Full Report. 3. Activities A. Networks, Associated Projects and Conferences Organised B. Papers presented at International Conferences

Transcription

1 Strategies of Civic Inclusion in Pan-European Civil Society ESRC Research Grant: L Grant Holders: Dario Castiglione, Jo Shaw and Richard Bellamy Full Report Contents 1. Background, objectives and approaches A. Background B. Main Objectives C. Methodology 2. Research Content and Results A. Ideas of Citizenship B. Civil Society and Transnational Governance 3. Activities A. Networks, Associated Projects and Conferences Organised B. Papers presented at International Conferences 4. Outputs A. Named Publications B. Other, Forthcoming and Related Publications 5. Key Findings, Impact and Dissemination A. Key Findings B. Impact and Dissemination 6. Future Research Priorities Appendix 1: Main Forthcoming Publications Appendix 2: Parallel Research Projects

2 1. Background, objectives and approaches A. Background As stated in the original proposal, the context of our research lies in the rapid transformation of European politics and society resulting from the collapse of communist regimes, the accelerated economic and political integration of the European Union, and the large-scale effects of globalisation. Its guiding rationale was the assumption that, with the growth of transnational governance within the European region, new forms of civic inclusion and participation would be required in order to guarantee political legitimacy, social cohesion and effective government. This consideration was germane to the 'One Europe or Several?' Programme, whose main aim was to investigate the prospects for 'integration and fragmentation' resulting from the dynamic of change across Europe (cf. Programme Outline, p. 1). It was part of our assumption that issues of political legitimacy, social cohesion and effective governance had traditionally been addressed from a 'statist' perspective (even in relation to the EU, often seen as a 'state' writ large). One of the thing that the 'statist' perspective fails to recognise is the way in which transnational governance cannot rely, as democratic nation state did, on a broad and supportive civil society, which fostered appropriate civic values and behaviour, put flesh on individual and group rights and contributed to empowering people. In other words, the way in which civil society and institutions connect at a transnational level cannot be taken for granted. Moreover, changes to the structure of governance cannot be seen in isolation, since processes of globalisation and regional integration are also operating within civil society. Therefore, civic inclusion in a transnational context cannot be seen as the adaptation of citizenship and civil society to the transformations affecting governance - it is part of a more dynamic and interactive process, where governance and citizenship, political institutions and civil society affect each other. B. Main Objectives Our main objectives concerned three areas of research, which we identified both in the original proposal and in the interim Reports as consisting in (1) conceptual clarification of the elements involved in the idea of civic inclusion; (2) the normative models underlying postnational citizenship, and (3) some of the institutional aspects that may give substance to transnational forms of citizens' participation and inclusion. Although these objectives have been at the centre of both our research, dissemination and publications, we have refined our analysis and slightly changed the focus of our project, to accommodate some of the major developments that have occurred in Europe, particularly the shaping of the EU's constitutional agenda. At the conceptual level, our original proposal insisted that civic inclusion was to be considered from both a political (civic) and a more general social (civil) perspective, so that the instruments and strategies employed to further civic inclusion should rely on both these aspects of social integration. This approach implied favouring rights of participation and empowering strategies that paid attention to both political and social inclusion, while using the one to promote the other. Moreover, it implied a vision of the virtues of citizenship as a mixture between the civic (sense of the community) and the civil (sense of justice and fairness). We regard this distinction as still valid, but as our research has progressed, we have tended to move beyond it, trying to articulate a set of new concepts and distinctions that may help us to capture the kind of transformation that citizenship and civil society are undergoing in transnational contexts (see section 2A, below). 2

3 At a more normative level, in parallel with the work that some of us have done within the TSER Network on European Citizenship (EURCIT), we have investigated three conceptual models of citizenship: the civic nationalist; the cosmopolitan globalist; and a mixed model combining elements of the previous two. We have done this both theoretically and in relation to certain institutional developments, such as the establishment of rights and opportunity structures across Europe. As part of this work, we have also tried to specify a number of more concrete ideological and cultural variants within each of the general models. The part of our research concerned with the institutional side of civic inclusion has acquired greater policy relevance with the emergence of a clearer constitutional agenda at the EU level through new Treaties (Amsterdam and Nice), the nearing of the date for further enlargement, the drafting of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, the publication of the White Paper on Governance, and the establishment of a constitutional Convention. This has given a more precise focus to our attempt to define the place of citizens' involvement and inclusion in a transnational form of governance. Moreover, some of the more applied part of our research, such as the study of EU electoral rights, have evident constitutional relevance in so far as these rights and their attribution contribute to the definition of both the boundaries and the self-image of the Union. C. Methodology The research we embarked upon almost three years ago was ambitious in both content and form. This has been a team project, crossing disciplinary boundaries, mixing normative and institutional approaches, theoretical and empirical research. Besides the three main applicants, 10 other researchers have been involved in it in different capacities (see full list, at the end of this Report). We have also activated and/or collaborated with various parallel projects; while a number of new research initiatives, which are well positioned to engage with some the lines of enquiry first developed as part of this research, have already started (see Appendix 2, in particular). There are three methodological aspects of our research that should be mentioned: (a) our attempt to bring both normative and institutional analysis to bear on the issue of civic inclusion; (b) the way in which this reflects a 'normative turn' in EU studies; (c) and some more particular methodological issues involved in various aspects of our empirical research. (a) The mixing of institutional analysis and normative argument is germane to our research agenda, since this is meant to identify both valuable forms of civic inclusion in transnational governance, and to see how these are reflected in the institutions and practices currently available or in formation. Because our conception of the relationship between the development of forms of transnational governance and the practices of civic inclusion is both dynamic and interactive, we use normative analysis to test institutional development, however, reflexively, we investigate institutional transformation to establish what values are either embedded/promoted by it or feasible within it. (b) The normative turn in European studies is related to the mixing of normative and institutional analysis. It reflects the increasing demand to find some form of political legitimacy to underpin the European integration process. In academic terms, the normative turn also reflects a partial break-up of traditional subject boundaries, bringing together law, political theory, international relations, comparative politics and sociological research. On a small scale, this is what our research has also attempted to do. 3

4 (c) Finally, at the more empirical level, our research has involved a variety of approaches and methods. Most of our empirically-oriented research has centred on case studies on specific issues. These have been selected as emblematic examples of the way in which European citizenship practices have developed. In a few instances, such as EU electoral rights and same-sex legislation, the research has involved comparative studies across Europe. In a number of cases we have looked at case law evolution; in others we have done documentary analysis; and we have also used elite interviews to see how non-state actors have employed certain forms of litigation, selfregulation, policy-coalition, and voice and exit strategies. 2. Research Content and Results A. Ideas of Citizenship (i) Civic Inclusion Civic inclusion means giving voice to the members of the political community. This can be done in various ways and, as the originating hypothesis of our research implied, is closely related to the forms of and changes in governance and civil society. In democratic societies, the practices of civic inclusion largely depend on the institutional definition of citizenship, which expresses the principle of 'full and equal membership' in a political community. Our research started by asking (a) whether current conceptualisations of citizenship (in the national context) were adequate; and (b) what changes, if any, the principle of citizenship needs to undergo before it can fit into the European transnational context. (ii) Conceptions of Citizenship Our answer to question (a) implied two considerations. The first is that the two main analytical models often associated with the idea of citizenship: citizenship-as-rights, and citizenship-as-belonging, are inadequate, since they tend to interpret citizenship as a passive status. A third analytical model, of citizenship-as-participation, looks more promising in so far as it implies a more active conception of the practices of citizenship. However, this is often considered too demanding, as it is associated with high levels of either civic participation or civic and civil virtue. It is possible to reformulate active citizenship in less demanding terms, as emerging from social cooperation, and as partly based on a network of horizontal relationships of political equality and social solidarity, which contribute to give meaning to both the exercise of rights and the process of identity formation, while only requiring a moderate amount of virtue and commitment on the citizens' part. The second consideration regarding the current conceptions of citizenship is that they often treat citizenship as a ready made status, either reflecting some intrinsic cultural elements of different political and social regimes, or as the product of a teleological development along the classic Marshallian lines. By contrast, the work done in parallel with the EURCIT network shows that national models of citizenship have always been contested and ultimately shaped by internal struggles for inclusion, which complement the 'membership-rules' view of citizenship, with its exclusive focus on the inside/outside paradigm. (iii) Normative Models When we move to question (b), regarding European and postnational citizenship, we notice that the normative models often applied to it reflect the languages of rights and identity, which, as argued above, are in themselves inadequate to capture the 4

5 principles and practices of democratic citizenship. This part of the work has been developed in parallel with the EURCIT project. As part of this, we have investigated three conceptual models: the civic nationalist; the cosmopolitan globalist; and a mixed model combining elements of each of them. We feel that the necessary sense of common political identity for European citizenship cannot be based on the idea of a common European heritage, but can emerge from collective agreement on values and aims provided that these values are allowed to emerge from a process of dialogue and deliberation at both mass and elite levels, rather than being imposed on the basis of supposedly common cultural and constitutional traditions. At the national level, community affiliations rather obviously preclude the development of transnational communitarian affinities and loyalties. The evidence of the feasibility of such ties developing at the EU level is not strong in even the fairly long term, and thus the kind of citizenship which is possible at EU level will need to be conceived and fostered on a different basis from its national equivalents. A cosmopolitan commitment to human rights has been seen as the answer by some. But these are broader than the EU, extending to humanity more generally. Moreover, rights may be 'thickened' in numerous and not always compatible ways. A mixed conception recognises this fact, regarding the EU as emerging from a dialogue between different sorts of community. These operate not just at the level of the member states, but also below and above them. As a result, it is important to develop a kind of citizenship which prioritises political engagement and opportunities over either prescriptive 'thin' statements of rights or 'thick' bonds of solidarity and identity. We have therefore concluded that the mixed model offers the most suitable basis for European citizenship, since it suggests how both citizens from different member states and third country nationals might engage with each other and the EU institutions, thereby building a sense of solidarity on a cross-border basis. (iv) The Boundaries of Suffrage An important test for the analysis of the normative models of postnational citizenship is that offered by the practices of 'alien suffrage', and in particular by the recently developed EU electoral rights. The granting of electoral rights to non-nationals is a contested practice in all polities. Debates about extensions of electoral rights are often deeply embedded in wider national debates about insiders and outsiders, about immigration, nationality law and the inclusion or integration of immigrants. In the context of the EU itself, electoral rights for EU citizens are a special case framed by the EU s adoption of a framework of free movement rights for certain privileged semi-insiders. Despite the generally low level of take up of EU electoral rights and their low visibility in much of national political discourse, they have both a symbolic and a practical importance, since they may prepare the ground for an extension of EU citizenship, via the fair treatment principle, to third country nationals. Indeed, within the EU the debate has shifted in large measure to the question of what rights ought to be given to third country nationals, and what are the respective responsibilities and rights of the Member States and the EU and its institutions. It was particularly useful to conceptualise the EU electoral rights contained in Article 19 EC as a special case of migrants rights and to examine the interaction with other political demarcations such as polity ideas, citizenship and sovereignty. The debates within the EU about electoral rights demonstrated two key roots for the discussion: concepts of free movement and citizenship on the one hand, and the project of internal democratisation on the other. 5

6 (v) Citizenship and the Constitutional Agenda The conclusion reached by the study on electoral rights, that the original framework within which EU citizenship was established interacts with the political processes through which the EU polity defines itself, raises the issue of the legitimacy deficit in European governance. Throughout our research, we have assumed that, in order to address such a deficit, changes in governance needs to be balanced by changes in the forms of citizenship and in the interface between political and civil society at a European level. For civic inclusion to be effective, European citizens need to have the opportunity to take decisions about issues that concern them directly, but also to feel that they have that opportunity. As part of our research, we have investigated whether and how recent 'constitutional' initiatives, such as the Amsterdam and Nice Treaties, the White Paper on Governance, the Charter of European Fundamental Rights, and the Constitutional Convention, have addressed the issue of citizenship and legitimacy deficit. Most of these initiatives claim to want to encourage a more bottom-up involvement of the European citizenry. However, in the language of the White Paper, this has been conceptualised in terms of openness and transparency, while paying little attention to the role that the networks of co-operation and solidarity across borders play in giving the citizens the opportunity to determine both the institutional structure of governance and its policy output. This part of our research has also made a contribution to the European constitutional debate in general, by contributing to important discussions on the nature of legal and constitutional 'pluralism' in Europe, and on the complexities of polity- and regime-building in relation to issues of legitimacy, sovereignty and identity. (vi) The Qualities of Citizenship Finally, as part of our research on the idea of citizenship in the European context, particularly in relation to the mixed model we advocate, we have started exploring a number of arguments on the qualities of active citizenship in transnational contexts. This part of our research was only meant as the beginning of a series of further studies, and as such it has benefited from collaborative work within other projects (see Appendices 1 and 2, and Sections 3A and 6, below). In brief, the main ideas that have informed our exploration of this issue comprise the question of the 'agonic' quality of the processes of polity- and identity-building; the dialogical and discoursive style that must inform participation in such contested processes, both at mass and elite level, without relying exclusively on the languages of rights and identity to provide the cement for the formation of the political community; the reconsideration of the issue of toleration in diverse societies, which needs to reflect the more open-minded and less assimilationist approach to difference; finally, the differentiated nature of social capital formation, which may take the form of either a 'bonding' process within a relatively homogenous community, or a 'bridging' process across different communities. B. Civil Society and Transnational Governance (i) Citizens' interests Together with the transformation of citizenship, the other main line of enquiry in our research on civic inclusion in the European context has been to investigate some of the changes in civil society, and how this has adapted to the transnational context. In particular, we have tried to examine three separate issues: whether we can talk of a European civil society; how civil society networks contribute to the organisation of 6

7 interests at a transnational level; and what are the new opportunities that transnational governance offers for the expression of citizens' interests. (ii) Civil Society in Europe Whether there is a European civil society is a difficult question to answer. It partly depends on the kind of definition adopted. Most accounts tend to mix three meanings of civil society: a) in the extended sense of a modern civil society; b) in the more restricted sense of the voluntary associations and intermediate state organisation that mediate and facilitate society self-organisation vis-à-vis the state; c) in the specialised sense of NGOs and public-interest associations. It may be argued that we can talk of a European civil society in sense (a), while sense (b) and (c) are still in formation. In particular, while there is no extended web of transnational forms of associations that can be said to fill the role that civil society has traditionally played in nation states (meaning b), there is a growing awareness of the important role that civil society organisations (meaning c) may play in the process of transnational governance, although the role that, for instance, the White Paper gives them is rather passive, being subject to institutional regulation, rather than the more active one of a 'space' for the wide representation of citizens' interests. (iii) Interest representation and opportunity structures The main focus of the second part of our research, however, has been on the institutional setting within which the voice of citizens is given expression. We have studied three interrelated domains: the political, the legal and the regulatory. The evidence that we have found on effective ways in which civil society can be given voice at each of these three levels of transnational governance is mixed. It follows that, without some concerted strategy aimed to widen the opportunity structure both for citizens' participation and for transnational civil society self-organisation, civic inclusion will remain very limited. At a more political level, we have found that NGO influence on policy is issue specific and dependent on lobbying skill and tactical alliances, but not on the legitimacy and representativeness of the NGO. NGO members and supporters have little involvement with NGO work or the EU. Without reform of the internal governance of NGOs, they are not suitable mechanisms to enable the EU and its citizens to come together. Institutional reforms are also necessary to foster civic inclusion. These include genuine and critical consultation with civil society groups at all stages of policy making, and promotion of a dialogue with civil society groups on specific EU policy areas and on the future of the EU. At a legal level, we have found that while political exclusion influences the adoption of litigation as a strategy, legal exclusion itself may influence the adoption of protest as a strategy. However, litigation and protest strategies have (until recently) tended to be employed on domestic territory by domestic actors rather than on a European basis by transnational social movements. Although certain aspects of EU environmental policy support a view that there is one European environment, this remains true only in relation to special or unique environmental resources. With regard to regulation, there seems to be little potential for the development of a participatory system of regulation without fundamental changes to the way the EU governs the market. NGOs themselves are sceptical about more participation and forms of co-regulation, which they fear may weaken statutory regulation and reinforce the dominance of industry in the regulatory process. Moreover, much regulatory detail of direct concern to public interests is decided on 7

8 and administered at national level, leaving little scope for the development of participatory regulation at EU level. In the short term, however, improvements are possible in consultation, the involvement of civil society, and the way in which affected interests are identified. (iv) Transnational opportunities Although the interface between civil society organisation and transnational governance is still underdeveloped, the presence of a transnational context seems to offer a new range of opportunities to both citizens and their autonomous organisations. This has been made evident by two particular studies we have conducted on minority groups whose civil entitlements have been traditionally curtailed in most national societies. In both cases, the new levels of legal regulation and political representation has meant a widening of their opportunity structure and the possibility of playing one level of governance against the other in order to reduce dominance. With respect to the legal liberalisation of same sex relationships, there seems to be a positive correlation between international trends and increasing transnational notions of citizenship. These are reinforced by increasing mobility, migration and transnationalisation of society. However, transnational social trends do not give rise simply to the replication of legal processes and standards of recognition of same sex relationships. National communities tend either to incorporate or to resist transnational trends through dominant national discourses. In some cases, the EU has worked as a catalyst for the promotion of legal liberalisation, as in the case of Romania, where the wish to belong to the wider European community have made liberalisation more acceptable. Our research on the Roma community in the Czech Republic and its history of exclusion demonstrates how deep cleavages within civil society, reinforced by social and economic exclusion, are largely impervious to half-hearted measures taken at a the local level. In such cases, the transnational context seems paradoxically to weaken social integration at the local level by decreasing mobility costs. For the Roma, the social capital generated through European networking, and the kinship bonds that sustained asylum migrations, were usually more significant than their weak links with local authorities, or their fragile bridges with local NGOs and civil associations. (v) Exit, voice and loyalty The lessons that come from the second part of our research are rather complex. They tend to undermine a rather simplified view of the effect of transnational governance on the way in which citizens' interests are organised and represented. This is often presented as a matter of size, suggesting that the nation state is no longer able to deal with increasingly global problems (e.g., security, pollution, financial and monetary markets). It is less remarked, however, that the crisis of the nation-state has already produced important changes in the practices of citizenship, which need to be considered when the boundaries of membership are extended across European states. Hirschman's famous distinction between exit, voice and loyalty may be of use in this context, since it could be said that during the last years in most of the European nation-states exit strategies (i.e. use of market options) have been favoured above voice and loyalty across a large area of social issues involving the distribution of entitlements and goods. Transnational governance, particularly as it has developed within the framework of the European common market, tends to increase this bias, though, on some occasions, it may also provide new fora for the expression of voice 8

9 and new opportunity for the construction of loyalties. From a policy perspective, it is important that strategies of civic inclusion at a European level should try to balance these three options, so to make them effective, instead of facilitating one at the expense of the others. 3. Activities A. Networks, Associated Projects and Conferences Organised The project has benefited from close collaboration with other research networks and projects. Such collaborative work has provided added value for the present research project in a variety of areas, such as the definition of the normative models of European citizenship (EURCIT TSER Network), the role of civil society networks in sustaining civic inclusion (EURESCO conference on Social Capital), the Europeanisation of politics (ESRC funded research on the 'Constitutionalisation of Transnational Parties'), and toleration as a civic virtue in diverse societies (ASLP conference on 'The Culture of Tolerance'). Each of these networks and initiatives has provided the opportunity for collaborative publications and the dissemination of some of the results of the present research project. Here some summary information on each of them, while further information can be found in Appendix 2. (i) European citizenship (EURCIT) network project This was a TSER Network on European Citizenship and the Social and Political Integration of the European Union. It lasted two years, and for part of the period run in parallel with our research. Network meetings and its output provided a good foundation for our investigation of European citizenship and its normative models. One volume has already come out, while a second (in close collaboration with this project) is in preparation (see Appendix 1). Three meetings promoted by the Network were particularly useful for the shaping of our research agenda and ideas, while giving us the opportunity to engage directly with people involved in the policy-making process: a. a conference on Enlargement organised in Berlin, in January 2000 with the participation of the European Commissioner for enlargement, Günter Verheugen. b. a meeting on The Constitution of European Democracy, organised in Vienna, in September 2000, with a round-table discussion on the Austrian case with the participation of European politicians. c. a conference on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, organised in Florence, in February 2001, with the participation of four members of Convention from different countries: Peter Altmaier, representative of the German Parliament; Pedro Bacelar de Vasconcelos, representative of the Portuguese Government and for a period acting as one of the Convention s Vice-Chair; Lord Bowness, representative of the Lords; and Stefano Rodotà, representative of the Italian Government. (ii) Social Capital Conference As part of our interest in issues of social cohesion and civic inclusion, we have promoted and organised a EURESCO conference on Social Capital: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. This was sponsored by the European Science Foundation and the European Commission with a contribution from the OEOS Programme, and was held 9

10 in Exeter September The conference was attended by more than 80 participants from across Europe and North America, bringing together political scientists, sociologists, economists, geographers, social theorists, and members of governmental and international organisations who work on social capital related survey and development projects. The proceedings have been published in a series of papers (see section 4B, below), while two volumes are in course of preparation. (iii) Constitutionalisation of Transnational Political Parties Closely linked to the research on transnational civil society and the Boundaries of Suffrage that they have carried out as part of our project, two of the members of our team (Shaw and Day) have obtained a ESRC grant on the Constitutionalisation of Transnational Political Parties. The goal of the project is to examine the legal and institutional context for the emergence of transnational parties in the European Union context, which will be done via a case study of the Party of European Socialists (PES). In so doing, the project will draw upon theories of supranational governance and citizenship, which has been at the centre of the present research project. (iv) The Culture of Tolerance Conference As part of our research on the nature of citizenship in transnational societies, characterised by multiculturalism and deep diversity, one of the members of our team (Castiglione) has organised the ALSP conference 2000 on 'The culture of tolerance'. A volume from the conference is forthcoming with MUP (see under 'Other selected publications'). The renewed interest in issues of toleration comes from the challenges posed by the way in which 'difference' has become both more diffuse and more pervasive in our societies, through processes of individualisation, multiculturalism, globalisation, and the multiplication of 'immigrant societies'. This implies a new conceptualisation of democratic citizenship, with more attention being paid to valuing difference over assimilation. B. Papers presented at International Conferences All members of the research team have attended a variety of conferences and presented papers related to the project research. The following is a representative but by no means complete list of conference participation. Ian Bartle: Transnational economic and technological forces, institutions and policy change: the reform of telecommunications and electricity in Germany, France and Britain, workshop National regulatory reform in an internationalised environment, ECPR Joint Sessions, Grenoble, April 2001; The regulatory state in Britain and Germany, UACES conference The Europeanisation of National Economic Orders: Competition Law and Utility Regulation, LSE, June Richard Bellamy 'Mixed Citizen in a Mixed Polity' European Commission Dialogue Workshop, European Citizenship: Beyond Borders, Across Identities, Brussels, January 2001; Sovereignty, Democracy and Rights, Workshop on Sovereignty in Transition, Department of Law, EUI, Florence, September Dario Castiglione: Political and Civil Rights in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, ARENA conference on the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, June

11 Four Questions on the Virtues of Democracy in Global Context, Yale Conference on Ethics and Globalization, McGill University, March Dimitris Chryssochoou: In Defence of the Civic: The Search for a European res publica, ARENA seminars, University of Oslo, March 'Presenting "Theorizing European Integration"' at the Conference on Institutional Democratisation and the Future of Europe, Hellenic Political Science Association, Athens, November Anthea Connolly: Alien Suffrage in the European Union and direct elections to the European Parliament , 18th Annual Graduate Student Conference, organised by the Institute for the Study of Europe, University of Columbia, March The origins and development of European Union policy on EU citizens voting rights, UACES Annual and Research Conference, Bristol, September 2001,. Stephen Day: European Social Democrats and the right to vote, paper presented at a Conference organised by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Berlin, April 2002 Chris Hilson Discussant at EURCIT workshop, European Citizenship and Social and Political Integration of the European Union, University of Sassari, Sardinia, 8-10 June Regulating GM Products in the EU: Risk, Precaution and International Trade (joint paper with Duncan French), Agricultural Trade Law, Washington DC, May Nieves Pérez-Sólorzano Borrogán: The Organisation of Business Interests in Central and Eastern Europe for EU Representation, Euroconference The Challenge of Change in EU Business Associations, Brussels, 7-10 May Post-Communist Interest Politics in Central and Eastern Europe, The European Forum Series of Guest Lectures, SOC, UEA, February Jo Shaw: Sovereignty at the Boundaries of the Polity, Paper presented at the ECSA (European Union Studies Association) Canada Conference on the European Union, enlargement and reform, Toronto, May 30 June EU Electoral Rights in Constitutional Perspective, Conference on Multi-level Constitutionalism Transatlantic Perspectives: Comparative Federalism the US and the EU, Lisbon, June Carl Stychin: Invited special guest lecture on the politics of sexuality and citizenship in France, at the Cornell University Law School and Sorbonne Summer Institute of International and Comparative Law, Sorbonne, Paris. July 2001; A Stranger to its Laws : Sovereign Bodies, Global Sexualities, and Transnational Citizens, American Law and Society Association Conference, Miami, May Alex Warleigh: Policy Entrepreneurs and Policy Coalitions: Exploring NGO Influence and Legitimacy in EU Environment and Consumer Policies, Workshop Clientelism, Informal Networks and Political Entrepreneurship in the European Union, ECPR Joint Sessions, Copenhagen, April 2000, 11

12 The Euro-vision thing: On flexibility as a strategy for managing integration, UACES conference in Budapest, April Outputs A. Named Publications The Project's main publication is still in preparation. It consists of a collective volume (Making European Citizens) co-ordinated by the main applicants, for which we have already signed a contract with Palgrave, and which will be published as part of the 'One Europe or Several?' series. We are also preparing an extended report (Strategies and Practices of Civic Inclusion), aimed at a more policy-oriented readership, to be published in the Autumn. (For more information, see section 4B and in Appendix 1). We have therefore opted to include as named publications two collection of working papers which show both the work we have done and give an idea of some of the central arguments that will be developed in the Project volume. 1. Citizens Voice: Rights and Participation (Collected papers 1) The right to have rights : citizenship practice and the political constitution and the European Union Richard Bellamy Questioning inclusion and exclusion: EU electoral rights as migrants rights Stephen Day and Jo Shaw Towards a civic conception of the European polity Dimitris N. Chryssochoou Doing politics with words: the European Charter of human rights Dario Castiglione 2. Citizens Interests: Institutions and Civil Society (Collected papers 2) New Social Movements and Civic Inclusion: the role of legal opportunity Chris Hilson Beyond the functional-ideational gap: from network governance to network democracy in the European Union Alex Warleigh Utility regulation in democratic Europe: What role for citizens? Ian Bartle A stranger to its laws : sovereign bodies, global sexualities, and transnational citizens Carl F. Stychin Local strategies for civic inclusion in a European context: the Roma in the Czech Republic Mita Castle-Kanerova and Bill Jordan B. Other, Forthcoming and Related Publications A number of key publications related to the project have been published or are forthcoming. Titles are given below with further details in Appendix 1. The main Project volume is to be published by Plagrave in 2003: Making European Citizens. Civic inclusion in a transnational context, Editors: Richard Bellamy, Dario Castiglione and Jo Shaw 12

13 A second volume to be published by Palgrave in 2003 and focused on the national traditions of European citizenship summarises some of the results of both the EURCIT Network and this project: Lineages of European Citizenship, Editors: Richard Bellamy, Dario Castiglione and Emilio Santoro An extended version of this report, aimed at users will be published in the Autumn: Strategies and Practices of Civic Inclusion, RUSEL Paper - Civic Series, 7/2002 (forthcoming), Editors: Ian Bartle and Dario Castiglione The proceedings of the Social Capital conference were been published in 2002 in six RUSEL Papers - Civic Series: Social capital: Conceptual explorations, 1/2002. The production of trust and social values, 2/2002 Social capital in democratic politics, 3/2002 Social capital in the economy, 4/2002 Social capital, poverty, mobility and well-being, 5/2002 New studies on social capital, 6/2002 The proceedings are elaborated into two coherent volumes to be published in 2004: Social Capital as a research programme (vol. 1); Social Capital as a policy programme (vol. 2), Editors: Dario Castiglione, Jan van Deth and Guglielmo Wolleb We have also started a Project Working Papers Series (CIVIC) on the Project Website ( To date, we have published 9 papers from various members of the Project research group. Other Selected Publications (A full list of publications has been sent submitted to the REGARD Database) Richard Bellamy and Dario Castiglione, 'Normative theory and the European union: Legitimising the Euro-polity and its regime', in Lars Tragardh (ed.), After National Democracy: Rights, Law and Power in America and the New Europe, Hart Publisher, 2002 Richard Bellamy and Dario Castiglione, Due modelli di politica e diritto nella costituzione dell'europa, in P. Costa and D. Zolo, Lo Stato di Diritto, Storia, Teoria e Critica, Feltrinelli, 2002 Dario Castiglione and Catriona MacKinnon (editors), The Culture of Toleration in Diverse Societies, MUP, 2002 forthcoming Mita Castle-Kanerova and Bill Jordan Local Strategies for Civic Inclusion in a European Context: the Roma in the Czech Republic ESRC One Europe or Several, Working Paper, 34/01, August Dimitris N. Chryssochoou, Theorizing European Integration, London: Sage, 2001 Stephen Day and Jo Shaw, EU Electoral Rights and the Political Participation of Migrants in Host Polities, (2002) Vol. 8 International Journal of Population Geography, pp Chris Hilson, Greening Citizenship: Boundaries of Membership and the Environment (2001) 13 Journal of Environmental Law Carl Stychin, Civil Solidarity or Fragmented Identities?: The Politics of Sexuality and Citizenship in France, (2001) 10 Social & Legal Studies

14 Jo Shaw, Sovereignty at the Boundaries of the Polity, in N. Walker, Sovereignty in Transition, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2002/3 forthcoming. Alex Warleigh, The Hustle: Citizenship Practice, NGOs and Policy Coalitions in the European Union The Cases of Auto Oil, Drinking Water and Unit Pricing (Journal of European Public Policy, 7.2, 2000). Alex Warleigh, Europeanising Civil Society: NGOs as Agents of Political Socialisation (Journal of Common Market Studies 39.4, 2001). 5. Key Findings, Impact and Dissemination A. Key Findings This was an ambitious interdisciplinary project, mixing theoretical and empirical research. Its main hypotheses run against some of the current prejudices about European citizenship, which have tended to see this through the dominant languages of rights and identity. Part of our research undermines the passive view that these two languages tend to offer of citizenship practices and of the relationship between transnational governance and the emergence of new forms of citizenship. Moreover, it tends to offer a complex view of how the emergence of European civil society may contribute to the formation and transformation of common interests across national boundaries. Some of the key findings of our research comprise: That a mixed model of citizenship, combining both cosmopolitan globalist and civic nationalists instances, seems to offer a more promising normative model for the development of practices of citizenship at the European level. That despite the generally low level of take up of EU electoral rights and their low visibility in national political discourse, they have both a symbolic and a practical importance as one of the pointers for the legal and ideal definition of EU citizenship. That transnational interest group activity and the institutional opportunity structures for the representation of civil society interests offer some potential for bridging the gap between EU institutions and citizens. However, civic inclusion is still very limited and the opportunities for citizens participation need to be significantly enhanced in the legal, political and regulatory domains. That the interaction of emerging transnational forms of governance with established national processes can increase the powers and rights of marginal groups, creating new cross-boundaries identities. Transnational governance, however, tends to increase mobility and hence exit options, following the pattern already established at national level by the expansion of forms of 'private citizenship'. Although this tendency is congruent with the free-movement philosophy underlying the construction of the common market, it risks weakening the other traditional options of voice and loyalty, which need to be preserved in some form at a transnational level in order to promote the principles of citizenship as 'full and equal membership'. B. Impact and Dissemination The impact of our research will need to be judged at various levels. In view of the research's strong theoretical component, which challenges common views of citizenship and civic inclusion, the impact can only judged in the medium- long-term, 14

15 in so far as it may contribute to changes and refinements in the main research paradigms of transnational citizenship practices. There are, however, some positive signs already that some of the central concepts we have discussed in our research collectively and serially, such as constitutional pluralism, mixed citizenship, integration theories, the distinction polity-regime, and the various normative models of citizenship, have already been absorbed in the current theoretical debate on the EU's constitutional agenda and the legitimacy deficit. With regard to our case studies, some of the work done on EU electoral rights, legal and political opportunity structures for social movements and NGOs at the European level, transnational context for the development of same-sex legislation, role of transnational civil society in developing policy agendas, regulation strategies, and protection of minority groups, has opened up new fields of research and offered new ideas and approaches. Our dissemination strategy has operated at different levels. (i) Network participation An important aspect of the dissemination of the project research was via participation in the TSER Network on European Citizenship through regular exchanges with other researchers across Europe (from Germany, Italy, Austria, Portugal, and Norway in particular) and a number of high profile conferences opened to both academics and policy-makers. Another important moment was the EURESCO conference on Social Capital, which has resulted in the establishment of a very active international network of researchers working in the area. (ii) User meeting A key aspect of our dissemination strategy is aimed at users. We are currently preparing a meeting with users in the Autumn, where we intend to discuss the finding of our research as summarised in the forthcoming publication of our extended report: Strategies and Practices of Civic Inclusion. We have already contacted representatives from the following categories of organisations: (i) Think tanks such as the European Reform Centre; (ii) European institutions - the Economic and Social Committee; (iii) NGOs concerned with public interests and citizenship in the EU such as the European Citizens Advisory Service - (iv) NGOs concerned with migration issues; (v) European and national politicians. (iii) Web Development Dissemination has also been facilitated by the project s web site at The pages are include news, events, project working papers, a list of publications and conference papers by project members, links to other sites. A separate web site for the Social Capital conference and the ensuing international network has been set up: (iv) Participation in the OEOS Programme Finally, participation in the Programme's initiatives has given us another opportunity for exchanges within the academic community and the dissemination of the findings of our research. 15

16 6. Future Research Priorities At a more theoretical level, there are two main research priorities that follow from our research: Further investigation on the role that transnational social co-operation may play in fostering and enlarging networks of trust and solidarity already operating at national level; The study of the role that constitution-building has in helping establishing the complex mix of entitlements, opportunities for participation, and new types of allegiance capable of sustaining transnational forms of citizenship; At a more applied level, many of our case studies have set new research agendas of their own - To mention a few: the role of European Political Parties in the European Union; how compatible are the tasks of influencing policy and acting as conscious agents of citizenship socialisation? Are other actors likely to perform these functions more successfully than NGOs? cross-national empirical research on the role that legal opportunity plays as an independent variable in explaining protest activity; further research on how law reforms on civil rights (as in the case of same-sex relationships) are affected by the emergence of a transnational context. Participants in the Strategies Project: Main Applicants: Dario Castiglione, Jo Shaw, Richard Bellamy Other main researchers: Ian Bartle, Dimitris Chryssochoou, Stephen Day, Chris Hilson, Bill Jordan, Carl Stychin, Alex Warleigh. Additional researchers: Mita Castle-Kanerova, Anthea Connolly, Nieves Pérez-Sólorzano Borrogán. 16

17 APPENDIX 1: Main Forthcoming Publications PROJECT VOLUME This volume studies the forms of transnational citizenship that are developing in Europe and especially the EU. Earlier discussions of transnational governance and European citizenship have focussed on their relationship to an existing or future European identity and the granting of a common set of European rights. However, the question of whether European citizens are developing a capacity for self-rule has rarely been addressed. Rather, it has instead been assumed this capacity naturally follows from the creation of a common identity and/or a common legal status. This volume challenges this assumption. Active citizenship involves more than simply voting, it also entails the capacity to organize politically in order to promote certain ideals and interests. Achieving such mobilization at a transnational level involves different techniques and skills to those required at the local and national levels. Contributors to this volume explore how far citizens have acquired the requisite methods and qualities, and make proposals as to how they might be further developed. CONTENTS Making European Citizens: Civic inclusion in a transnational context Eds. Richard Bellamy, Dario Castiglione and Jo Shaw Introductory essay: Citizenship and transnational governance in Europe RB, DC and JS Part I: Citizens' voice: Rights and participation Civic and civil virtues Richard Bellamy and Dario Castiglione Towards alien suffrage? Anthea Connolly, Stephen Day and Jo Shaw The principle of affectedness Chris Hilson Civic competence Dimitris N. Chryssochoou Part II: Representing citizens' interests: An institutional view Transnational Parties Stephen Day and Jo Shaw NGOs and informal representation Alex Warleigh Regulation and market citizenship Ian Bartle Part III: Between Centre and Periphery: A civil society perspective Lesson learning and the 'civil society of interests' Nieves Pérez-Sólorzano Borrogán Local strategies for civic inclusion: Between exit and voice Mita Castle-Kanerova and Bill Jordan Local mobilisation and supranational standards Carl Stychin Conclusions: Strategies and Practices of civic inclusion RB, DC and JS 17