Projets CEE terminés

Promoteur : Clément Fontan
Chercheur : Antoine de Cabanes
Financement : FNRS aspirant

Because central banks play an interface role between financial markets and democratic states, they are crucial regulatory authorities that are located at the heart of capitalist systems. When the Global Financial Crisis erupted, central banks radically moved beyond the role they were playing since the beginning of the 1990s’ as they became the lenders of last resort of both states and financial markets, in addition of gaining numerous additional competences. The starting point of this research project is to consider whether democratic controls over central banks’ activities have evolved in line with the extension of their role within the political realm. The research will consider three forms of democratic controls over central banks : legal control (judicial review and treaty change), political control (politics of nomination of central bank governors) and parliamentary control (hearings of central bankers). In order to understand the explaining factors driving the evolution of democratic controls, there will be comparative study on the following central banks : the ECB, the Fed, the BoE and the BoJ. The project will adopt a mixed method research design including discursive analysis and semi-structured interviews.

Promoteur : Tom Delreux
Chercheur : Joseph Earsom
Financement : PDR F.R.S. – FNRS

This project analyses the climate diplomacy of the European Union (EU) in the current international regime complex on climate change. The EU is a major player in global cli-mate governance, which no longer exclusively takes place in  the  framework  of  the  UN  Framework  Convention  on  Climate Change but rather in a broad range of internatio-nal institutions, including the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Maritime Organization, the Montreal Protocol or the Major Economies Forum. The enti-rety of the institutions where international climate policies are discussed and where the EU has to conduct is climate diplomacy is called the ‘international regime complex on climate change’. The proposed research project examines how  and  why  the  EU  employs  certain  linkages  between  the institutions of the regime complex. Factors relating to both the EU’s internal functioning and the external setting in which the EU acts will be taken into account. The main innovation of the project is that it investigates the EU’s climate diplomacy towards the entire regime complex, whereas the current literature focuses on the EU’s diplo-macy in a single international institution only. By using systematic text analysis and the ‘theory-testing’ variant of processtracing methodology, the proposed research project will qualitatively study the EU’s climate diplomacy in the regime complex in the period 2011-2018. It uses originally collected empirical data, obtained through extensive qualita-tive fieldwork (primary document research and semi-struc-tured interviews in EU institutions and member states).

Negotiating in EU trialogue meetings : a double principal-agent analysis of the role of the Presidency and the rapporteur

Promoteur : Tom Delreux
Chercheur :  Thomas Laloux

L’objectif de ce projet est d’analyser le niveau de ‘discrétion’ dont dispose la Présidence tournante du Conseil et du rapporteur du Parlement européen vis-à-vis de leurs institutions respectives pour négocier au sein des trilogues informels prenant place durant la procédure législative ordinaire de l’Union Européenne. Ces trilogues informels sont des réunions, non prévues par les traités, qui réunissent des représentants du Parlement Européen, du Conseil et de la Commission avec comme objectif de négocier un compromis qui peut ensuite être formellement adopté par la Parlement et le Conseil le plus tôt possible dans la procédure. Alors que les trilogues sont maintenant devenus la norme, le rôle central joué par les représentants des institutions y participants soulève la question de la marge de manœuvre, ou la discrétion, qu’ils disposent vis-à-vis de leurs institutions.

D’un point de vue théorique, cette question est étudiée à travers la théorie ‘principal-agent’ dont le but est justement de comprendre des situations dans lesquels un (groupe d’) acteur(s) (l’agent, ici les représentants) agit pour le compte d’un autre (groupe d’) acteur(s) (le principal, ici le Conseil et le Parlement Européen). Ce projet est innovateur pour plusieurs raisons : il permet relier deux types de négociations (intra- et interinstitutionnelles) au sein de la procédure législative ordinaire de l’UE ; Il analyse la délégation et la discrétion des agents qui en découle dans le contexte des trilogues, qui sont actuellement les principaux forums de négociations législative dans l’UE ; enfin il tient compte de deux relations principal-agent simultanées et de leurs influences mutuelles.

Chessboard politics : EU external forest policies in the fragmented international forest regime

Promoteur : Tom Delreux 

Chercheur : Pauline Pirlot

L’objectif de ce projet est d’analyser les réponses de l’UE aux régimes internationaux fragmentés. Le projet se concentre sur expliquer le comportement stratégique de l’UE dans le régime international des forêts, couvrant la période 1990-2015. Le comportement stratégique de l’UE est défini comme certaines façons spécifiques dont son action extérieure est effectuée. Le projet explique sous quelles conditions, qu’elles soient particulières à l’UE ou aux pratiques de négociations internationales, l’UE entreprend une réponse prédéfinie.

Le caractère fragmenté du régime international des forêts est le point de départ de ce projet. Cette particularité donne lieu à des caractéristiques spécifiques, comme des contradictions entre lois internationales, qui peuvent être utilisées de façon stratégique par l’UE sur la scène internationale. Adoptant un comportement stratégique, l’UE utilise les caractéristiques de la fragmentation du régime international des forêts pour atteindre ses objectifs. Tel un joueur d’échecs, l’UE place ses pions – l’effet de son action extérieure – sur un échiquier – le régime international des forêts – afin d’atteindre ses objectifs.

Les élites des partis politiques nationaux face à la « crise de la zone euro» : la (dé)politisation de l’intégration européenne, un enjeu de légitimité ?

Promoteurs : Virginie Van Ingelgom, Damien Bol (King's College London)

Chercheur : Alban Versailles

À partir d’un design comparatif, ce projet vise à contribuer à la compréhension de la politisation différenciée de l’intégration européenne. En combinant l'analyse d'un facteur contextuel, la crise de la zone euro, à l'analyse du rôle des leaders politiques nationaux, il s’agira de développer une réflexion sur l’importance des discours des élites nationales comme facteur intermédiaire de (dé)politisation de l’intégration européenne. L'objectif sera de s’interroger sur les conséquences de la (dé)politisation de l’intégration européenne en questionnant l'impact de ces processus sur les attitudes des citoyens et le degré de légitimité qu'ils accordent aux différents acteurs et aux différents niveaux de pouvoirs impliqués dans la gestion de la crise économique et monétaire. Ainsi, ce projet se concentre sur les deux principales « zones d'ombres » subsistant dans notre compréhension du processus de (dé)politisation de l'intégration européenne : l'importance des facteurs intermédiaires et les conséquences de la (dé)politisation. Pour ce faire, cinq cas ont été choisis : l'Allemagne, la France, le Royaume-Uni, la Belgique et l'Irlande. Premièrement, pour comprendre les sources de la (dé)politisation de l'intégration européenne, l'analyse se concentrera sur le rôle des élites politiques nationales (présidents de partis et/ou chefs de file exerçant un mandat prépondérant dans l'exécutif national) en mobilisant des méthodes à la fois qualitatives, avec l'analyse de leurs discours, et quantitatives, avec le recours à des bases de données sur leurs attitudes et leurs programmes (CHES, CCS, CMP). Ensuite, pour comprendre les effets de cette (dé)politisation, ce seront les attitudes des citoyens qui seront analysées en combinant des méthodes quantitative (Eurobaromètre, EES) et qualitative (expérimentation). Enfin, les résultats de ces deux phases de recherches permettront ensemble une analyse plus riche du processus de politisation.

RESTEP – Transatlantic Network on the Politicization of Europe 

Promoteurs : Tom Delreux, Vincent Dujardin, Virginie Van Ingelgom, Clément Fontan
Chercheurs : Thomas Laloux, Damien Pennetreau, Alban Versailles, Frauke Olher, Cal Le Gall, Lise Frehen

Based at Université of Montréal, the Transatlantic Network on the Politicization of Europe (RESTEP) aims at creating a space for research and discussion on the European Union as a critical political object. Made possible with the financial support of the EU Erasmus+ Program (2017-2020 Jean Monnet Network), it brings together a group of  twenty professors from nine universities, in both Canada and Europe:  Université de Montréal, McGill University, Université Catholique de Louvain, Sciences Po Grenoble, Sciences Po Bordeaux, University of Warwick, Central European University, University of Liverpool and Universidade de Lisboa. The main mission of RESTEP is to foster the co-production of knowledge between scholars, practitioners and civil society through collaborative activities on research, teaching and networking. It aims at: Developing a transatlantic research cluster; Training a new generation of leaders on these issues; Providing opportunities for dialogue and long-term collaboration between researchers and decision-makers to analyze the effects of politicization on institutions, political actors and citizens. > Ultimately, RESTEP seeks to contribute to the public debate on the > EU’s legitimacy

Promoteur : Clément Fontan

Financement : Economic and social research council (ESRC) & Rebuilding Macroeconomics

The Bank of England (BoE) holds a peculiar place among central banks in the Western World. At first glance, it seems more entrepreneurial in the type of research papers it publi-shes, with strong stances taken on financial regulation (in particular on structural reform of banking), distributional effects of quantitative easing, central bank digital curren-cies or climate change. The BoE also fosters methodologi-cal  innovation,  as  exemplified  by  Andy  Haldane’s  recent  interest in agent-based modelling. Yet, it is not clear to what extent the macroeconomic policies it implements, or the macroeconometric models its economists rely on for forecasting, simulation and policy analysis, substantially differ from those implemented in other central banks or taught in departments of economics. In this project, we thus propose to combine quantitative analysis, semi-structured interviews and archival evidence to assess the state of the knowledge produced by BoE economists, their background, networks, influences and impact, and to track the historical roots of their underlying modelling culture back into the 1970s to 2010

Promoteur: Tom Delreux

Le ‘Jean Monnet Research Network on EU-UN Relations’ (EUN-NET) rassemble des académiques provenant de huit institutions européennes et américaines, dont ISPOLE. Il vise à stimuler l’intérêt académique quant aux interactions entre l’UE et l’ONU et à créer une plateforme multidisciplinaire pour des analyses et débats sur ce sujet. [http://eunnet.eu]

English Version

The EUN-NET Network brings together established academics from different disciplines (law, economics, political science and international relations) that have a proven record of research and teaching excellence in the field of EU-UN relations. The rationale of this multidisciplinary partnership is to encourage exchange of academic best-practice and creating a thematic trans-national research group.

The EUN-NET Network’s dual objective comprises the stimulation of academic interest in EU-UN interactions and the forging of a broader common public space for informed analysis and debate on current EU-UN issues. The former will be achieved by a variety of teaching methodologies and the set up of a research network that will outlive the duration of the program. The latter will entail an enhanced cooperation between academic and civil society stakeholders through several public events to disseminate knowledge and enhance the understanding of this complex relationship.

Promotrices: Virginie Van Ingelgom, Claire Dupuy 
Chercheur:  Damien Pennetreau 

Starting from the difficulties faced by the European integration project, this research investigates one of the underlying mechanisms of EU’s current legitimacy crisis: welfare retrenchment. Historically, policies have been used by political elites as a tool of legitimation. States have relied on the promotion of social policies and subsequent development of welfare states to establish their legitimacy. Thus, it makes sense to investigate the overlooked policy feedback effect. The core argument of the policy feedback theory is that policies’ outcomes reshape the subsequent policy process. In the meantime scholars underline that citizens’ relationship with politics is changing. The literature related to democratic linkages illustrates that citizens engage in politics differently than in the past. It also tries to understand what the new patterns of citizens’ involvement are. It then is appropriate to assess the policy feedback effect in the light of citizens’ democratic linkages. Still, the role of the media has to be taken into account. These latter highlight policies’ success or failures. In doing so, they provide the necessary information to evaluate the action of the incumbent governments. They also provide lenses that may influence citizens’ judgement. This explains the relevance of integrating media in the analysis. This research answers to the following academic question: how do welfare retrenchments in labour and health policies and the media coverage in that regard influence citizens’ relationship with their political system? Relying on mixed-methods the cases (Belgium, France, and the UK) are analysed in longitudinal perspective. The used qualitative data are taken from existing research and reappraised while the quantitative data are produced through media content analysis and interpreted.

Promoteur : Lieven De Winter 
Chercheur : Mihail Chiru 
Financement : “MOVE-IN Louvain” Incoming Post-doctoral Fellowship, co-funded by the Marie Curie 

Actions of the European Commission. The absence of an electoral connection in the European Union (EU) elections, i.e. the fact that voters do not reward or punish Members of European Parliament (MEPs) for their legislative behavior is the standard view among EU election scholars. For most of the period since 1979 this view seemed too obvious to be tested empirically, but recent institutional reforms and societal developments suggest the need to reconsider the conventional wisdom. Thus, the project will investigate to what extent and how do individual parliamentary activities matter for the re-selection and re-election of MEPs. Special attention will be given to distinguishing between the electoral consequences of policy influence and of constituency service, while also adopting a longitudinal perspective to trace any changes related to electoral reform. An original dataset will be built that will include the MEPs’ roll-call dissent levels, number of reports, opinions and parliamentary questions submitted between 1999 and 2014 and information regarding their participation in subsequent EP elections. The project would improve our understanding of patterns of EP legislative policy making over time by looking at how parties manage their most knowledgeable and resourceful cadres. By adopting a longitudinal perspective this analysis would offer an assessment of the legislative professionalization potential of the European Parliament and of how the various electoral arrangements and actual elections affect the pool of experienced and policy-influent legislators. Moreover, the project can answer several theoretical puzzles with respect to EP elections and recruitment: the supposed trade-off parties face between nominating national legislators who can win votes and nominating incumbents who can achieve policy goals; the apparent irrelevance of voting loyalty for re-election, although several scholars have emphasized that national parties, the main principals of the MEPs, are very interested in loyalty.

Promoteur : Tom Delreux
Chercheuse : Frauke Ohler
Financement : FNRS aspirance

This project studies the role of the European Union (EU) in contemporary global environmental politics through an innovative combination of an outside-in mapping with an inside-out explanation of that role. Three dimensions of the EU’s role are examined : its environmental ambition, leadership and diplomacy. The project is innovative because of a twofold reason. First, counterbalancing the literature’s dominant focus on climate change, it focuses on the EU’s role in three less politicized, yet important, international environmental treaty regimes. Those regimes are the regime of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the regime of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, and the chemicals regime. Second, the project evaluates the EU’s role via an original outside-in mapping, based on non-EU centric evaluations by observers of the EU’s role. Variation in the role of the EU in the three environmental treaty regimes in the period 2010-2018, both over time and between the treaty regimes, are then explained through structured, focused comparisons based on an inside-out approach. Original empirical data are collected through several techniques. First, interviews and online surveys will be conducted with non-EU observers who have witnessed the EU’s role in the environmental treaty regimes : officials working at the secretariats of the international treaty regimes and Earth Negotiation Bulletin reporters. Second, data to explain variation in the EU’s role is gathered through semi-structured interviews with closely involved EU policy-makers, and through the analysis of official documents (from the EU and the secretariats) and specialized press reports on internal EU decision-making. The project will thereby contribute to a more fine-tuned understanding of the EU as international actor and to improved knowledge about the process and outcomes of international environmental cooperation.

Promotrice : Virginie Van Ingelgom
Chercheuse : Soetkin Verhaegen
Financement : Chargée de recherche FNRS

To make governance operate effectively requires citizens to perceive it as legitimate. Perceived legitimacy, is “the belief that the existing political institutions are the most appro-priate ones for the society” (Lipset 1983: 64). Questions about legitimacy arise for all governance levels citizens are subject to: national, subnational and supranational levels. Hence, a growing literature studies perceived legitimacy, mostly of the national or EU level. However, theories on multilevel governance  stress  complex  relationships  between  gover-nance levels. This is in contrast to the currently dominant practice of studying these governance levels in isolation, or as a simple trade-off between two levels. The absence of a deep understanding of the relationship between citizens’ attitudes about the various governance levels they are subject to is problematic, as the multilevel setting has a profound impact on legitimation dynamics (Scharpf 2007). For these reasons, the proposed project integrates the literatures on perceived legitimacy and multilevel governance to answer its guiding research question ‘to what extent and how do perceptions of legitimacy of European, national and sub-national governance levels interact?’. The project places the EU, national and the most relevant subnational level in EU member states at the centre, as questions about legitimacy are most apparent for these levels. A mixed-me-thods  approach  combining  focus  groups  in  Belgium  and  the Netherlands, the collection of original survey data in Belgium (in cooperation with the EOS project) and the analysis of quantitative survey data on all EU member states will be used to answer this question. It will be explored what citizens regard as relevant traits of legitimate governance and how this varies across governance levels, the linkages between perceptions of legitimacy of these levels will be shown and variation in citizens’ perceptions of legitimacy of each level, and their linkages will be explained.