. https://doi.org/10.5817/PC2019-2-102
Weatherill, S. (2016) Contract Law of the Internal Market. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Weatherill, S. (2020) ‘The Fundamental Question of Minimum or Maximum Harmonisation’, in Garben, S. and Govaere, I. (eds) The Internal Market 2.0. Oxford: Hart Publ. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3660372 (accessed: 20.12.2023).
Zeff, E.E. (2003) ‘Negotiating in the European Council: A Model European Union Format for Individual Classes’, International Studies Perspectives, 4 (3), pp. 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/1528-3577.403003
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of the St Petersburg University Journal of Economic Studies are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
