|Liesbet Hooghe, Tobias Lenz, Gary Marks. 2019. A Theory of International Organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, xxi + 196pp. Aug 2019. Book – unofficial version.|
|Why do international organizations (IOs) look so different, yet so similar? Some international organizations have just a few member states, while others span the globe. Some are targeted at a specific problem, while others have policy portfolios as broad as national states. Some are captured almost entirely by their member states, while others have independent courts, secretariats, and parliaments. Variation among international organizations appears as wide as that among states. The purpose of this book is to explain this variation. We show how each IO is an attempt to balance the functional impetus to tackle problems that spill beyond national borders, and the communal desire for self-rule, which can dampen international cooperation. The implications of postfunctionalist theory for an IO’s membership, policy portfolio, contractual specificity, and authoritative competences are tested using annual data for 76 IOs for 1950-2010.|
Liesbet Hooghe, Gary Marks, Tobias Lenz, Jeanine Bezuijen, Besir Ceka, and Svet Derderyan. 2017. Measuring International Authority: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Vol. III. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 925pp. Aug 2017. Book: unofficial version
This book sets out a Measure of International Authority (MIA) for seventy-six major international organizations (IOs) from 1950 to 2010. Successive chapters detail the theoretical, conceptual, and coding decisions. MIA breaks down the concept of international authority into discrete dimensions, which are built up from coherent ingredients—the composition and role of individual IO bodies at each stage in policy making, constitutional reform, the budget, financial compliance, membership accession, and the suspension of members. These observations can be assembled—like Lego blocks—in diverse ways for diverse purposes.
Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks. 2016. Community, Scale, and Regional Governance: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 195pp. Book – unofficial version.
Jurisdictional design is shaped by functional and communal pressures. Functional pressures arise from the character of the public goods provided by government: their scale economies, externalities, and informational asymmetries. However, to explain demands for self-rule one needs to understand how people think and act in relation to the communities they conceive themselves belonging. The authors demonstrate that scale and community explain basic features of governance, including the growth of multiple tiers over the past six decades; how jurisdictions are designed; why governance within the state has become differentiated; and the extent to which regions exert authority.
Liesbet Hooghe, Gary Marks, Arjan H. Schakel, Sara Niedzwiecki, Sandra Chapman Osterkatz, and Sarah Shair-Rosenfield. 2016. Measuring Regional Authority: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Vol.I . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 687pp. Book – unofficial version
This is the first of four volumes theorizing the structure of governance above and below the central state. This book sets out a measure of regional authority for 81 countries in North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia, and the Pacific from 1950 to 2010. Subnational authority is exercised by individual regions, and this measure is the first that takes individual regions as the unit of analysis. On the premise that transparency is a fundamental virtue in measurement, the authors chart a new path in laying out their theoretical, conceptual, and scoring decisions before the reader. The book also provides summaries of regional governance in 81 countries for scholars and students alike.
Hussein Kassim, John Peterson, Michael Bauer, Sara Connolly, Renaud Dehousse, Liesbet Hooghe, and Andrew Thompson. 2013. The European Commission of the 2st Century. Oxford: OUP, 381pp.
The European Commission is arguably the world’s most powerful international administration, but also the subject of intense controversy. It is sometimes portrayed as technocratic, monolithic, and unaccountable, and sometimes as fragmented and weakly led. According to some, it is populated by career bureaucrats who want to expand EU competencies and their own power. This book tests these views. Co-authored by an international team of researchers, this book draws on original data from the largest attitudinal survey ever conducted by independent researchers inside the Commission, as well as interviews with senior officials. It provides an authoritative account of the European Commission of the twenty-first century.
Liesbet Hooghe, Gary Marks, Arjan H. Schakel. 2010. The Rise of Regional Authority: A Comparative Study of 42 Democracies (1950-2006). London: Routledge, 224pp.
This book measures and explains the formal authority of intermediate or regional government in 42 advanced democracies, including the 27 EU member states. It tracks regional authority on an annual basis from 1950 to 2006. The measure reveals wide variation both cross-sectionally and over time. The authors examine four influences – functional pressures, democratization, European integration, and identity – to explain regionalization over the past half-century.
Table of contents: 1. Measuring Regional Authority 2. Operationalizing Regional Authority 3. Validation of the Regional Authority Index 4. An Era of Regionalization
Appendix A: Profiles of Regional Reform in 42 Countries
Appendix B: Country and Regional Scores
Liesbet Hooghe. 2002. The European Commission and The Integration of Europe: Images of Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, XI + 279pp.
What kind of European Union do top Commission officials want? Should the European Union Be supranational or intergovernmental? Should it promote market liberalism or regulated capitalism? Should Commission be Europe’s government or its civil service? The book examines top officials’ preferences through analysis of unique data from 137 interviews. Hooghe demonstrates that the Commission has difficulty shaping its employees’ preferences in the fluid multi-institutional context of the European Union. Top officials’ views are better explained by experiences outside rather than inside the Commission: party, country, and prior work leave deeper imprints than length of service, directorate-general, or cabinet.
Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks. 2001. Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Lanham, M.D.: Rowman & Littlefield, XVI + 240pp.
European politics has been reshaped in recent decades by a dual process of centralization and decentralization. At the same time that authority in many policy areas has shifted to the supranational level of the European Union, so national governments have given subnational regions within countries more say over the lives of their citizens. Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks characterize this process as multilevel governance, and argue that its emergence in the second half of the twentieth century is a watershed in the political development of Europe. Hooghe and Marks explain why multi-level governance has taken place and how it shapes conflict in national and European political arenas. Drawing on a rich body of original research, the book is written in a clear and accessible style for undergraduates and non-experts.
Liesbet Hooghe (ed.). 1996. Cohesion Policy and European Integration. Building Multilevel Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 458pp.
How can one convince potent nation-states to put their sovereignty at risk in common European policies? EU cohesion policy, which absorbs one-third of the EU budget, provides such a puzzle. Since the 1988 reform national governments are required to negotiate with the Commission and regional authorities on how to use cohesion money. How has this European-wide policy eroded national sovereignty in favour of a stronger role for the Commission and more power for Europe’s regions? The first part of the book probes into the policy dynamics at the European level. In the second part, eight country studies evaluate the impact of a single EU policy on territorial relations. The concluding section explains persistent variation in EU cohesion decision making and implementation.