Siyasal Bütünleşme Kuramları Işığında AB Genişlemesi

Yıl 2011, , 67 - 83, 01.05.2011

S. Sezgin Mercan

https://doi.org/10.1501/Avraras_0000000160

Cited By: 3

Öz

Avrupa bütünleşmesi, beraberinde kuramsal çalışmaları ve tartışmaları getiren bir sürece karşılık gelmektedir. Avrupa bütünleşmesine geniş kapsamlı bir açıklama getirebilecek tek bir kuram yoktur. Her bir kuram bütünleşmenin sadece bir kısmını ya da dönemini açıklayabilmektedir. Çalışma, bu çıkarımı bütünleşme kuramlarının Avrupa Birliği’nin genişlemesini açıklama potansiyeline indirgemektedir. Sonuç olarak da bütünleşme kuramlarının genişlemeyi tam olarak açıklayamadığı öne sürülmektedir. Bu çalışmada, bütünleşme kuramlarının, Avrupa Birliği’nin genişleme dalgaları incelenirken atıfta bulunulabilecek referans noktaları olup olmadığı ve bu bağlam çerçevesindeki eksiklikleri tartışılmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupa Birliği, genişleme, bütünleşme kuramları, rasyonalizm, inşacılık

Kaynakça

• Emanuel ADLER, “Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol: 3, No: 3, 1997, s.319-363.
• Sinem Akgül AÇIKMEŞE, “Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri Işığında Avrupa Bütünleşmesi,” Uluslararası İlişkiler, Cilt 1, No 1, 2004, s.1-32.
• Jeffrey CHECKEL, “Social Construction and Integration,” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol: 6, No: 4, 1999, s.545-560.
• Thomas CHRISTIANSEN, Knud Erik JORGENSEN ve Antje WIENER, “The Social Construction of Europe,” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol: 6, No: 4, 1999, s.528-544.
• Dimitris N. CHRYSSOCHOOU, Theorizing European Integration, Sage Publications, London, 2001.
• Armağan Emre ÇAKIR, Avrupa Bütünleşmesinin Siyasal Kuramları, İstanbul, Beta Yayınevi, 2001.
• Mette EILSTRUP-SANGIOVANNI, Debates on European Integration, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
• Heather GRABBE ve Kirsty HUGHES, Enlarging the EU Eastwards, London, Pinter, 1998.
• Ernst B. HAAS, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces: 1950-1957, 2nd edition, Standford, CA, Standford University Press, 1968.
• Ernst B. HAAS, Beyond the Nation State: Functionalism and International Organization, Standford, CA, Standford University Press, 1964.
• Peter A. HALL ve Rosemary C. R. TAYLOR, “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms,” Political Studies, Vol: 44, No: 5, 1996, s.936-957.
• Simon HIX, “CP, IR and the EU A Rejoinder to Hurrell and Mennon,” West European Politics, Vol: 19, No: 4, 1996, s.802-804.
• Markus JACHTENFUCHS ve Beate KOHLER-KOCH, “Governance and Institutional Development,” içinde Antje Wiener ve Thomas Diez (ed.), European Integration Theory, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004.
• Joseph JUPILLE, James A. CAPORASO ve Jeffrey T. CHECKEL, “Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism and the Study of the European Union,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol: 36, No: 7, 2003, s.7-40.
• James G. MARCH ve Johan P. OLSEN, “The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life,” American Political Science Review, Vol: 78, No: 3, 1984, s.734-749.
• Lee MILES, “Theoretical Considerations”, Neill Nugent (ed.), European Union Enlargement, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
• David MITRANY, “A Working Peace System; An Argument for the Functional Development of International Organization,” içinde David Mitrany, The Functional Theory of Politics, London, Martin Robertson, 1975.
• Andrew MORAVCSIK, The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht, New York, Cornell University Press, 1998.
• Andrew MORAVCSIK, “Federal Ideas and Constitutional Realities in the Treaty of Amsterdam,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Annual Review, Cilt: 36, 1998, s.13-38.
• Andrew MORAVCSIK, “Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol: 31, No:4, 1993, s.473-524.
• John O’BRENNAN, “A Social Constructivist Perspective on Enlargement,” Levrat, N. and Willa, P. (der.), EU External Capability and Influence in International Relations, Instiut Europeene de l'Universite de Geneve and ECPR, Geneva, 2001.
• John PETERSON ve Elizabeth BOMBERG, Decision Making in the European Union, Basingstoke, UK, Macmillan, 1999.
• Mark A. POLLACK, “The New Institutionalisms and European Integration,” Antje Wiener, ve Thomas Diez, European Integration Theory, New York, Oxford University Pres, 2004.
• Ben ROSAMOND, Theories of European Integration, New York, Palgrave, 2000.
• Fritz W. SCHAPF, “Notes Toward a Theory of Multilevel Governing in Europe,” Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol: 24, No: 1, 2001, s.1-26.
• Philippe C. SCHMITTER, “Ernst B. Haas and The Legacy of Neofunctionalism,” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol: 12, No: 2, 2005, s.255-272.
• Frank SCHIMMELFENNIG, “The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union,” International Organization, Cilt 55, No 1, 2001, s. 47-80.
• Frank SCHIMMELFENNIG ve Ulrich SEDELMEIER, “Theorizing EU Enlargement: Research, Focus, Hypotheses, and The State of Research,” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol: 9, No: 4, 2001, s. 500-528.
• Helene SJURSEN, “Why Expand? The Question of Legitimacy and Justification in the EU’s Enlargement Policy,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol: 40, No: 3, 2002, s. 491-513.
• Altiero SPINELLI, For a Free and United Europe. A Draft Manifesto, (Edizioni del Movimento Italiano per la Federazione Europe.
• Antje WIENER ve Thomas DIEZ, European Integration Theory, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004.
• Daniel WINCOTT, “Institutional Interaction and European Integration: Towards and Everyday Critique of Liberal Intergovernmentalism,” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol: 33, No: 4, 1995, s. 597-609.