Skip to main content
main-content

About this book

The book provides a structural analysis of the European space effort from an institute change perspective. It analyzes the EU-ESA inter-institutional relationship, gives an overview of the development of space policy in Europe, and advances the debate about the impact of the European integration process on existing institutional actors. 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.

Table of Contents

Frontmatter

Chapter 1. Introduction

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.

Nina-Louisa Remuss

Chapter 2. Methodology and Theoretic Framework

While Political Science is often defined as the study of institutions (Steinmo et al. in Structuring politics—historical institutionalism in comparative analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 3, 1992), the study of institutions touches upon several academic disciplines, such as International Relations, International Law, International Political Economy, International History and European Studies (Rittberger and Zangl in International organization—polity, politics and policies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p. 3, 2006).

Nina-Louisa Remuss

Chapter 3. Empirical Study: The Development of Space Policy in Europe

This chapter provides an updated overview of the development of space policy in Europe to qualify to what extent ESA has changed institutionally in a subsequent fourth chapter. The development of space activities in Europe is considered a case study of institutional change. In line with Campbell (2004, p. 40) if we want to determine, how much institutional change has occurred in a particular setting, we need to examine all the relevant institutional dimensions over time. Thus, the development of European space activities is considered from the beginning of European space collaboration in 1959 until 2014. This is in line with Dudley and Richardson (1999), who perceive long-term historical policy studies as the only way to understand the development of institutional change (Hörber, 2016b, p. 254). Moreover, in line with Thelen (1999, p. 400); Hall and Taylor (1996a); Conner (2010, p. iiix), the process of institutional foundation and selection can be linked to the process of institutional change. Accordingly, knowing how institutions were constructed “provides insights into how they might come apart” (Thelen, 1999, p. 400).

Nina-Louisa Remuss

Chapter 4. Theoretical Discussion

This last chapter seeks to combine the theoretical and empirical part of this dissertation. To do so, the six phases of the development of space policy in Europe will be analysed in terms of the stages of institutional development and the five facets of institutional change. Particular attention is paid to the impact of the European integration process.

Nina-Louisa Remuss

Chapter 5. Conclusion and Synthesis

To understand institutional change, the dissertation analysed the case of ESA in terms of stages of institutional development and facets of institutional change. Combining the findings from the analysis of the state of the art of theories, explaining both the European integration process as well as institutional change, with the empirical findings. Also, the six phases of the development of space policy in Europe were analysed in terms of the five facets of institutional change as identified, with the objective to provide an updated overview of the development of space policy in Europe, to advance the debate about the impact of the European integration process on existing institutional actors, to make a theoretical contribution to our understanding of institutional change, to make a theoretical contribution to our understanding of when supranational actors are able to advance their own agenda. This section summarises the advantages, disadvantages, and findings of such an approach to institutional change.

Nina-Louisa Remuss

Backmatter

Additional information

Premium Partner

Neuer InhaltdSpaceFEVValeo LogoTE Connectivity Corporation
image credits