Informelle Governance zur inneren Sicherheit in Europa – auf dem Weg zu einer systematischeren Bewertung

Chapter
Part of the Studien zur Inneren Sicherheit book series (SZIS)

Zusammenfassung

Die europäische Zusammenarbeit zur inneren Sicherheit und die Entwicklung des EU-Raums der Freiheit, Sicherheit und des Rechts (RFSR) wird immer komplexer und politisch umstrittener. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich jedoch nicht den aktuellsten Kontroversen, z. B. zur Migrationspolitik, sondern greift vielmehr eine langfristige Debatte zur Transparenz, Legitimität und Struktur der europäischen Sicherheitskooperation auf. Ohne eine Klärung des schillernden Begriffs der inneren Sicherheit hier vornehmen zu können, kann man gemäß der EU-Strategie zur Inneren Sicherheit (European Commission 2010) dies derzeit mit den Themenfeldern der Bekämpfung von organisierter Kriminalität, des internationalen Terrorismus, der Grenzsicherheit, und zunehmend auch des Katastrophenschutzes und der Cybersicherheit umreißen.

Literatur

  1. Alain, Marc. 2001. „’The trapeze artists and the ground crew‘ police cooperation and intelligence exchange mechanisms in Europe and North America: A comparative empirical study.“ Policing and Society 11 (1):1–27.Google Scholar
  2. Bayer, Michael D. 2010. The Blue Planet: Informal International Police Networks and National Intelligence: Informal International Police Networks and National Intelligence. Washington: National Defense Intelligence College.Google Scholar
  3. Bendel, Petra, Andreas Ette, and Roderick Parkes, eds. 2011. The Europeanization of Control. Venues and Outcomes of EU Justice and Home Affairs Cooperation. Edited by Thomas Faist, Politik, Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft in einer globalisierten Welt. Münster: Lit Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Bevir, Mark, 2014. „The Rise of Security Governance.“ In Interpreting Global Security, Mark Bevir, Oliver Daddow und Ian Hall (Hrg). London: Routledge, S. 17–34.Google Scholar
  5. Bigo, Didier. 1992. L'Europe des polices et de la sécurité intérieure. Paris: Espace international.Google Scholar
  6. Bigo, Didier. 2006. „Globalized (in)Security: the Field and the Ban-opticon.“ In Illiberal practices of liberal regimes: the (in)security games, Didier Bigo and Anastassia Tsoukala (Hrsg). Paris: l'Harmattan/Cultures & Conflits, S. 5 50.Google Scholar
  7. Bigo, Didier. 2013. „The transnational field of computerised exchange of information in police matters and its European guilds.“ In Transnational Power Elites: The New Professionals of Governance, Law and Security, Niilo Kauppi and Mikael Rask Madsen (Hrsg). London: Routledge, S. 155–182.Google Scholar
  8. Bigo, Didier, Julien Jeandesboz, Mederic Martin-Maze, and Francesco Ragazzi. 2014. Review of Security Measures in the 7th Research Framework Programme. FP7 2007–2013. edited by European Parliament LIBE Committee. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/509979/IPOL-LIBE_ET(2014)509979_EN.pdf.
  9. Block, Ludo. 2010. „Bilateral Police Liaison Officers: Practices and European Policy.“ Journal of Contemporary European Research 6 (2):194–210.Google Scholar
  10. Boswell, Christina. 2009. The Political Uses of Expert Knowledge. Immigration Policy and Social Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bourne, Mike, Heather Johnson, and Debbie Lisle. 2015. „Laboratizing the border: The production, translation and anticipation of security technologies.“ Security Dialogue 46 (4):307–325.Google Scholar
  12. Börzel, T. (2010). „European governance: negotiation and competition in the shadow of hierarchy.“ JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 48 (2):191–219. Google Scholar
  13. Bröchler, Stephan, and Timo Grunden, eds. 2014. Informelle Politik: Eine Herausforderung für die Regierungsforschung. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Bunyan, Tony. 1993. „Trevi, Europol and the European state.“ In Statewatching the new Europe. A handbook on the European state. Tony Bunyan (Hrsg.). Nottingham: Russell Press, S. 15–36.Google Scholar
  15. Bures, Oldrich. 2012. „Informal counterterrorism arrangements in Europe: Beauty by variety or duplicity by abundance?“ Cooperation and Conflict 47 (4):495–518.Google Scholar
  16. Chalmers, Adam William. 2014. „Getting a seat at the table: Capital, capture and expert groups in the european union.“ West European Politics 37 (5):976–992.Google Scholar
  17. Christiansen, Thomas, and Christine Neuhold. 2013. „Informal Politics in the EU.“ JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 51 (6):1196–1206.Google Scholar
  18. Council of the European Union. 2013. Relationship between the LEWP and the eighteen (18) expert groups and networks related to the LEWP – suggestions for improving the planning, monitoring and reportin. 9407/1/13 REV 1.Google Scholar
  19. Council of the European Union. 2014. Foreign Fighters and returnees: Implementation of the measures decided by the JHA Council on 9–10 October 2014. 16002/14 LIMITE ENFOPOL 409.Google Scholar
  20. Council of the European Union. 2015. Overview of expert groups and networks related to the LEWP and the provisional planning of their meetings. 7706/1/15 REV 1 LIMITE ENFOPOL 77.Google Scholar
  21. Cross, Mai’a K Davis. 2013. „Rethinking epistemic communities twenty years later.“ Review of International Studies 39 (01):137–160.Google Scholar
  22. Cross, Mai’a K. Davis. 2011. Security Integration in Europe: How Knowledge-based Networks Are Transforming the European Union. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  23. Deflem, Mathieu. 2002. Policing world society: historical foundations of international police cooperation: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dingwerth, Klaus and Philipp Pattberg. 2006. „Was ist global governance?“ Leviathan 34(3): 377–399.Google Scholar
  25. Dupont, Benoit. 2014. „Private security regimes: Conceptualizing the forces that shape the private delivery of security.“ Theoretical criminology 18 (3):263–281.Google Scholar
  26. Engelmann, Claudia. 2014. „Informelles Regieren in der europäischen Asylpolitik.“ Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 8 (1):169–192.Google Scholar
  27. Eriksen, Erik Oddvar, John Erik Fossum, and Agustín Menéndez. 2004. Developing a constitution for Europe: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Ette, Andreas, Roderick Parkes, and Petra Bendel. 2011. The diversity of European Justice and Home Affairs cooperation: A model-testing exercise on its development and outcomes. Berlin: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Europäische Commission. 2010. The EU Internal Security Strategy in Action. COM(2010) 673 final.Google Scholar
  30. European Commission. 2015. The European Agenda on Security. COM(2015) 185 final.Google Scholar
  31. Fabbrini, Sergio. 2013. „Intergovernmentalism and Its Limits Assessing the European Union’s Answer to the Euro Crisis.“ Comparative Political Studies 46 (9):1003–1029.Google Scholar
  32. Frevel, Bernhard, and Verena Schulze. 2012. „Kooperative Sicherheitspolitik–Safety und Security Governance in Zeiten sich wandelnder Sicherheitskultur.“ In Sicherheitskultur: Soziale und politische Praktiken der Gefahrenabwehr, Christopher Daase, Philipp Offermann and Valentin Rauer (Hrg). Frankfurt: Campus, S. 205–227.Google Scholar
  33. Gaisbauer, Helmut P. 2013. „Evolving patterns of internal security cooperation: lessons from the Schengen and Prüm laboratories.“ European security 22 (2):185–201.Google Scholar
  34. Gerspacher, Nadia. 2008. „The history of international police cooperation: a 150-year evolution in trends and approaches.“ Global crime 9 (1–2):169–184.Google Scholar
  35. Gornitzka, Åse, and Ulf Sverdrup. 2008. „Who consults? The configuration of expert groups in the European Union.“ West European Politics 31 (4):725–750.Google Scholar
  36. Grande, Edgar. 2012. „Governance Forschung in der Governance-Falle? Eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme.“ Politische Vierteljahresschrift 53(4): 565–592.Google Scholar
  37. Guiraudon, Virginie. 2000. „European Integration and Migration Policy: Vertical Policy-making as Venue Shopping.“ JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 38 (2):251–271.Google Scholar
  38. Hayes, Ben, Max Rowlands, and Nick Buxton. 2009. Neoconopticon: The EU security-industrial complex: Transnational institute.Google Scholar
  39. Héritier, Adrienne. 1999. Policy-making and diversity in Europe : escaping deadlock, Theories of institutional design. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Herschinger, Eva, Markus Jachtenfuchs, and Christiane Kraft-Kasack. 2013. „Transgouvernementalisierung und die ausbleibende gesellschaftliche Politisierung der inneren Sicherheit.“ In Die Politisierung der Weltpolitik. Umkämpfte internationale Institutionen, Michael Zürn and Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt (Hrg.) Berlin: Suhrkamp, S. 190–212.Google Scholar
  41. Hillebrand, Claudia. 2012. Counter-terrorism networks in the European Union : maintaining democratic legitimacy after 9/11. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Innenministerium Baden-Württemberg. 2014. Bericht über die Beteiligung der Länder in polizeilichen Angelegenheiten der Europäischen Union im Jahr 2013. Az.: 3–0123.3-A36A.Google Scholar
  43. Jachtenfuchs, Markus. 2005. „The monopoly of legitimate force: denationalization, or business as usual.“ European Review 13 (supplement):37–52.Google Scholar
  44. Johansson, Karl Magnus, and Jonas Tallberg. 2010. „Explaining Chief Executive Empowerment: EU Summitry and Domestic Institutional Change.“ West European Politics 33 (2):208–236.Google Scholar
  45. Kaunert, Christian, and Sarah Léonard. 2012. „The development of the EU asylum policy: venue-shopping in perspective.“ Journal of European Public Policy 19 (9):1396–1413.Google Scholar
  46. Kaunert, Christian, John D Occhipinti, and Sarah Léonard. 2014. „Introduction: supranational governance in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice after the Stockholm Programme.“ Cambridge Review of International Affairs 27 (1):39–47.Google Scholar
  47. Kersbergen, Kees van and Frans van Waarden. 2004. “‚Governance’as a bridge between disciplines: Cross‐disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy.“ European Journal of Political Research 43(2): 143–171.Google Scholar
  48. Kleine, Mareike. 2014. „Informal governance in the European Union.“ Journal of European Public Policy.Google Scholar
  49. Mayntz, Renate. 2009. Über Governance. Institutionen und Prozesse politischer Regelung. Frankfurt, Campus.Google Scholar
  50. Lavenex, Sandra. 2006. „Shifting up and out: The foreign policy of European immigration control.“ West European Politics 29 (2):329–350.Google Scholar
  51. Lavenex, Sandra. 2007. „Mutual recognition and the monopoly of force: limits of the single market analogy.“ Journal of European Public Policy 14 (5):762–779.Google Scholar
  52. Liberatore, Angela. 2007. „Balancing security and democracy, and the role of expertise: Biometrics politics in the European Union.“ European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 13 (1–2):109–137.Google Scholar
  53. Linke, Fraktion Die. 2014a. Kooperationen und Projekte europäischer Polizeien im Jahr 2014. Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
  54. Linke, Fraktion Die. 2014b. Kooperationen und Projekte europäischer Polizeien im zweiten Halbjahr 2013. Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
  55. Linke, Fraktion Die. 2014c. Maßnahmen der Bundesregierung und der Europäischen Union gegen „ausländische Kämpfer“ und „Rückkehrer“. Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
  56. Linke, Fraktion Die. 2014d. Treffen der informellen Struktur der „Gruppe der Sechs + 1“ in Barcelona und dort behandelte Inhalte (Nachfrage zur Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage auf Bundestagsdrucksache 18/2175). Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
  57. List, Martin, and Bernhard Zangl. 2003. „Verrechtlichung internationaler Politik.“ Die neuen Internationalen Beziehungen. Forschungsstand und Perspektiven in Deutschland, Baden-Baden:361–399.Google Scholar
  58. Lords, House of. 2006. Behind Closed Doors: the meeting of the G6 Interior Ministers at Heiligendamm Report with Evidence. edited by European Union Committee: Authority of the House of Lords.Google Scholar
  59. Maggetti, Martino, and Fabrizio Gilardi. 2011. „The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards.“ Journal of European Public Policy 18 (6):830–847.Google Scholar
  60. Mak, Jeannette, and Jan van Tatenhove. 2006. „Conclusions: Towards a more informal EU?“ Perspectives on European Politics and Society 7 (1):124–131.Google Scholar
  61. Malmström, Cecilia. 2013. „EU Versus Extremism: Europe must respond to the threat of radicalisation, before it turns even more violent.“ Journal Exit-Deutschland. Zeitschrift für Deradikalisierung und demokratische Kultur 2:1–3.Google Scholar
  62. Mégie, Antoine. 2014. „The origin of EU authority in criminal matters: a sociology of legal experts in European policy-making.“ Journal of European Public Policy 21 (2):230–247.Google Scholar
  63. Menjívar, Cecilia. 2014. „Immigration Law Beyond Borders: Externalizing and Internalizing Border Controls in an Era of Securitization.“ Annual Review of Law and Social Science 10:353–369.Google Scholar
  64. Metz, Julia. 2013. „Expert groups in the European Union: A sui generis phenomenon?“ Policy and Society 32 (3):267–278.Google Scholar
  65. Mitsilegas, Valsamis, Sergio Carrera, and Katharina Eisele. 2014. „The End of the Transitional Period for Police and Criminal Justice Measures Adopted before the Lisbon Treaty. Who Monitors Trust in the European Justice Area?“ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2014/509998/IPOL_STU(2014)509998_EN.pdf
  66. Monar, Jörg. 2001. „The Dynamics of Justice and Home Affairs: Laboratories, Driving Factors and Costs.“ Journal of Common Market Studies 39 (4):747–764.Google Scholar
  67. Monar, Jörg. 2010. „Experimentalist governance in justice and home affairs.“ In Experimentalist governance in the European Union: towards a new architecture. Charles F Sabel and Jonathan Zeitlin (Hrg.). Oxford: OUP, S. 237–260.Google Scholar
  68. Nance, Mark, and Patrick Cottrell. 2014. „A turn toward experimentalism? Rethinking security and governance in the twenty-first century.“ Review of International Studies 40 (02):277–301.Google Scholar
  69. Occhipinti, John D. 2014. „Whither the withering democratic deficit? The impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice.“ Cambridge Review of International Affairs 27 (1):83–105.Google Scholar
  70. Pauwelyn, Joost, Ramses Wessel, and Jan Wouters. 2012. Informal international lawmaking: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Pierson, Paul. 1996. „The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutionalist Analysis.“ Comparative Political Studies 29 (2):123–163.Google Scholar
  72. Pollak, Johannes, and Peter Slominski. 2009. „Experimentalist but not accountable governance? The role of Frontex in managing the EU's external borders.“ West European Politics 32 (5):904–924.Google Scholar
  73. Pouliot, Vincent. 2008. „The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities.“ International Organization 62 (02):257–288.Google Scholar
  74. Rasmussen, Anne, and Brendan J Carroll. 2014. „Determinants of upper-class dominance in the heavenly chorus: Lessons from European Union online consultations.“ British Journal of Political Science 44 (2):445.Google Scholar
  75. Ripoll Servent, Ariadna. 2015. Institutional and Policy Change in the European Parliament: Deciding on Freedom, Security and Justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  76. Sabel, Charles F., and Jonathan Zeitlin. 2010. Experimentalist governance in the European Union : towards a new architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Scherrer, Amandine, and Benoît Dupont. 2010. „Nœuds ou champs? Analyse de l'expertise internationale sur la criminalité transnationale organisée et le terrorisme.“ La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale 52 (2):147–172.Google Scholar
  78. Scholten, Peter, and Stijn Verbeek. 2015. „Politicization and expertise: Changing research–policy dialogues on migrant integration in Europe.“ Science and Public Policy 42 (2):188–200.Google Scholar
  79. Sheptycki, James. 2002. „Accountability Across the Policing Field: Towards a General Cartography of Accountability for Post-Modern Policing.“ Policing and Society 12 (4):323–338.Google Scholar
  80. Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2004. A New World Order. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Stacey, Jeffrey. 2010. Integrating Europe: informal politics and institutional change: OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
  82. Stampnitzky, Lisa. 2011. „Disciplining an Unruly Field: Terrorism Experts and Theories of Scientific/Intellectual Production.“ Qualitative Sociology 34 (1):1–19.Google Scholar
  83. Tekin, Funda. 2012. Differentiated Integration at Work. The Institutionalisation and Implementation of Opt-Outs from European Integration in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  84. Tropina, Tatiana, and Cormac Callanan. 2015. Self-and Co-regulation in Cybercrime, Cybersecurity and National Security. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  85. Uçarer, Emek M. 2014. „Tempering the EU? NGO advocacy in the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice.“ Cambridge Review of International Affairs 27 (1):127–146.Google Scholar
  86. van Buuren, Jelle. 2012. „Runaway Bureaucracy? The European Police Chiefs Task Force.“ Policing 6 (3):281–290.Google Scholar
  87. Verdier, Daniel. 2015. „The dilemma of informal governance with outside option as solution.“ International Theory 7 (01):195–229.Google Scholar
  88. Wagnsson, Charlotte. 2010. „Divided power Europe: normative divergences among the EU ‚big three‘.“ Journal of European Public Policy 17 (8):1089–1105.Google Scholar
  89. Wesseling, M. 2013. „The European fight against terrorism financing: Professional fields and.“ Dialogue 42 (2):161–178.Google Scholar
  90. Wolff, Sarah, Flora Goudappel, and Jaap W. de Zwaan. 2012. Freedom, Security and Justice after Lisbon and Stockholm. The Hague: TCM Asser Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden  2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stiftung Europa-Universität ViadrinaFrankfurt (Oder)Deutschland

Personalised recommendations