Our discussions will be guided by the question of leadership: which side initiated transatlantic dialogue on an issue? Who regulated an issue first domestically? Who sought transatlantic harmonization of policies in a particular policy area? These questions of leadership will help us to understand conflicts and also aid in analyzing the outcome of negotiations as initiators and leaders can be expected to have more influence over negotiation outcomes than those who react to a leader’s proposal.
The course will provide you with a survey of important issues. You will pursue one topic in greater depth in a research paper that compares European and U.S. approaches to a given issues by asking which side took a leadership role in putting the issue on the transatlantic agenda.
There are three required texts for this class. Most readings will be posted on Moodle.
• Baglione, Lisa A. 2006. Writing a Research Paper in Political Science: A Practical Guide to Inquiry, Structure, and Methods. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education. ISBN: 0495092622
• Van Oudenaren, John. 2005. Uniting Europe: An Introduction to the European Union, 2nd Edition, Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN: 0742536610
• Deese, David A. 2007. World Trade Politics: Power, Principles and Leadership. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.
You also need to stay current on politics on both sides of the Atlantic. Most domestic U.S. media does a poor job in covering events outside the United States or Iraq. Therefore you need to consult sources that do good political reporting beyond the Beltway. I suggest that you read the daily newspaper International Herald Tribune (www.iht.com). The IHT does a good job of covering international news in a paper of manageable size. It is also a good idea to consult relevant blogs, e.g. http://atlanticreview.org/ which is a review of transatlantic news put together by three German Fulbright alumni.
• Research paper
• Class participation
• Research conference participation and presentation
The aim of this comparative research paper is to explore one policy area in detail. It is to be comparative in nature – i.e. comparing the same policy area on both sides of the Atlantic with special attention paid to leadership and transatlantic negotiations on the policy.
You will develop your research paper in three steps:
1. Research proposal (due 2/26)
Decide on your research question. Write a short proposal outlining your question, its relevance and start researching the available literature.
2. Review of the relevant literature (due 3/15).
Scientific discoveries build on previous discoveries. Reviewing the existing literature in the field provides you with a better idea of what others have found out about your topic; how you may want to adapt your question in light of pre-existing scholarship; and which theoretical approaches you may choose. This can be a lengthy research process, start early! Expect to summarize your findings in up to 5 pages.
2. Conference draft (due 4/1)
You will present your paper in our research conference on 4/5 (see below). At this point, the paper needs to be completed and polished to a point that it can be presented to the larger community.
3. Revisions of conference draft and final submission (due 5/15)
Most likely you will receive much helpful input from your discussant and other conference participants. Incorporate these comments into your final paper before your submit it for grading. Start this process immediately after the conference, since this may require additional research.
There is no set length requirement, but a good research paper is focused and detailed at the same time. As a rule of thumb, a paper should be no longer than 10,000 words – a limit set by many journals in the field. Some journals even limit submissions to 7,500 words. It is good to get used to these limitations early on.
Please follow the APSA style guide for political science (see for example: http://dept.lamar.edu/polisci/DRURY/drury.html and http://www.csuchico.edu/~kcfount/guides/APSA.pdf).
Your grade will be determined primarily by the content of your paper assignments; nevertheless you are expected to submit well-written work that has been thoroughly proof-read for grammar, punctuation, and style. Sloppy or poorly written work may result in a penalty.
Papers in this course will ask under which conditions, the Europeans and the United States come together in agreement and when they will pursue their goal in disagreement. Drawing on insights from across a number of issue areas ranging from 'low' to 'high' politics, these papers could address the question to what extent European weakness in negotiations with the United States is a result of a lack of clearly defined interest(s). A second set of possible questions relates to EU foreign policy making more specifically: under what circumstances do EU member states manage to define common interests? Does the specter of transatlantic disagreement act as a forcing event and when, if at all, do European interests move beyond the lowest common denominator?
A good starting hypothesis is that most of the time Europeans fail to define their interests and positions before contention over policies arises across the Atlantic. European interests are usually only defined in terms of opposition to U.S. proposals and initiatives and European policy hence suffers from a reactive policy-making mode. This allows the United States to set the agenda and frame the issue while the EU or its Member States can at best modify U.S. proposals.
Guiding questions to pursue in papers:
• Which side is the domestic leader? Who has initiated domestic regulation first?
• Which side has put the issue on the transatlantic agenda?
• What impact does early domestic leadership have on the initiator’s transatlantic negotiation position?
• When and how do EU-members or the EU define national or EU interest?
• Are they more likely to succeed in negotiations with the United States if they define their interests ahead of time?
• Are there any treaties to which the Unites States is a party that required substantial adaptation on behalf of the United States?
• When are Europeans successful against or without the United States in international negotiations?
• Does it make a difference whether the Commission negotiates on behalf of EU member governments with the US?
• How much and what kind of concessions do EU member states need to make to appease the United States?
Each student will present a paper in our research conference on 5 April. This conference will possibly include outside experts on the topics covered in student papers to serve as discussants and panel chairs. The conference will be public so you need to make sure that your paper and presentation are good enough to present in a public forum.
The conference follows a typical format for academic meetings: presentations are organized in thematic panels including three to four presenters, a panel chair, and a discussant. In a 10-minute presentation, you present your research; following the presentations, the discussant provides initial feedback on the presentations; then the audience poses questions to the presenters, often resulting in a lively discussion.
It takes time and a lot of practice to become a good presenter – so better start now!
This syllabus is subject to change. The most recent version can be found on Moodle. When in doubt, always refer to the one on Moodle.
Please reserve Friday, February 29 for an extended “Research Boot Camp” – please do not plan anything for that day until we have finalized library instruction and research meetings. As compensation, there will be no classes the previous week while I am attending a research conference. You also need to block Saturday, April 5 for a paper conference.
Introduction to the course and its requirements.
Uniting Europe, chapter 11: The United States and the EU: Partners or Rivals?
The role of leadership in transatlantic relations
Micheal Smith (1998): Competitive Co-Operation and EU-US Relations: Can the EU Be a Strategic Partner for the US in the World Political Economy? Journal of European Public Policy 5(4), December 1998: 561-77 (on Moodle).
Kindleberger, Charles P. (1981): Dominance and Leadership in the International Economy: Exploitation, Public Goods, and Free Rides. International Studies Quarterly 25:242-54 (on Moodle).
Daniel Drezner (2005): Globalization, Harmonization, and Competition: The Different Pathways to Policy Convergence. Journal of European Public Policy 12(5), October 2005: 841-59 (on Moodle).
Leadership in domestic regulation
David Bach and Abraham L. Newman (2007): The European Regulatory State and Global Public Policy. Journal of European Public Policy 14(6) (on Moodle).
The European Union - History and evolution
Uniting Europe, chapter 1: Introduction: Peace, Prosperity, and the Challenges of European Integration.
Uniting Europe, chapter 2: Development: From Common Market to Constitution
The European Union – Institutions
Uniting Europe, chapter 3: The Institutions and Laws of the European Union
The European Union – Policies
Uniting Europe, chapter 4: The Single Market: From Customs Union to 1992 and Beyond.
Uniting Europe, chapter 5: Common Policies: A Mixed Picture.
Optional readings on Moodle:
• Research questions: Jones & Olson - The Problem: Essence of the Research Project
• Democracy deficit: Majone - The Common Sense of European Integration
• Effects of EU institutions: Hoornbeek - Policy-making institutions and water policy outputs
• News background: Letter from Europe: The European Commission is back in business
The European Union and transatlantic relations
Mark A. Pollack (2005): Theorizing the European Union: International Organization, Domestic Polity, or Experiment in New Governance? Annual Review of Political Science 8: 357–98 (on Moodle).
Michele Knodt and Sebastiaan Princen (2003): Introduction: Puzzles and Prospects in Theorizing the EU’s External Relations. In: Michele Knodt and Sebastiaan Princen (eds.): Understanding the European Union’s External Relations. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 1-16 (on Moodle).
Sebastiaan Princen and Michele Knodt (2003): Understanding the EU’s External Relations: The Move from Actors to Processes. In: Michele Knodt and Sebastiaan Princen (eds.): Understanding the European Union’s External Relations. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 195-208 (on Moodle).
Research Boot-Camp: library research, literature review. A review of the existing literature is a key component of a research paper. Researching the literature shows you what has already been written on the subject and provides you with an idea of the theoretical and methodological approaches taken by other researchers.
A library expert will show us how to make best use of the library’s resources, including research in databases.
Baglione, Chapter 3 (Adressing the Scholarly Debate: The Literature Review)
John W. Cresswell (2003): Research Design - Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, Second Edition. Chapter 2: Review of the Literature, p. 27-48 (on Moodle).
Laurence F. Jones and Edward C. Olson (1996): Political Science Research: A Handbook of Scope and Methods. Chapter 2: The Problem: Essence of the Research Project, p.22-29 (on Moodle).
Janet Buttolph Johnson and H. T. Reynolds (2004): Political Science Research Methods, 5th Edition, CQ Press. Chapter 5. Conducting a Literature Review (on Moodle).
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: the U.S. federal executive, Congress, the states
McCormick, John (2005): American Exceptionalism: The Implications for Europe. Journal of Transatlantic Studies 3(2), Autumn 2005: 199-215 (on Moodle).
Steven Everts (2001): Unilateral America, Lightweight Europe? Managing Divergence in Transatlantic Foreign Policy. Centre for European Reform Working Paper, February 2001 (on Moodle).
Robert B. Zoellick (1999): Congress and the Making of US Foreign Policy. Survival 41(4): 20-41 (on Moodle).
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: WTO and OECD
World Trade Politics, part 1 (pp. 3-38).
Woodward, Richard (2004). The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. New Political Economy 9(1), March 2004, 113-27
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: WTO history
World Trade Politics, part 2 (pp. 41-155).
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: WTO impact and relevance
World Trade Politics, part 3 (pp. 159-183)
Alter, Karen J. and Sophie Meunier (2005). Nested and Overlapping Regimes in the Transatlantic Banana Trade Dispute. Paper presented at the 2004 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2-5.
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: transnational actors and initiatives, think-tanks, Transatlantic Businesss Dialogue
Maria Green Cowles (2001). The Transatlantic Business Dialogue: Transforming the New Transatlantic Dialogue. In: Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (eds.): Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp.213-33 (on Moodle).
Rebecca Steffenson (2005). Managing EU-US Relations. Actors, Institutions, and the New Transatlantic Agenda. Manchester: Manchester University Press, chapter 1 "Understanding the 'New Transatlantic Agenda'", pp. 1-24 (on Moodle)
Rebecca Steffenson (2005). Managing EU-US Relations. Actors, Institutions, and the New Transatlantic Agenda. Manchester: Manchester University Press, chapter 2 "The Institutionalisation of EU-US Relations in the 1990s", pp. 25-51 (on Moodle).
Rebecca Steffenson (2005). Managing EU-US Relations. Actors, Institutions, and the New Transatlantic Agenda. Manchester: Manchester University Press, chapter 3 "Reading: The Transatlantic Policy Process", pp. 52-70.
Transatlatlantic policy-making institutions: Governance in networks, legitimacy, and efficiency
Fuchs, Doris, and Markus ML Lederer. 2007. The Power of Business. Business and Politics 9 (3):Article 1 (on Moodle).
Rhodes, R. A. W. 1996. The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies 44 (3):652-67 (on Moodle).
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1997. The Real New World Order. Foreign Affairs 76 (5):183-97 (on Moodle).
Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (2001). Reading: Transatlantic Governance in Historical and Theoretical Perspective. In: Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (eds.): Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 3-42 (on Moodle).
Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (2001). Who Governs? In: Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (eds.): Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 287-305 (on Moodle).
When good relations pay: trade policy
Uniting Europe, chapter 8: Europe as a Global Actor: Trade and Finance
Fraser Cameron (2006). EU-US Economic Relations and Global Governance. In: Kari Möttölä (ed.): Transatlantic Relations and Global Governance. Washington, DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations, Johns Hopkins University, pp. 57-78 (on Blackoard).
C. Randall Henning and Sophie Meunier (2005). United Against the United States? The EU's Role in Global Trade and Finance. In: Nicolas Jabko and Craig Parsons (eds.): With US or Against US? European Trends in American Perspective. The State of the Union, volume 7. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 75-102 (on Moodle).
Mulitilateralism vs. national interest: climate change, International Criminal Court, Law of the Sea
Joshua Busby and Alexander Ochs (2004). From Mars and Venus down to Earth: Understanding the Transatlantic Climate Divide. In: David Michel (ed.): Beyond Kyoto: Meeting the Long-Term Challenge of Global Climate Change. Washington, DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations, Johns Hopkins University. Available from: http://www.swp-berlin.org/common/get_document.php?asset_id=1374.
Internationalizing U.S. leadership: multi-lateral environmental agreements
Elizabeth DeSombre (2004). Understanding United States Unilateralism: Domestic Sources of U.S. International Environmental Policy. In: Regina Axelrod, David Downie and Norman Vig (eds.): The Global Environment, Washington, DC: CQ Press (on Moodle).
Transatlantic policy: wrap-up
Uniting Europe, chapter 12: Conclusion: The EU, the Citizen, and Europe's Place in the World
Regulating risk vs. creating economic opportunities: chemicals regulation, biotech, and nanotech
Paulette Kurzer (2005). Transatlantic Risk Perceptions, Public Health, and Environmental Concerns: Coming Together or Drifting Apart? In: Nicolas Jabko and Craig Parsons (eds.): With US or Against US? European Trends in American Perspective. The State of the Union, volume 7. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 75-102 (on Moodle).
Henrik Selin (forthcoming). Transatlantic Politics of Chemicals Management. In: Miranda A. Schreurs, Stacy D. VanDeveer, and Henrik Selin (eds.): Enlarging TransAtlantic Relations: The Political Economy of Environment, Agriculture, and Energy Trade Politics across the Atlantic (on Moodle).
Integrating markets: accounting standards, procurement, intellectual property rights
Michelle Egan (2001). Mutual Recognition and Standard-Setting: Public and Private Strategies for Governing Markets. In: Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer (eds.): Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 179-209 (on Moodle).
2006 EU-U.S. Summit Progress Report on the Economic Initiative (on Moodle).
2007 EU-U.S. Summit Economic Progress Report (on Moodle).
Privacy vs. security: flight passenger data, SWIFT wire transfers, safe-harbor agreement
Heisenberg, Dorothee (2005). Negotiating Privacy: The European Union, the United States, and Personal Data Protection. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Chapter 1: Data Privacy: Setting the International Standard (on Moodle).
Heisenberg, Dorothee (2005). Negotiating Privacy: The European Union, the United States, and Personal Data Protection. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Chapter 8: Implications for the Future.
Horizontal initiatives: High-Level Regulatory Forum, OMB-EC dialogue, Better Regulation, regulatory impact analysis
Joint Report on the Roadmap for EU-US Regulatory Cooperation (June 2006)(on Moodle).
Joint Report on the Roadmap for US-EU Regulatory Cooperation (April 2007) (on Moodle).
Regulatory Cooperation Wrap-up and Transatlantic Public Opinion
Eberlein, Burkard, and Abraham L. Newman. 2008. Escaping the International Governance Dilemma? Incorporated Transgovernmental Networks in the European Union. Governance 21 (1):25-52.(on Moodle)
German Marshall Fund of The United States. 2005. Perspectives on Trade and Poverty Reduction http://www.gmfus.org/template/download.cfm?document=doc/Final%20Survey%20Report%201205.pdf
Optional: Trade and Poverty Reduction Survey: Topline Data October 2005 http://www.gmfus.org/doc/T&P2005_Toplines_.pdf