Supranational institutions have played a seminal role in politics since the end of the second world war. This is true at the global level both in the economic (world bank, IMF, GATT, WTO) and the non economic field (UNO and its derivatives, NATO, etc…) but also at the regional level with its most important manifestation which is probably the EU.

During the last 50 years supranational institutions have been the mecca of many quests like peace, economic development and prosperity; that place where national leaders seek to find the holy grail that they are not able to find in their internal context. This suggests that the rationale for supranational governance –the intervention of the international sphere in national context- is that it enhances decision and policy making in a way that can not be achieved in the national context. In other words; supranational governance is legitimate if, and only if, it leads to an outcome that is superior to that which would be achieved in a strictly national context.

The objective of this article is to analyse which are the forces which make possible to enhance the efficiency of decisions and thus to induce under which conditions supranational governance would be efficient. While the conclusions and the conceptual framework might be valid for most of the manifestation of supranational governance, this article has been written wearing in mind a very specific context; that of structural reform in the EU and thus its conclusions might be somehow biased towards this context.

In addition, this blog and the community where it is hosted share some universalistic concern with “world federalism”; the kantian ideal que universal peace and prosperity will only be achieved if there is some kind of federation between all member states governed by a supranational organization. The object of this article is thus also to illuminate what are the potential benefits of this project, what are its risks, under what conditions it would be efficient and above all, when would it, realistically, take place.

While the article find its sources in many litteratures (especially, european governance and integration theory and more broadly political economy), I try to keep the friendly way of explaining in order to let it accessible. As a result, I will try to avoid quotes and academic references (however, they will be provided if asked) and to illustrate theories and concepts-which are, I believe, unavoidable when we are talking about such a large framework- with historical and practical examples.

The process of policy making can be split in two different phases and the efficiency of the process might be checked in both. The first one is that of decision making; to what extent the international context in which decisions are taken lead to more efficient decision making than national states. The second part is that of implementation; it is not sufficient that international recommendations are the correct ones, they must also be feasible from the political-economic point of view i.e. its implementation should be possible and should not outweigh the benefit of added efficiency.

The article will be thus composed of many entries of which this one is the first. The others will be subsquently published in this same blog. Finally, I will beg pardon in advance for my terrible english grammar.

Tags: European Union, federalism, governance, international organizations, ONU, organizaciones internacionales, structural reform, supranacional, supranational, UN, Union Europea

This entry was posted on Sábado, Mayo 24th, 2008 at 18:33 and is filed under English Version, Metropóli, Nación Europea, Supranational governance, ciencia recreativa, globalización, internacional, provincial . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.