Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Theorising Institutional Change: The Impact of the European Integration Process on the Development of Space Activities in Europe

Part of the book series: Springer Theses ((Springer Theses))

  • 189 Accesses

Abstract

While European Space collaboration was initially developed outside the competences of the European Union (EU) with space programmes being carried out almost exclusively under the framework of European Space Agency (ESA) and national agencies, the EU has gained “shared competences” (Art. 2, TFEU) in space policy following the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. Currently the EU and ESA work together under a Framework Agreement. In 2016, the EU Commission has published a Communication entitled “European Space Policy” (ESP). Even though ESA’s Member States have agreed to keep ESA as an intergovernmental organisation during the ESA Ministerial Council of 2014, the discussion about ESA becoming part of the EU framework continues. The EU’s ambitions for leadership in European space policy raise question concerning the future of ESA. The study of institutions lies at the heart of political sciences. Strikingly the theoretic framework qualifying institutional change and making it comparable leaves room for more concrete and testable dimensions of institutional change. This dissertation thus seeks to advance the debate on institutional change by proposing a more structured approach to institutional change, consisting of stages of institutional development and facets of institutional change. Thereby the evolving institutional arrangements between EU and ESA are considered a case study. Special attention is paid to the impact of the European integration process on existing institutional actors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    ESA embraces non-EU States such as Switzerland and Norway and extra-European States such as Canada.

  2. 2.

    The best overview of the defining features, as well as the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of each can be found in Hall and Taylor (1996a, pp. 936–57) and Rhodes et al. (2006, p. xiii).

  3. 3.

    For more information on the role of the Council of Ministers cf. Christiansen (2002).

  4. 4.

    Accordingly, critical events may mark the appropriate time frames for analysis (e.g. electoral, budget, legislative or other cycles).

  5. 5.

    For more information on “critical junctures” refer to the following literature cf. Florensa (2004, p. 18), Christiansen and Vanhoonacker (2008), Campbell (2004, p. 26), Hall and Taylor (1996a, p. 942), Krasner (1984, p. 235) in Ikenberry (1994, p. 9), Horak (2007, p. 21), March and Olsen (2006, p. 12).

  6. 6.

    For example changes in the markets, technological innovations or legislative changes.

References

  • Aliberti, M., & Krasner, S. D. (2016). Governance in space. In C. Al-Ekabi, B. Baranes, P. Hulsroj, & A. Lahcen (Eds.), Yearbook on space policy 2014 (pp. 143–166). Vienna: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Aminzade, R. (1992). Historical sociology and time. Sociological Methods & Research, 20, 456–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, S. S., Eliassen, K. A., & Sitter, N. (2001). Formal processes: EU institutions and actors. In S. S. Andersen & K. A. Eliassen (Eds.), Making policy in Europe (pp. 20–43). London: SAGE Publisher.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bailes, A. J. K. (2011). Death of an institution. The end for western European union, a future for European defence? Egmont Paper 46. Retrieved from http://aei.pitt.edu/32322/1/ep46.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2017.

  • Battrick, B. (Ed.). (2004). The European space sector in a global context—ESA’s annual analysis (BR-222). Retrieved from http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br222/br222.pdf. Accessed March 19, 2017.

  • Bendor, J., Glazer, A., & Hammond, T. H. (2000). Theories of delegation in political science. Retrieved from https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/theories-delegation-political-science. Accessed January 18, 2012.

  • Boin, A. (2008). Mapping trends in the study of political institutions. International Studies Review, 10, 87–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caporaso, J. (1998). Regional integration theory: Understanding our past and anticipating our future. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T. (2002). Out of the shadows: The general secretariat of the council of ministers. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 8(4), 80–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T., & Vanhoonacker, S. (2008). At a critical juncture? Change and continuity in the institutional development of the council secretariat. West European Politics, 31(4), 751–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conner, A. (2010). Introduction: International institutions and effectiveness—Achieving cooperation. In J. L. Goldstein & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International institutions—Vol. II consequences: When, where and why international institutions are effective (pp. iiix–x). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2006). Council joint action amending joint action 2001/554/CFSP on the establishment of a European union institute for security studies (2006/1002/CFSP). Brussels: European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davara, F. (2000). The future of the WEU Torrejon Centre. Air & Space Europe, 2(4), 24–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 3–23). Cambridge: Ballinger Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doleys, T. (2000). Member states and the European commission: Theoretical insights from the new economics of organization. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(4), 532–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudley, G., & Richardson, J. (1999). Competing advocacy coalitions and the process of “frame reflection”: A longitudinal analysis of EU steel policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(2), 225–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelmann, R., Milde, H., & Weimerskirch, P. (1998). Agency-Beziehungen und Kontrakt-Design: Problem, Lösung, Beispiel. Kredit und Kapital, 1, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egeberg, M. (2004). An organisational approach to European integration: Outline of a complementary perspective. European Journal of Political Research, 43, 199–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESA. (2012). Political declaration towards the European space agency that best serves Europe (ESA/C-M/CCXXXIV/Res.4 (final)). Naples: ESA.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012). Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European space agency (COM (2012) 671 final). Brussels: European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florensa, M. C. (2004). Institutional stability and change. A logic sequence for studying institutional dynamics. Paper presented at the Tenth Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP). Oaxaca, Mexico. Retrieved from https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/1823/CostejaFlorensa_Institutional_040525_Paper220.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed March 13, 2017.

  • Gaubert, A. (2006). Is there really any duplication in Europe’s space activities? Space Policy, 22(1), 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J. L. & Steinberg, R. H. (2010). Introduction. In J. L. Goldstein, & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International Institutions, Vol. I: Causes (pp. xvii–xxxi). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greif, A., & Laitin, D. D. (1994). A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 633–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996a). Political science and the three new institutionalisms (pp. 936–957). XLIV: Political Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996b). Political science and the three new institutionalism. Retrieved from http://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/dp96-6.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2017.

  • Hartlapp, M., Metz, J., & Rauh, C. (2013). Linking agenda setting to coordination structures: Bureaucratic politics inside the European commission. Journals of European Integration, 35(4), 425–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Héritier, A. (2007). Explaining institutional change in Europe. New York: OUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S. (2005). The political system of the European union. Houndmills: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobe, S., Heinrich, O., Kerner, I., & Froehlich, A. (2009). Entwicklung der Europäischen Weltraumagentur als „implementing agency“ der Europäischen Union: Rechtsrahmen und Anpassungserfordernisse. Kölner Schriften zum Internationalen und Europäischen Recht. Band 17. Berlin: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobe, S., Kunzmann, K., & Reuter, T. (2006). Forschungsbericht ESA—EU: Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen einer zukünftigen kohärenten Struktur der europäischen Raumfahrt. Kölner Schriften zum Internationalen und Europäischen Recht Bd. 13. Berlin: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horak, M. (2007). Governing the post-communist city: Institutions and democratic development in Prague. Toronto: University of Toronto.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2009a). The European space agency and the European union: The next step on the road to the stars. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 5(3), 405–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2009b). ESA + EU: Ideology or pragmatic task sharing? Space Policy, 25, 206–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2016a). The European space agency and the European union. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 53–65). London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2016b). Conclusion: To boldly go where no one has gone before. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy (pp. 253–263). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2016c). Foreword. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. xx–xxiii). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörber, T. (2016d). Introduction—Towards a European space policy. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 1–12). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, T. (1991). Charakteristika und Bestimmungsfaktoren der europäischen Raumfahrtpolitik. Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Sozialwissenschaft an der Fakultät für Sozial- und Verhaltenswissenschaften der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, G. J. (1994). History’s heavy hand: Institutions and the politics of the state. Paper prepared for a conference on “New Perspectives on Institutions”, University of Maryland. Retrieved from: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/HistorysHeavyHand_0.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2017.

  • Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Sabatier, P. A. (1993). The study of public policy processes. In H. C. Jenkins-Smith & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Policy change and learning. An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 1–9). Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jupille, J. (2004). Procedural politics: Issues, influence, and institutional choice in the European union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, R. (2004). Paradise and power. America and Europe in the new world order. London: Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassim, H., Connolly, S., Dehousse, D., Rozenberg, O., & Bendjaballah, S. (2016). Managing the house: The presidency, agenda control and policy activism in the European commission. Journal of European Public Policy, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2016.1154590, pp. 1–22.

  • Keohane, R., & Nye, J. (2001). Power and interdependence. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Köpping Anthanasopoulos, H. (2016). Europe’s wilderness—The council’s frames on space policy. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 82–97). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(4) (Autumn 2001), 761–799.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. (1988). Sovereignty—An institutional perspective”. Comparative Political Studies, 21(1), 66–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, M. A., Young, O. R., & Zürn, M. (1995). The study of international regimes. European Journal of International Relations, 1, 267–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madariaga, A. (2011). Patterns of institutional change and external competitiveness in neoliberal and dependent political economies. The cases of Chile and Estonia. Budapest: Central European University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madders, K. (1997). A new force at a new frontier: Europe’s development in the space field in the light of its main actors, policies, law and activities from its beginning up to the present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madders, K., & Thiebaut, W. M. (1992). Two Europe in one space: The evolution of relations between the European space agency and the European community in space affairs. Journal of Space Law, 20(2), 117–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2006). Elaborating the ‘New Institutionalism’. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 3–20). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchisio, S. (2006). Proposals for an institutional realignment of the European space sector. In S. Hobe, B. Schmidt-Tedd, & K.-U. Schrogl (Eds.), Project 2001 plus—global and European challenges for air and space law (pp. 193–204). Köln: Heymanns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meunier, S., & McNamara, K. R. (2007). Making history: European integration and institutional change at fifty. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. P. (1997). Institutional design in democratic context. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 5(3), 203–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, J., & Shackleton, M. (2006). The EU’s Institutions: An overview. In J. Peterson & M. Shackleton (Eds.), The institutions of the European union (pp. 1–16). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (1998). The path to European integration: A historical institutionalist perspective. In W. Sandholtz & A. Stone Sweet (Eds.), European integration and supranational governance (pp. 27–58). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M. A. (1996). The new institutionalism and EC governance: The promise and limits of institutional analysis. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 9(4), 429–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M. A. (1997a). Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European community. International Organization, 51(1), 99–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M. A. (1997b). The Commission as an agent. In N. Nugent (Ed.), At the heart of the union: Studies of the European commission (pp. 111–130). Houndmills: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathgeber, W., & Remuss, N. (2009). Space security—A formative role and principled identity for Europe (ESPI Report 16). Wien: ESPI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remuss, N. (2011). Meeting Europe’s external and internal security through space applications—Security as an element for European identity. In B. Baranes & K.-U. Schrogl (Eds.), European identity through space (pp. 132–144). Vienna: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuter, T. (2007). Die ESA als Raumfahrtagentur der Europäischen Union: Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für eine institutionelle Neuausrichtung der europäischen Raumfahrt. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006). Old institutionalism. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 90–108). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. (1996). Actor-based models of national and EU policy making. In H. Kassim & A. Menon (Eds.), The European union and national industrial policy (pp. 26–51). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, V., & Zangl, B. (2006). International organization: Polity, politics and policies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roland, G. (2004). Understanding institutional change: Fast-moving and slow-moving institutions. Studies in Comparative International Development, 38(4), 109–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosamond, B. (2000). Theories of European integration. Houndmills: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rüttgers, J. (1989). Europas Wege in den Weltraum: Programme—Proteste—Prognosen. Frankfurt am Main: Umschau Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrogl, K. (1993). Die Europäische Gemeinschaft als Magnet—Ihre Anziehungskraft auf die europäischen Fachorganisationen ESA und CEPT. Zeitschrift für Internationale Politik, 18, 525–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. W. (2008). Institutions and organizations—ideas and interests. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, M. (2007). The international politics of space. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shepsle, K. A. (1989). Institutional equilibrium and equilibrium institutions. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1(2), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigalas, E. (2016). Europe in space—The European parliament’s justification Arsenal. In T. Hörber & P. Stephenson (Eds.), European space policy (pp. 66–81). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmo, S., Thelen, K., & Longstreth, F. (1992). Structuring politics: Historical institutionalism in comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Beyond continuity. Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki, K. (2003). Policy logics and institutions of European space collaboration. Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandholtz, W. & Stone Sweet, A. (1998). European Integration and Supranational Governance. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallberg, J. (2000). The anatomy of autonomy: An institutional account of variation in supranational influence. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 843–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallberg, J. (2003). European governance and supranational institutions: Making states comply. London and New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Kries, W. (2003). Which future for Europe’s space agencies? Space Policy, 19, 157–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, H. (2000). The policy process. In H. Wallace & W. Wallace (Eds.), Policy-making in the European union (pp. 39–64). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (2001). Driving with the rearview mirror: On the rational science of institutional design. International Organization, 55(4), 1019–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, O. R. (2010). Regime dynamics: The rise and fall of international regimes. In J. L. Goldstein & R. H. Steinberg (Eds.), International institutions—Vol. II consequences: When, where and why international institutions are effective (Vol. II, pp. 163–183). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Berlin, Germany

    Dr. Nina-Louisa Remuss

Authors
  1. Dr. Nina-Louisa Remuss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Remuss, NL. (2018). Introduction. In: Theorising Institutional Change: The Impact of the European Integration Process on the Development of Space Activities in Europe. Springer Theses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95978-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95978-8_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95977-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95978-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation