-
Fossum, John Erik; Lord, Christopher James & Leiren, Merethe Dotterud
(2023).
Books on Brexit: John Erik Fossum, Christopher Lord and Merethe Dotterud Leiren .
-
-
Fossum, John Erik; Lord, Christopher James & Dotterud, Merethe Leiren
(2022).
‘Good Neighbours? The UK and Europe After Brexit: Episode 5” 26 August 2022.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
War in Europe: EU in a new Europe.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
UK-EU relations in comparative perspective.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Future of European Democracy.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
DiCE Regional Assembly.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Nicolaidis, Kalypso
(2022).
Is the Conference on the Future of Europe a success?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Handlingsrom for nasjonale reguleringer innenfor EU/EØS – er det et mulig stemningsskifte på gang?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Exclusion and Segmentation in Contemporary Europe.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Brexit, EU external differentiation and normative challenges.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
What is the relationship between differentiation, dominance and democracy?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
What are the key features of differentiation?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Differentiated Integration and Dominance.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Differentiating shocks and the question of domination.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Bátora, Jozef
(2022).
Introduction: Differentiation and the question of dominance.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Differentiated integration.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Brexit and European Integration.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Wessels, Wolfgang
(2022).
Executive accountability and the link between differentiation, democracy and dominance: what can the EU learn from the US, Canada and Germany?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Executive accountability in the EU.
Vis sammendrag
EU3D WP3 workshop
-
Fossum, John Erik & Eriksen, Erik Oddvar
(2022).
Political differentiation: Democracy and dominance.
-
Fossum, John Erik; Sjursen, Helene & Tranøy, Bent Sofus
(2022).
Scenarios for EU's development in light of the war in Ukraine .
Vis sammendrag
EU3D coordinator and professor John Erik Fossum at ARENA Centre for European Studies at University of Oslo organised a panel discussion with colleague at ARENA, research professor Helene Sjursen, professor Bent Sofus Tranøy at Høyskolen Kristiania and Heidi Nordby Lunde, representative in the Norwegian Parliament and leader of Europabevegelsen. Journalist Sten Inge Jørgensen led the debate.
The panellists discussed how the development of the EU is affected by the war in Ukraine and what it means for unity and agreement in the EU and Europe.
They discussed the problems associated with EU fragmentation and decline in law-based international collaboration; democratic pitfalls of more European integration, if democratic institutions are not involved; and the implications of EU acquiring decision-making powers within policy areas that are traditionally seen as belonging to the state.
The event was organised on 25 October 2022 by the University of Oslo as part of the EU3D future of Europe Debate series.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
Europas demokratiske fremtid - implikasjoner for Norge?
Vis sammendrag
EU3D-koordinator og professor ved ARENA Senter for europaforskning, John Erik Fossum, holdt en presentasjon om den demokratiske fremtiden for Europa og implikasjoner for Norge for studentorganisasjonen Europeiske Studenter Oslo.
Fossum la frem tre mulige scenarier for Europas fremtid: oppløsning eller differensiert oppløsning av EU; "muddling through" uten utvidelse av EU og ingen store reformer; og konsolidering i en eller annen form. For hvert av disse scenariene presenterte Fossum mulige demokratiske implikasjoner og implikasjoner for Norge.
-
Fossum, John Erik; Lord, Christopher James & Leiren, Merethe Dotterud
(2022).
Episode 5 of the podcast series ‘Good Neighbours? The UK and Europe after Brexit'.
[Internett].
Soundcloud.
Vis sammendrag
Norway, the EU and Brexit
With John Erik Fossum, Professor of Political Science at ARENA Centre for European Studies at the University of Oslo, Merethe Dotterud Leiren, Research Director at CICERO (Center for International Climate Research) in Oslo, and Christopher Lord, Professor at ARENA Centre for European Studies at the University of Oslo.
This episode discusses the pros and cons of the Norwegian model. It explores what Norway’s relationship with the EU tells us about the nature of the EU and the situation of a non-member. It also considers how Brexit has affected UK-Norway-EU relations in energy and climate change.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Fossum, John Erik, ‘Differentiation and Democracy’, DiCE Webinar, 5 February 2021.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Lord, Christopher James
(2021).
introduction on the new challenges associated with the altered context of Norway‐EU‐UK relations and some reflections on Norwegian wiggle‐room.
-
Wolff, Guntram; Fossum, John Erik & Góra, Magdalena
(2021).
Conference on the future of Europe: vehicle for reform vs forum for reflection.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Brexit in comparison: models of differentiated (dis)integration.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Differentiation and Democracy.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Why a change in government won’t change Norway’s ambiguous EU policy.
Future of Europe.
-
Fossum, John Erik; Góra, Magdalena & Wolff, Guntram
(2021).
The Conference on the Future of Europe: vehicle for reform versus forum for reflection?
Future of Europe.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Democratic Accountability in a Post-COVID-19 World (presentation of paper).
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Outing "the others": Towards populist segmented orders.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Executive dominance in a segmented political order – what are the defining characteristics?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Discerning pathologies in the EU setting: Segmentation versus differentiation.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Seizing the chance: differentiation, democracy and the Conference on the Future of Europe.
Vis sammendrag
Panel:
Sergio Fabbrini, Dean, Political Science Department, LUISS University
John Erik Fossum, Professor of Political Science, ARENA Centre for European Studies, University of Oslo
Brigid Laffan, Director. Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Instittute (EUI)
Moderator: Matteo Bonomi, Resercher, Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI)
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Nordic perspectives on differentiation and secession.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Principles and practices of the EU's relations with affiliated non-members’.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Brexit, EU external differentiation and normative challenges.
Vis sammendrag
Presentation at the PhD course 'A differentiated Europe and its implications'.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
What is the relationship between differentiation, dominance and democracy?
Vis sammendrag
Presentation at the PhD course 'A differentiated Europe and its implications'.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
What are the key features of differentiation?
Vis sammendrag
presentation at the PhD course titled 'A differentiated Europe and its implications'.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
What lessons can we discern for post-Brexit UK from Norway’s EU relationship?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
On the Search for Viable Governance in Contested Federal-Type Settings: The European Union and Canada Compared.
EU3D Research Papers.
ISSN 2535-8170.
s. 1–40.
doi:
10.2139/ssrn.3900514.
Vis sammendrag
This paper focuses on two contested federal-type entities, Canada and the EU. There is a curious paradox in that both have been depicted as failed (Canada) and as virtually impossible (EU) nation-building projects, but also as vanguards in terms of handling national and other forms of difference and diversity. The first purpose is to substantiate the claim that the two form a distinct sub-category of federation, poly-cephalous federation. Poly-cephalous federation is a more apt term for depicting the EU and Canada (pre- patriation, i.e. pre-1982) than such terms as multilevel governance and multinational federation. The distinguishing features of poly-cephalous federations are a) that they are about an on-going working out of the terms of federal balancing as part of doing the balancing; and b) that those in charge of the balancing are executive officials who set the terms of balancing in systems of summitry with clear parallels to international diplomacy. The executives are heads of states and governments. They represent and control their respective governments and have privileged access to the many tools that modern states have for shaping and sustaining community and identity. It follows that poly-cephalous federations are very prone to executive dominance. The second purpose of the paper is to consider what form of democratic federalism (if any) such a structure may give rise to. The Canadian experience suggests that the main democratic potential in poly-cephalous federations inheres in a viable transition to reflexive federalism (which will be discussed in relation to the post-1982 period). What it is and under what conditions it can be developed is important to establish, not the least because we should consider if there might be a similar potential for the EU, even if its path would obviously be very different from that of Canada.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
EU Constitutional Models in 3D: Differentiation, Dominance and Democracy.
EU3D Research Papers.
ISSN 2535-8170.
s. 1–48.
doi:
10.2139/ssrn.3900382.
Vis sammendrag
A key question facing the distinctly differentiated EU is the following: under what conditions is differentiation conducive to democracy, and under what conditions is differentiation pathological and associated with dominance? The purpose of this research paper is to address that question with reference to establishing the most appropriate constitutional model for the EU. Such a constitutional model must on the one hand enable us to make sense of the EU, and on the other hand help us to establish the conditions under which differentiation is conducive to democracy, as well as the conditions under which it is not. The focus here is on what we may term the differentiation-democracy configuration: how the principles of democracy and differentiation are entrenched and combined in the institutional-structural arrangements that are normally embedded in the constitution. I first specify a set of EU-related challenges that any effort at devising a constitutional model for the EU will have to confront. Thereafter, I develop a set of benchmarks or criteria for assessing each model in order to explicate how the model understands democracy and differentiation, and to show how the phenomena that these terms designate are related. This unpacking exercise yields four differentiation-democracy dimensions (decisional or law-making differentiation; competence-based functional differentiation; territorial differentiation; and citizens’ rights and incorporation differentiation). Thereafter, I undertake a brief reality-check by asking how these four dimensions are configured in post-war Europe. That provides us with a set of ‘stubborn facts’, not the least pertaining to who sets the terms for today’s European differentiation-democracy configuration(s) and what these terms are. All constitutional models must relate to those facts if they are to work for the EU. The last section specifies and assesses three constitutional models, a cosmopolitan, an intergovernmental and a federal model.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Bátora, Jozef
(2021).
Differentiation and Segmentation.
EU3D Research Papers.
ISSN 2535-8170.
s. 1–24.
doi:
10.2139/ssrn.3892312.
Vis sammendrag
It is widely recognized that the EU that emerged from the financial and refugee crises of the last decade has become more differentiated. Such a development brings forth important questions about the nature and character of the EU as a political system, and the kinds of processes and mechanisms that drive its development. An important problem is that neither differentiated integration nor differentiation say much about the positive character or the distinguishing features of the EU as a political system. The claim that we set forth in this paper is that the notion of the EU as a segmented political system provides a more apt and precise characterisation of the EU as a political system. In addition, the notion of segmentation helps to capture some of the distinct dynamics that propel the EU’s development.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2021).
Is the Nordic Model more compatible with the American Dream than present-day United States?
I Hauhart, Robert C. & Sardoč, Mitja (Red.),
The Routledge Handbook on the American Dream: Volume 1.
Routledge.
ISSN 9781000385526.
s. 105–120.
Vis sammendrag
What do we mean by the American dream? Can we define it? Or does any discussion of the phrase end inconclusively, the solid turned liquid—like ice melting? Do we know whether the American dream motivates and inspires or, alternately, obscures and deceives? The Routledge Handbook on the American Dream offers distinctive, authoritative, original essays by well-known scholars that address the social, economic, historical, philosophic, legal, and cultural dimensions of the American dream for the twenty-first century. The American dream, first discussed and defined in print by James Truslow Adams’s The Epic of America (1931), has become nearly synonymous with being American. Adams’s definition, although known to scholars, is often lost in our ubiquitous use of the term. When used today, the iconic phrase seems to encapsulate every fashion, fad, trend, association, or image the user identifies with the United States or American life. The American dream’s ubiquity, though, argues eloquently for a deeper understanding of its heritage, its implications, and its impact—to be found in this first research handbook ever published on the topic.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Interview with John Erik Fossum on Brexit research and interchange on differentiated governance in Europe, The Post Brexit Europe podcast, 16 April 2020. https://bridgenetwork.eu/podcast-episodes/an-interview-with-john-erik-fossum/.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
‘EP 20: Brexit og demokratiet i 2020’, interview with John Erik Fossum on Brexit [in Norwegian], Pod Britannia, 16 January 2020. Available at: https://www.eu3d.uio.no/news/2020/fossum-on-podcast-on-brexit.html.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Governing differentiation in a multi-speed EU.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
In, out and shake it all about: Brexit and the UK-Norway comparison.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Differentiation: Problem or solution?
Future of Europe.
Vis sammendrag
A multi-speed or multi-tiered Europe has often been presented as a solution to Europe’s current challenges. But this kind of differentiation can generate democratic problems, argues EU3D Scientific Coordinator John Erik Fossum.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Bátora, Jozef
(2020).
Towards a segmented European political order.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
The European Council – an EU Interstitial Balancer?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Demoi-cracy or domination? Normative perspectives on Differentiated Integration.
Vis sammendrag
Does differentiated integration advance democracy by allowing the EU’s multiple demoi or peoples greater scope to chose the extent to which they are willing to pool their sovereignty with others across different policy domains? Or does it lead instead to an increase in domination, as the choices of some member states are effectively subordinated to those of their larger and more powerful neighbours? In this panel, John Erik Fossum (ARENA Oslo/EU3D) and Richard Bellamy y (UCL/Exeter/InDivEU) debated the normative implications of differentiated integration for European democracy.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Differentiated Integration in theory and practice: state of the art.
Vis sammendrag
This panel debate explored rival theoretical approaches to understanding differentiated integration and review the findings of the latest empirical research on its incidence and impact within the EU.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Can democracy bounce back?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
A differentiated Europe facing Brexit – what can we learn from “the Norway model"?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Conceptualizing differentiation shocks.
-
Fossum, John Erik & Bátora, Jozef
(2020).
Towards a segmented European political order.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
Executive dominance.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Europe and its Parliament in a Global Context.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Can differentiation solve Europe’s current challenges?
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Brexit: dagen før dagen?
-
Fossum, John Erik & Dutceac Segesten, Anamaria
(2019).
Elections européennes: six pays vus par six experts.
The Conversation.
ISSN 2201-5639.
Vis sammendrag
https://theconversation.com/elections-europeennes-six-pays-vus-par-six-experts-117345
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
The challenges arising from differentiation.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Brexit and Europe's future political order.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Europe’s triangular challenge: dominance, differentiation and democracy.
Vis sammendrag
Paper titled ‘Europe’s triangular challenge: dominance, differentiation and
democracy’ presented at the panel ‘Differentiation and Dominance in
Europe’ organised by EU3D, American Political Science Association’s (APSA)
Annual Meeting & Exhibition, Washington DC, 29 August 2019
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Brexit and consequences for Norway.
Vis sammendrag
keynote speech at the Jean Monnet module of the BA programme in European Studies at the University of Bergen.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Project overview and analytical framework.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2019).
Continuity or break with the past? A case study of Brexit.
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2022).
The Political Future of the European Economic Area.
EU3D Research Papers.
ISSN 2535-8170.
Vis sammendrag
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the political future of the European Economic Area (EEA). The paper starts by providing a brief overview of the EEA (Section 2). Next, it discusses the factors affecting the future of the EEA from the vantage-point of Norway (Section 3). The Norwegian political system contains a set of gag-rules to prevent changes in the status quo of EU affiliation. What such gag rules imply for the EEA’s future is important to address. Thereafter, the paper discusses the factors affecting the future of the EEA from the vantage-point of the EU (Section 4). Penultimately, the paper considers possible trajectories for the EU-level’s development. Conclusively, the paper provides a brief assessment of the similarities and differences between the EEA and such alternatives as EU-UKTCA, the Swiss Model, and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between the EU and Canada (CETA) (Section 5).
-
Fossum, John Erik
(2020).
The EU’s non-members: Key principles, underlying logics and types of affiliation.
EU3D Report Series.
ISSN 978-82-8362-038-2.
Vis sammendrag
This report focuses on the principles and arrangements that the EU has established for structuring and conducting its relations with affiliated non-member states. The report has four aims. First is to discuss the principles underpinning the EU’s arrangements with non-members. The basic principles guiding the EU’s relations with affiliated non-members – understood as principles and not necessarily as practice are the same universal principles that guide EU external relations in general. The EU represents an effort at reconfiguring the notion of state sovereign territorial rule, among other things by means of boundaries that are far more permeable than what we normally associate with states. Statists are sceptical of permeable boundaries because they associate open and permeable boundaries with loss of territorial control and the prospect of external colonisation and domination. The implication is that the EU as a non-state entity will be more exposed to such pressures and problems.
The second aim is to provide a brief overview of the EU’s external context. The focus is on EU exposure to conflicts and EU vulnerability in relation to great power politics, volatile markets, lack of international order and/or lack of binding rules. Such possible sources of EU external vulnerability have bearings on the EU’s relations with affiliated non-members. A brief overview of the EU’s external context helps to account for the seeming paradox that the EU is highly externally vulnerable and at the same time often referred to as a (form of unwilling) hegemon in relation to its affiliated non-members.
The third aim is to provide a brief overview of the different forms of affiliation that non-members have with the EU. We outline similarities and differences between these: how (mutually) committing they are; how they are legally embedded and institutionally entrenched; and what their range of variation tells us about the EU. These questions help us to address how EU external vulnerability ‘spills over to’ the EU’s relations with those non-members that the EU builds closer affiliations with.
The overview is relevant for understanding the UK’s situation and its status post-Brexit. The UK may end up with a mode of affiliation that resembles an existing one, combines elements from several, or innovates on these. In order to get a better sense of what Brexit may entail, we need to know the types and range of existing EU relations with non-members. Further, the EU’s existing relations with affiliated non-members will likely be affected by Brexit, given that it could put other EU arrangements with non-members in play. Further still, it is not unlikely that at least some of the EU’s member states will see if they can extract benefits or concessions from the EU in the aftermath of Brexit (including rolling back integration or obtaining exemptions, opt-outs etc.).
The fourth aim is to provide a range of analytical distinctions and building-blocks that EU3D’s further research can draw on in discerning in more depth the implications for EU3D’s core dimensions: differentiation, dominance and democracy. These three dimensions all figure in and give direction to this report but are not systematically assessed here.