Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Cover of the book

2018 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

1. Introduction

Author : Dr. Nina-Louisa Remuss

Published in: Theorising Institutional Change: The Impact of the European Integration Process on the Development of Space Activities in Europe

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

While European Space collaboration was initially developed outside the competences of the European Union (EU) with space programmes being carried out almost exclusively under the framework of European Space Agency (ESA) and national agencies, the EU has gained “shared competences” (Art. 2, TFEU) in space policy following the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. Currently the EU and ESA work together under a Framework Agreement. In 2016, the EU Commission has published a Communication entitled “European Space Policy” (ESP). Even though ESA’s Member States have agreed to keep ESA as an intergovernmental organisation during the ESA Ministerial Council of 2014, the discussion about ESA becoming part of the EU framework continues. The EU’s ambitions for leadership in European space policy raise question concerning the future of ESA. The study of institutions lies at the heart of political sciences. Strikingly the theoretic framework qualifying institutional change and making it comparable leaves room for more concrete and testable dimensions of institutional change. This dissertation thus seeks to advance the debate on institutional change by proposing a more structured approach to institutional change, consisting of stages of institutional development and facets of institutional change. Thereby the evolving institutional arrangements between EU and ESA are considered a case study. Special attention is paid to the impact of the European integration process on existing institutional actors.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Footnotes
1
ESA embraces non-EU States such as Switzerland and Norway and extra-European States such as Canada.
 
2
The best overview of the defining features, as well as the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of each can be found in Hall and Taylor (1996a, pp. 936–57) and Rhodes et al. (2006, p. xiii).
 
3
For more information on the role of the Council of Ministers cf. Christiansen (2002).
 
4
Accordingly, critical events may mark the appropriate time frames for analysis (e.g. electoral, budget, legislative or other cycles).
 
5
For more information on “critical junctures” refer to the following literature cf. Florensa (2004, p. 18), Christiansen and Vanhoonacker (2008), Campbell (2004, p. 26), Hall and Taylor (1996a, p. 942), Krasner (1984, p. 235) in Ikenberry (1994, p. 9), Horak (2007, p. 21), March and Olsen (2006, p. 12).
 
6
For example changes in the markets, technological innovations or legislative changes.
 
Literature
Aliberti, M., & Krasner, S. D. (2016). Governance in space. In C. Al-Ekabi, B. Baranes, P. Hulsroj, & A. Lahcen (Eds.), Yearbook on space policy 2014 (pp. 143–166). Vienna: Springer.CrossRef
Aminzade, R. (1992). Historical sociology and time. Sociological Methods & Research, 20, 456–480.CrossRef
Andersen, S. S., Eliassen, K. A., & Sitter, N. (2001). Formal processes: EU institutions and actors. In S. S. Andersen & K. A. Eliassen (Eds.), Making policy in Europe (pp. 20–43). London: SAGE Publisher.CrossRef
Boin, A. (2008). Mapping trends in the study of political institutions. International Studies Review, 10, 87–92.CrossRef
Campbell, J. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Caporaso, J. (1998). Regional integration theory: Understanding our past and anticipating our future. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 1–16.CrossRef
Christiansen, T. (2002). Out of the shadows: The general secretariat of the council of ministers. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 8(4), 80–97.CrossRef
Christiansen, T., & Vanhoonacker, S. (2008). At a critical juncture? Change and continuity in the institutional development of the council secretariat. West European Politics, 31(4), 751–770.CrossRef
Conner, A. (2010). Introduction: International institutions and effectiveness—Achieving cooperation. In J. L. Goldstein & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International institutions—Vol. II consequences: When, where and why international institutions are effective (pp. iiix–x). London: SAGE.
Council of the European Union. (2006). Council joint action amending joint action 2001/554/CFSP on the establishment of a European union institute for security studies (2006/1002/CFSP). Brussels: European Communities.
Davara, F. (2000). The future of the WEU Torrejon Centre. Air & Space Europe, 2(4), 24–25.CrossRef
DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 3–23). Cambridge: Ballinger Pub.
Doleys, T. (2000). Member states and the European commission: Theoretical insights from the new economics of organization. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(4), 532–553.CrossRef
Dudley, G., & Richardson, J. (1999). Competing advocacy coalitions and the process of “frame reflection”: A longitudinal analysis of EU steel policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(2), 225–248.CrossRef
Edelmann, R., Milde, H., & Weimerskirch, P. (1998). Agency-Beziehungen und Kontrakt-Design: Problem, Lösung, Beispiel. Kredit und Kapital, 1, 1–27.
Egeberg, M. (2004). An organisational approach to European integration: Outline of a complementary perspective. European Journal of Political Research, 43, 199–219.CrossRef
ESA. (2012). Political declaration towards the European space agency that best serves Europe (ESA/C-M/CCXXXIV/Res.4 (final)). Naples: ESA.
European Commission. (2012). Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European space agency (COM (2012) 671 final). Brussels: European Communities.
Gaubert, A. (2006). Is there really any duplication in Europe’s space activities? Space Policy, 22(1), 1–2.CrossRef
Goldstein, J. L. & Steinberg, R. H. (2010). Introduction. In J. L. Goldstein, & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International Institutions, Vol. I: Causes (pp. xvii–xxxi). London: SAGE.
Greif, A., & Laitin, D. D. (1994). A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 633–652.CrossRef
Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRef
Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996a). Political science and the three new institutionalisms (pp. 936–957). XLIV: Political Studies.
Hartlapp, M., Metz, J., & Rauh, C. (2013). Linking agenda setting to coordination structures: Bureaucratic politics inside the European commission. Journals of European Integration, 35(4), 425–441.CrossRef
Héritier, A. (2007). Explaining institutional change in Europe. New York: OUP.CrossRef
Hix, S. (2005). The political system of the European union. Houndmills: Palgrave.
Hobe, S., Heinrich, O., Kerner, I., & Froehlich, A. (2009). Entwicklung der Europäischen Weltraumagentur als „implementing agency“ der Europäischen Union: Rechtsrahmen und Anpassungserfordernisse. Kölner Schriften zum Internationalen und Europäischen Recht. Band 17. Berlin: LIT Verlag.
Hobe, S., Kunzmann, K., & Reuter, T. (2006). Forschungsbericht ESA—EU: Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen einer zukünftigen kohärenten Struktur der europäischen Raumfahrt. Kölner Schriften zum Internationalen und Europäischen Recht Bd. 13. Berlin: LIT Verlag.
Horak, M. (2007). Governing the post-communist city: Institutions and democratic development in Prague. Toronto: University of Toronto.CrossRef
Hörber, T. (2009a). The European space agency and the European union: The next step on the road to the stars. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 5(3), 405–414.
Hörber, T. (2009b). ESA + EU: Ideology or pragmatic task sharing? Space Policy, 25, 206–208.CrossRef
Hörber, T. (2016a). The European space agency and the European union. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 53–65). London, New York: Routledge.
Hörber, T. (2016b). Conclusion: To boldly go where no one has gone before. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy (pp. 253–263). London and New York: Routledge.
Hörber, T. (2016c). Foreword. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. xx–xxiii). London and New York: Routledge.
Hörber, T. (2016d). Introduction—Towards a European space policy. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 1–12). London and New York: Routledge.
Hutter, T. (1991). Charakteristika und Bestimmungsfaktoren der europäischen Raumfahrtpolitik. Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Sozialwissenschaft an der Fakultät für Sozial- und Verhaltenswissenschaften der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Sabatier, P. A. (1993). The study of public policy processes. In H. C. Jenkins-Smith & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Policy change and learning. An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 1–9). Boulder: Westview Press.
Jupille, J. (2004). Procedural politics: Issues, influence, and institutional choice in the European union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Kagan, R. (2004). Paradise and power. America and Europe in the new world order. London: Atlantic Books.
Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (2001). Power and interdependence. New York: Longman.
Köpping Anthanasopoulos, H. (2016). Europe’s wilderness—The council’s frames on space policy. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 82–97). London and New York: Routledge.
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(4) (Autumn 2001), 761–799.
Krasner, S. (1988). Sovereignty—An institutional perspective”. Comparative Political Studies, 21(1), 66–94.CrossRef
Levy, M. A., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (1995). The study of international regimes. European Journal of International Relations, 1, 267–330.CrossRef
Madariaga, A. (2011). Patterns of institutional change and external competitiveness in neoliberal and dependent political economies. The cases of Chile and Estonia. Budapest: Central European University.
Madders, K. (1997). A new force at a new frontier: Europe’s development in the space field in the light of its main actors, policies, law and activities from its beginning up to the present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Madders, K., & Thiebaut, W. M. (1992). Two Europe in one space: The evolution of relations between the European space agency and the European community in space affairs. Journal of Space Law, 20(2), 117–132.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2006). Elaborating the ‘New Institutionalism’. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 3–20). Oxford: OUP.
Marchisio, S. (2006). Proposals for an institutional realignment of the European space sector. In S. Hobe, B. Schmidt-Tedd, & K.-U. Schrogl (Eds.), Project 2001 plus—global and European challenges for air and space law (pp. 193–204). Köln: Heymanns.
Mearsheimer, J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5–49.CrossRef
Meunier, S., & McNamara, K. R. (2007). Making history: European integration and institutional change at fifty. Oxford: OUP.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Olsen, J. P. (1997). Institutional design in democratic context. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 5(3), 203–229.CrossRef
Peterson, J., & Shackleton, M. (2006). The EU’s Institutions: An overview. In J. Peterson & M. Shackleton (Eds.), The institutions of the European union (pp. 1–16). Oxford: OUP.
Pierson, P. (1998). The path to European integration: A historical institutionalist perspective. In W. Sandholtz & A. Stone Sweet (Eds.), European integration and supranational governance (pp. 27–58). Oxford: OUP.
Pollack, M. A. (1996). The new institutionalism and EC governance: The promise and limits of institutional analysis. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 9(4), 429–458.
Pollack, M. A. (1997a). Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European community. International Organization, 51(1), 99–134.CrossRef
Pollack, M. A. (1997b). The Commission as an agent. In N. Nugent (Ed.), At the heart of the union: Studies of the European commission (pp. 111–130). Houndmills: Macmillan.
Rathgeber, W., & Remuss, N. (2009). Space security—A formative role and principled identity for Europe (ESPI Report 16). Wien: ESPI.
Remuss, N. (2011). Meeting Europe’s external and internal security through space applications—Security as an element for European identity. In B. Baranes & K.-U. Schrogl (Eds.), European identity through space (pp. 132–144). Vienna: Springer.
Reuter, T. (2007). Die ESA als Raumfahrtagentur der Europäischen Union: Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für eine institutionelle Neuausrichtung der europäischen Raumfahrt. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006). Old institutionalism. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 90–108). Oxford: OUP.
Richardson, J. (1996). Actor-based models of national and EU policy making. In H. Kassim & A. Menon (Eds.), The European union and national industrial policy (pp. 26–51). London: Routledge.
Rittberger, V., & Zangl, B. (2006). International organization: Polity, politics and policies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Roland, G. (2004). Understanding institutional change: Fast-moving and slow-moving institutions. Studies in Comparative International Development, 38(4), 109–131.CrossRef
Rosamond, B. (2000). Theories of European integration. Houndmills: Palgrave.
Rüttgers, J. (1989). Europas Wege in den Weltraum: Programme—Proteste—Prognosen. Frankfurt am Main: Umschau Verlag.
Schrogl, K. (1993). Die Europäische Gemeinschaft als Magnet—Ihre Anziehungskraft auf die europäischen Fachorganisationen ESA und CEPT. Zeitschrift für Internationale Politik, 18, 525–532.
Scott, R. W. (2008). Institutions and organizations—ideas and interests. London: SAGE.
Sheehan, M. (2007). The international politics of space. London: Routledge.CrossRef
Shepsle, K. A. (1989). Institutional equilibrium and equilibrium institutions. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1(2), 131–147.CrossRef
Sigalas, E. (2016). Europe in space—The European parliament’s justification Arsenal. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 66–81). London and New York: Routledge.
Steinmo, S., Thelen, K., & Longstreth, F. (1992). Structuring politics: Historical institutionalism in comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Beyond continuity. Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: OUP.
Suzuki, K. (2003). Policy logics and institutions of European space collaboration. Burlington: Ashgate.
Sandholtz, W. & Stone Sweet, A. (1998). European Integration and Supranational Governance. Oxford: OUP.
Tallberg, J. (2000). The anatomy of autonomy: An institutional account of variation in supranational influence. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 843–864.CrossRef
Tallberg, J. (2003). European governance and supranational institutions: Making states comply. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRef
von Kries, W. (2003). Which future for Europe’s space agencies? Space Policy, 19, 157–161.CrossRef
Wallace, H. (2000). The policy process. In H. Wallace & W. Wallace (Eds.), Policy-making in the European union (pp. 39–64). Oxford: OUP.
Wendt, A. (2001). Driving with the rearview mirror: On the rational science of institutional design. International Organization, 55(4), 1019–1049.CrossRef
Young, O. R. (2010). Regime dynamics: The rise and fall of international regimes. In J. L. Goldstein & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International institutions—Vol. II consequences: When, where and why international institutions are effective (Vol. II, pp. 163–183). London: SAGE.
Metadata
Title
Introduction
Author
Dr. Nina-Louisa Remuss
Copyright Year
2018
Book
Theorising Institutional Change: The Impact of the European Integration Process on the Development of Space Activities in Europe

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95977-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-95978-8

Copyright Year: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95978-8_1

Premium Partner

    Image Credits