Loading…
States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System
Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non‐decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of common market studies 2018-01, Vol.56 (1), p.44-62 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943 |
container_end_page | 62 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 44 |
container_title | Journal of common market studies |
container_volume | 56 |
creator | Zaun, Natascha |
description | Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non‐decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic pressures to engage other Member States in responsibility‐sharing. Yet, governments of Member States with small application numbers (among whom several Eastern European governments were particularly vocal) had incentives to undercut responsibility‐sharing to avoid similar pressures. Having a better alternative to the potentially negotiated agreement, these governments successfully blocked the introduction of permanent refugee quotas. Besides explaining the absence of an effective response to one of the root causes of the asylum crisis (unequal strains) through asymmetrical interdependence, the article further develops Liberal Intergovernmentalist arguments and shows how national electorates influence positions taken by governments at the EU level when they are mobilized by right‐wing populist parties. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jcms.12663 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1980909337</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1980909337</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1OwzAQhS0EEqWw4QSW2CGl2HESx-xQVQqo_JauLdtxiksSh9gRZMcROCMnISWsmc2MNN97T3oAHGM0wf2cbVTpJjhMErIDRjhK0iBmSbwLRgiFOGBpmuyDA-c2CCEco3gEsqUXXjsoHJz3x6vWtW4cNBWcreCF64q2hA-2MN4odw5nH3UhTGWqNfQvGt7Z6vvzS2S29sZW0OZQwCedt2ut4WNrvYDLznldHoK9XBROH_3tMVhdzp6nV8Hifn49vVgEKmIRCXIRMpqpJJSS0jCWmDAmQ0kYJRJJJTKa0f6T4lggQSihSOWpTLBKI4JQ7zAGJ4Nv3di3VjvPN7Ztqj6SY5YihhjpZWNwOlCqsc41Oud1Y0rRdBwjvm2Rb1vkvy32MB7gd1Po7h-S30xvl4PmB1dodOU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1980909337</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Wiley</source><source>EBSCOhost Econlit with Full Text</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><creator>Zaun, Natascha</creator><creatorcontrib>Zaun, Natascha</creatorcontrib><description>Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non‐decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic pressures to engage other Member States in responsibility‐sharing. Yet, governments of Member States with small application numbers (among whom several Eastern European governments were particularly vocal) had incentives to undercut responsibility‐sharing to avoid similar pressures. Having a better alternative to the potentially negotiated agreement, these governments successfully blocked the introduction of permanent refugee quotas. Besides explaining the absence of an effective response to one of the root causes of the asylum crisis (unequal strains) through asymmetrical interdependence, the article further develops Liberal Intergovernmentalist arguments and shows how national electorates influence positions taken by governments at the EU level when they are mobilized by right‐wing populist parties.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9886</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-5965</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12663</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Incentives ; Interdependence ; Intergovernmentalism ; liberal Intergovernmentalism ; Political asylum ; Political parties ; Populism ; Quotas ; refugee crisis ; Refugees ; responsibility‐sharing ; Right wing politics ; Voters</subject><ispartof>Journal of common market studies, 2018-01, Vol.56 (1), p.44-62</ispartof><rights>2017 University Association for Contemporary European Studies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2018 University Association for Contemporary European Studies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33223</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zaun, Natascha</creatorcontrib><title>States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System</title><title>Journal of common market studies</title><description>Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non‐decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic pressures to engage other Member States in responsibility‐sharing. Yet, governments of Member States with small application numbers (among whom several Eastern European governments were particularly vocal) had incentives to undercut responsibility‐sharing to avoid similar pressures. Having a better alternative to the potentially negotiated agreement, these governments successfully blocked the introduction of permanent refugee quotas. Besides explaining the absence of an effective response to one of the root causes of the asylum crisis (unequal strains) through asymmetrical interdependence, the article further develops Liberal Intergovernmentalist arguments and shows how national electorates influence positions taken by governments at the EU level when they are mobilized by right‐wing populist parties.</description><subject>Incentives</subject><subject>Interdependence</subject><subject>Intergovernmentalism</subject><subject>liberal Intergovernmentalism</subject><subject>Political asylum</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Populism</subject><subject>Quotas</subject><subject>refugee crisis</subject><subject>Refugees</subject><subject>responsibility‐sharing</subject><subject>Right wing politics</subject><subject>Voters</subject><issn>0021-9886</issn><issn>1468-5965</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1OwzAQhS0EEqWw4QSW2CGl2HESx-xQVQqo_JauLdtxiksSh9gRZMcROCMnISWsmc2MNN97T3oAHGM0wf2cbVTpJjhMErIDRjhK0iBmSbwLRgiFOGBpmuyDA-c2CCEco3gEsqUXXjsoHJz3x6vWtW4cNBWcreCF64q2hA-2MN4odw5nH3UhTGWqNfQvGt7Z6vvzS2S29sZW0OZQwCedt2ut4WNrvYDLznldHoK9XBROH_3tMVhdzp6nV8Hifn49vVgEKmIRCXIRMpqpJJSS0jCWmDAmQ0kYJRJJJTKa0f6T4lggQSihSOWpTLBKI4JQ7zAGJ4Nv3di3VjvPN7Ztqj6SY5YihhjpZWNwOlCqsc41Oud1Y0rRdBwjvm2Rb1vkvy32MB7gd1Po7h-S30xvl4PmB1dodOU</recordid><startdate>201801</startdate><enddate>201801</enddate><creator>Zaun, Natascha</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201801</creationdate><title>States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System</title><author>Zaun, Natascha</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Incentives</topic><topic>Interdependence</topic><topic>Intergovernmentalism</topic><topic>liberal Intergovernmentalism</topic><topic>Political asylum</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Populism</topic><topic>Quotas</topic><topic>refugee crisis</topic><topic>Refugees</topic><topic>responsibility‐sharing</topic><topic>Right wing politics</topic><topic>Voters</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zaun, Natascha</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of common market studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zaun, Natascha</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System</atitle><jtitle>Journal of common market studies</jtitle><date>2018-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>44</spage><epage>62</epage><pages>44-62</pages><issn>0021-9886</issn><eissn>1468-5965</eissn><abstract>Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non‐decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic pressures to engage other Member States in responsibility‐sharing. Yet, governments of Member States with small application numbers (among whom several Eastern European governments were particularly vocal) had incentives to undercut responsibility‐sharing to avoid similar pressures. Having a better alternative to the potentially negotiated agreement, these governments successfully blocked the introduction of permanent refugee quotas. Besides explaining the absence of an effective response to one of the root causes of the asylum crisis (unequal strains) through asymmetrical interdependence, the article further develops Liberal Intergovernmentalist arguments and shows how national electorates influence positions taken by governments at the EU level when they are mobilized by right‐wing populist parties.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/jcms.12663</doi><tpages>19</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-9886 |
ispartof | Journal of common market studies, 2018-01, Vol.56 (1), p.44-62 |
issn | 0021-9886 1468-5965 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1980909337 |
source | EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Wiley; EBSCOhost Econlit with Full Text; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts |
subjects | Incentives Interdependence Intergovernmentalism liberal Intergovernmentalism Political asylum Political parties Populism Quotas refugee crisis Refugees responsibility‐sharing Right wing politics Voters |
title | States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐adoption of a Refugee Quota System |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T15%3A01%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=States%20as%20Gatekeepers%20in%20EU%20Asylum%20Politics:%20Explaining%20the%20Non%E2%80%90adoption%20of%20a%20Refugee%20Quota%20System&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20common%20market%20studies&rft.au=Zaun,%20Natascha&rft.date=2018-01&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=44&rft.epage=62&rft.pages=44-62&rft.issn=0021-9886&rft.eissn=1468-5965&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jcms.12663&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1980909337%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4943-fa297dc62bb7725b1399b2b3973b0bcad7d7b77815a0a37370cf8b61c84300943%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1980909337&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |