Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
EuropeanisationintheEUNewMemberStates.AspectsandResearchAgendas
19
Thelogicofappropriatenessisaperspectiveonhumanaction.Toactappropriatelyisto
proceedaccordingtotheinstitutionalisedpracticesofacollectivityandmutualunder-
standingsofwhatistrue,reasonable,natural,right,andgood.Actorsseektofulfilthe
obligationsanddutiesencapsulatedinarole,anidentity,andamembershipinapolitical
community.Rulesarefollowedbecausetheyareperceivedtobeadequateforthetaskat
handandtohavenormativevalidity(2008:193).
ThereforeconstructivistsarguethatCEEcountriesbehavedappropriatelybe-
causetheywantedtobeacceptedwithinthecommunityofWesterncountries,where
theyfelttheybelonged.Basedontheargumentbuiltrelyingonevidencefromthe
economicspherebyKalypsoNikolaidis(1993),ElisabethJohansson-Nougésclaims
that:
(…)inordertobeacceptedasworthy"Europeans”andshowtheirEuropeancredentials
toopt-intotheexclusivecluboftheEU,themajorityoftheapplicantstatesadaptedtheir
politicalpreferencescloselytotheEuropeanUnion’slongbeforetheywererecognisedas
officialEUcandidates(2004:81).
ThealternativetwomodelsproposedbySchimmelfennigandSedelmeier(2005)
focuspreciselyonamoreconstructivistreadingofthechanges.Intheperspective
ofthesociallearningmodeltheEUisperceivedasacommunityofvalueswhich
thecandidatecountrieswanttojoinandwanttoadaptthenormsandrulesbecause
theyareperceivedasgood.Asmediatingfactorsofthisapproachtheauthorsstress
threeelements:legitimacy,identityandresonance(SchimmelfennigandSedelmeier
2005:18).Thelegitimacyoftherulesreliesontheirclarityandperceptionasgoodor
properandthereforeaccepted.Theidentityiseasiertoexplain,andstressesthatthe
rulesperceivedasownorleadingagrouptobeacceptedwheretheywanttobelong
areeasiertoaccept.Finallyresonanceisconnectedwiththelocalpopularsubjects
andrecognitionoftherules.
Thesecondmodeloflesson-drawingreliesontheobservationthatasignificant
partofthechangesinthecandidatecountrieshappenedwithoutcompulsoryorcoer-
civemeans.Onthecontrary,itwasactuallythevoluntarydecisionofstatesandelites
tomimicmodelsfromwheretheythoughtitwasgoodtotakethem.Inthismodelthe
authorsalsodevelopedasetoffactors.Thefirstoneisdissatisfactioninthelevelof
functioningofdomesticinstitutionsandasaresultthesearchfornewsolutions.The
secondfactorisconnectedwiththeexistenceofEU-centredepistemiccommunities
–thegroups,asPeterHaaswouldstress,thatareresponsiblefordeliveringsolutions
whencognitiveuncertaintyoccurs(1992)andinthisparticularcontextbeingalready
involvedorinprofessionaltermslinkedwiththeEUcircles.Thethirdfactoristhat
therulesaretransferable,meaningthattheycanbereintroducedinanewcontext.
Thisthirdmodelinawayreconcilesbothpositionsofrationalandconstructiveper-
spective.
ThethreepresentedmodelsreflectthediscourseontheEuropeanisationwithin
theEUandespeciallytheinterconnectionbetweenthedomesticandsupranational
levelininducingthechanges.Thisbecameevenmorevisibleinthestudiesonthe
changesintheCEEregionafterenlargement(RiedelandPacześniak2010;Milcza-