T I M E SAutumn 2013

times.eui.eu Governing the ungovernable

Guarding the guardians

Hitting the debt ceiling

PROFILES OPINIONS EVENTS

|ntroduction

Welcome to the fourth edition of EUI Times, the quarterly electronic magazine produced by the European University Institute in Florence.In this issue’s feature section we look first at the issue of climate govern-ance, asking how nations respond to climate change, and at the related work being done at the EUI by the Florence School of Regulation and the Global Governance Programme. We also profile the Centre for Me-dia Pluralism and Media Freedom and its activities towards developing a transparent measure of media pluralism. Our final feature is a Q&A with Professor David Levine, giving an economist’s view of the US gov-ernment shut down and debt ceiling negotiations. The EUI Times Profiles feature Brigid Laffan, the new Director of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, as she embarks on her five year term. We also speak to Ben Hammersley, Robert Schuman Fel-low at the Global Governance Programme, about his work which looks at the threat of terrorism through the prism of public health. Finally we interview Joseph Lacey, researcher in the Department of Political and Social Sciences and Fulbright Scholar at Princeton University, about his work on multilingual democracies. The Opinion section features contributions from two distinguished EUI professors. In light of the revelations about the activities of the US National Security Agency, Professor Martin Scheinin discusses the le-gal boundaries of mass electronic surveillance systems. Professor Hans-peter Kriesi looks back at September’s German general election and its implications for the European Union.We also invite readers to take a look at some key upcoming events, as well as a selection of recent publications by EUI members. As ever your thoughts and comments are welcome and can be sent to times@eui.euI hope you enjoy the Autumn 2013 issue of EUI Times.

Stephan AlbrechtskirchingerDirector, Communications Service

T I M E S

Features

4 GOVERNING THE UNGOVERNABLE The Florence School of Regulation and the Global Governance Programme talk Climate Change Policy

Features

7 GUARDING THE GUARDIANS A talk with the RSCAS' Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom

Features

10 HITTING THE DEBT CEILING Q&A with economist David Levine on the October US government shut-down

Profiles13 Faculty

A NEW DIRECTOR FOR THE ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE Brigid Laffan

Opinions18 ELECTRONIC MASS

SURVEILLANCE VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS

Martin Scheinin

Profiles15 Fellow

A NON-TRADITIONAL ACADEMIC Ben Hammersley

20 Events 23 Publications

Profiles17 Researcher

LANGUAGE AND DEMOCRACY Joseph Lacey

Opinions19 THE GERMAN ELECTIONS AND

EUROPE Hanspeter Kriesi

EUI TIMESAutumn 2013

Director: Stephan Albrechtskirchinger Editor: Jackie GordonWriting: Mark BriggsWeb: Francesco Martino, Raul Pessoa, Federico GaggeroOnline: times.eui.euEmail: times@eui.eu

T I M E SAutumn 2013

times.eui.eu Governing the ungovernable

Guarding the guardians

Hitting the debt ceiling

PROFILES OPINIONS EVENTS

on the cover: Terrace, Villa San Felice

Autumn 2013

Published in October 2013 by the European University Institute© European University Institute, 2013

European University InstituteBadia Fiesolana - Via dei Roccettini, 9 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) - Italy+39 055 4685266 www.eui.eutwitter: @europeanuni

4 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Features GOVERNING THE UNGOVERNABLE

The challenges posed by climate change are becoming increasingly apparent, as is the ac-ceptance of the need to reduce emissions of

greenhouse gases, notably CO2, to mitigate against its worst possible consequences. What remains un-clear however is how to organise a global response to a uniquely global problem. Do the solutions lie in policy, technology, economics, the life styles of indi-vidual citizens, or all of the above?At the EUI, both the Florence School of Regulation and the Global Governance Programme are study-ing this problem, working with policy makers to create and measure effective responses to climate change. Professor Denny Ellerman and Professor Jean-Michel Glachant sat down with the EUI Times to discuss their work and wider context of dealing with climate change.

ProblemsClimate change is not the first environmental chal-lenge humanity has faced, however it is the first with truly global causes and consequences.   “We know that climate is a problem of global dimensions,” says Professor Ellerman, director of the Climate Gov-ernance research strand at the GGP and the FSR's Climate Policy Research Unit. “It is different from a local environment or pollution problem. If we are cleaning up the air in London or Los Angeles, there is a government structure in place to deal with the problem.”“When we move to an environmental problem with a global reach, there is no world government, so how

“When we move to an environmental problem with a global reach, there is no world government, so how do nations, human society, the globe organise effectively to tackle this problem?”

Denny Ellerman

5 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

do nations, human society, the globe organise effec-tively to tackle this problem? Is it through multina-tional agreements, voluntary actions, trading sys-tems? That is the governance question.”The general trend of anthropomorphic generated warming has become accepted in Europe, as is the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However the exact level of the required reduction is still dis-puted, making drafting policy difficult says Eller-man: “You’re talking about what will be the situation in 2100. Technology will change, we don’t know what the demographics are, there are continuing issues in the science about the effect increasing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases have on the cli-mate. The direction is all very clear, but the magni-tudes and timing are considerably less so, those are areas of disagreement.”With no agreed upon destination and no global government, policies have become piecemeal, aimed at targeting specific problems rather than the overall picture.“We have several policies and sets of rules acting in the EU, sometimes they fit together and are co-ordi-nated, sometimes they are not,” bemoans Glachant. Germany has a high percentage of its energy gener-ated by renewables, which are less polluting but more expensive. The country than supplements its energy requirements through the burning of cheap coal. “It’s totally crazy to spend more than €20bn a year on renewables to still burn such an amount of coal. Where is the carbon pricing gone?”

SolutionsAccording to Ellerman: “The EU has done more to implement environmental policy than any other na-tion or set of nations. I would call Europe the world’s climate policy laboratory”.Adding to local flagship environmental policies such as London’s congestion charge, in 2005 a European-wide carbon price was established. The price, the first significant price on GHG emissions in the world, fluctuates with economic activity, among other things, such as weather and relative fuel prices.

“We didn’t go for only this,” adds Glachant, “in 2007 Mrs Merkel got a European Council agreement on the ‘20-20-20’ in 2020 target. 20 per cent less emis-sions, 20 per cent renewables in our energy mix, 20 per cent more energy efficiency.”Ellerman has a particular focus on the carbon price, and says its success in Europe is causing other coun-tries to consider implementation. “The carbon prob-lem is made for trading because the location doesn’t matter. If you reduce the carbon in China it is just as effective globally as if it was reduced in Europe.”“There is this perception that an absolute limit on carbon emissions is a limit on growth. I think that is a false perception. The evidence is that you can re-move the carbon without really changing lifestyles all that much. It’s going to cost a little more, but life goes on pretty much the same. Before 2005 a carbon price did not exist in Europe, does Europe look much dif-ferent eight years later?” Despite Europe being in the grip of a continent-wide recession Ellerman says no serious academic argument has been made that connects slow economic growth with the carbon price, adding that other regions of the world have experienced the same post-2008 economic problems despite not having a carbon price.“The system is reliant on creating a scarcity to turn carbon emission into a commodity, and it has done so throughout the European Union despite the consid-

Jean-Michel Glachant

6 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

Denny Ellerman is Director of the Loyola de Palacio's Climate Change Policy Research Unit, and directs the Global Governance Programme's research strand on Climate Governance, at the EUI's Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. He comes to the EUI from MIT's Sloane School of Management and has advised on energy issues for both the US government and the private sector.

Jean-Michel Glachant is Director of the Loyola de Palacio Energy Policy Programme and the Florence School of Regulation at the EUI's Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. He is scientific coordinator and/or partner in numerous international research projects, and advises on regulation policy on both national and international/European levels.

erable differences in per capita GDP among member states. One of the more interesting features of the EU ETS is the shift to significant auctioning that starts this year. About 60 per cent of the allowances are auctioned, and the revenues are kept by the member state governments. One of the issues we will be look-ing at in the future is what governments will do with this. Although the revenue is small relative to total government revenue streams, member states facing debt crises will likely welcome these extra revenues. There will be 28 experiments about what countries do with the revenue.”

Looking forward“Climate change is a long term issue,” says Glachant, “It affects all human beings. In the EU we are not the ones who are going to suffer the max of it.” Glachant is confident the EU will meet its self-imposed 20-20-20 targets, however he is unconvinced about the effect that an isolated EU policy ultimately has on global climate: “Today Europe is already small on the pol-luting side, and we are becoming smaller and smaller every year. We cannot reduce pollution by ourselves at the world level. In 30 years we will be 7 per cent of the world population, Africa will be 24 per cent. If they catch up with the quality of life in Europe [our own targets] will not have a decisive importance.”“What we are doing in Europe is not going to unilat-erally change the game. Many others need to follow or to replicate. However, ethically the EU position has value.”Last month the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change unveiled its latest report. Despite its declara-tion that climate change is 95 per cent likely to be caused by human activity, the report garnered less at-tention than its predecessor in 2007.“I am very sympathetic (to the IPCC) they do exactly what they should do, they do not make any decision, but they say the facts, they also acknowledge that they can be wrong in this or they can be right in that, science is science but truth is never 100 per cent true,” says Glachant.

“The problems in policy development lie in the poli-tics not in the underlying scientific reality,” states Ellerman. “We should not expect scientific knowl-edge alone to solve political problems. The climate policy debate is stalled in some countries because of a stand-off between the so-called climate deniers on one hand, and on the other, what might be called climate catastrophists cum social utopians who see climate change as a compelling justification for dra-matic societal changes.”Ellerman suggests that even though climate is a glob-al problem, the solution may not require every single nation.  “We don’t need all 190 nations to be part of the agreement. Most of the emissions are from may-be 20 countries, that’s all you need for an effective coalition to limit emissions.”“The challenge is how to organise to preserve a global public good? If the nations of the world can create an effective global system to limit and regulate green-house gas emissions, humans will have succeeded in overcoming the greatest environmental challenge that has faced the species.”

“The problems in policy development lie in the politics not in the underlying scientific reality.”

7 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

GUARDING THE GUARDIANSFeaturesStarted in December 2011 the  Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) provides an independent research observatory on the situation of pluralism and freedom in the media landscapes of EU member states. Co-financed by the Euro-pean Commission, and headed by  Professor Pier Luigi Parcu, the project seeks collaboration across academic disciplines, with media professionals and policy makers.As explained in the CMPF’s latest report, “Media freedom and pluralism are both a result and a guar-antee of efficient and legitimate democratic rule.” However unlike other pillars of democracy the me-dia doesn’t benefit from specific EU legislation aimed at defending it.“It was an issue before the union was born, so it’s an issue usually dealt with in the constitutions of the member states, making it politically sensitive at a na-tional level” explains Professor Parcu. “However, the European Commission cannot accept that one of its member states has problems of freedom or plural-ism. If there is a problem in the member states it be-

comes partly a European problem. The Commission is wondering what to do, can it do something? The first step to decide what to do is to understand.” “The purpose of the Centre is to provide an entity that can observe, interpret, and make recommen-dations without direct involvement of European institutions.”

Pier Luigi Parcu

“Media freedom and pluralism are both a result and a guarantee of efficient and legitimate democratic rule.”

Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom

8 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Who or what is a journalist today?When assessing the media, the issues surrounding its practitioners cannot be ignored. The debate over who actually counts as a journalist has become in-creasingly important as the industry grapples with the advance of online news. Gone are the days when a journalist was anyone with a press card in their cap and a newspaper editor waiting to print their article.In recent years the activities of the “Fifth Estate” have grabbed headlines around the world, with its cast of characters including Chelsea Manning, Ju-lian Assange and Edward Snowden. The Arab Spring showed the increasing importance citizen journalists play in covering events, with mainstream media or-ganisations turning to them for content their jour-nalists were unable to obtain.“The issue of Wikileaks demonstrates that the in-terpretation of journalists is useful,” says Elda Bro-gi, scientific coordinator at the CMPF. “The citizen journalists, caught in the middle of the Arab Spring, are more of a journalist than Assange, because they are choosing what they want to publish rather than just supplying everything they have.”Some security professionals and MPs in the UK have called for the Guardian newspaper to be prosecuted after involvement in the publications of Wikileaks and the Snowden revelations: “These are important themes in media freedom, have always been there and will not go away because of the internet. The permanent ability of media to print given informa-tion and protect their sources,” says Parcu, “will re-main fundamental even in a digital environment.”

A working definition of a “journalist” is more than just a theoretical exercise. It has consequences for issues including libel and the protection of sources. Should the same laws apply to every Wordpress or Tumblr blogger as to accredited journalists at the Guardian or the New York Times?“The CMPF is studying how journalists are safe-guarded in Europe and what is the definition of “journalist” nowadays. Some people say that jour-nalists do not exist, but journalism does,” says Brogi.According to Professor Dirk Voorhoof, an expert in media law from Ghent University who teaches at the CMPF summer school, rulings from the European Court of Human Rights on the protection of sources suggest that claim may have a legal grounding: “The definition in case law is suitably broad. It’s about bringing information on a regular basis to the public. It’s not a profession, but a function.”

Pluralism and ownershipIt is not just the role of the individual that the Centre ex-amines, but also the environment in which they oper-ate. A free and varied media helps create a public sphere where different information and views facilitate dis-course, and ultimately lead to an informed electorate.“Pluralism means the media environment is diverse in order to let people decide according to different sources of information,” Brogi stresses. “If there is no free circulation of ideas, just the broadcast of one set of views, it is very difficult for the ordinary citizen to understand what is happening and to form their own idea about what is going on, especially of the political reality.”However specific definitions and measurements of plu-rality are notoriously difficult to pin down: “One level is economic, ownership for example, and this you can measure,” explains Parcu. “The other area is content, and this is more difficult, but there are instruments that allow you to interpret how much freedom there is. As long as you’re transparent and can be criticized, you put the debate on a more objective platform.”

“Pluralism means the media environment is diverse in order to let people decide according to different sources of information.”

9 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Pier Luigi Parcu is Director of the Communications & Media Area of the Florence School of Regulation and Director of the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom at the EUI's Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. He is a specialist in antitrust and regulatory issues of network industries.

In the aftermath of the phone hacking scandal in the UK a wider debate is taking place about media ethics and pluralism. There have been numerous attempts to suggest a legally mandated level of plurality in terms of ownership. However these appear likely to be rejected as it proves easier to define what is too little plurality, rather than what is enough.“I don’t know if it is a question of best practices,” suggests Parcu. It may rather be “a question of the best indicators. If the indicators are transparent, eas-ily measureable and open to discussion, then it be-comes easier to positively contribute to the debate and achieve good results.”

New MediaAs with all aspects of the media, technology is posing its own challenges when it comes to plurality. While on the one hand the internet gives access to an ex-tremely plural environment, on the other hand, with the myriad of voices now present, there is an increas-ing percentage of people who unconsciously filter their news through social media networks. “There is an observable phenomena called ‘The Bubble Ef-fect’,” explains Brogi, “You feel like you are open to all views, but you aren’t.”Indeed, most people select their social media con-tacts for reasons other than maintaining media plu-rality. The result is individuals are only exposed to articles and news items which reaffirm already held views rather than challenging them.According to Brogi, more noticeable questions are being asked about the responsibilities of such servic-es and, in general, Internet intermediaries: “Do they have an editorial control on the content they display, do they have a responsibility? Do we have to think of specific new rules for such services on the internet?”

Future of the CentreIn addition to the research, seminars and Summer School undertaken over the last year, the Centre will be involved from September 2013 to August 2014 in the test-implementation of the “media pluralism monitor”. The tool has been developed in 2009 by a group of universities and research institutions, led by the University of Leuven.The European Commission awarded a grant to the CMPF to test and pilot-implement the tool for the first time, to measure pluralism in an objective and neutral way in nine countries across the EU. The monitoring tool will be updated to make it easier to use and to place greater emphasis on the role of the internet. “We have studied European competencies, what Eu-rope can do and where it could do more” says Parcu. “The next phase is the monitoring. The Commission wants the media monitor to be implemented by ac-tors who are not politically involved.”The CMPF is currently studying the Western Bal-kans and will present a report on the current state of media freedom and plurality, and will report to the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights in November.For more information the Centre maintains a blog, pulling in content regarding plurality and media freedom from around the web.

Leo Meeus

10 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Features

After weeks of negotiation and rhetoric the US Congress agreed on a deal to re-open the federal government and raise the debt ceiling, removing the threat of the US defaulting on its loans. How-ever, with the deal only intended as a short term fix EUI Times speaks to American economist and Pro-fessor in Microeconomics at the EUI, David Levine about the causes and consequences of recent events on Capitol Hill. In view of the US Government shut down and the challenge to further raise the US gov-ernment debt ceiling, how does an economist judge the political situation?There was a great deal of posturing on both sides. The Republicans have been highly disorganized and have fought among themselves unable to agree on even what they might want. The Executive pos-

tured as well: we had various claims by Treasury about catastrophe if the debt limit were not raised in time. However, if the limit had not been raised, Treasury - and the Federal Reserve Bank, along with the IMF and other central banks around the world - would have done everything they could to mitigate the impact. Default in the technical sense only occurs if bond-holders demand pay-ment and payment is not made. So, for example, if the Federal Reserve Bank were to buy all maturing bonds and hold them for future payment without demanding payment, there would be no default. I think we may expect to see further posturing when the new deadlines are approached.Is this a unique phenomenon to the United States?Default by governments of various types is common. Greece, for example, defaulted on its debt - for the very good reason that it was unable to pay. The state of California had a political situation very similar to the one now playing out on a larger stage - two politi-cal parties unable to agree on a budget. It routinely “defaulted” every summer for many years - furlough-ing employees, and paying them with IOUs instead of cash and so forth. It did not default on its bonds. Belgium managed to go without any legal govern-ment for nearly two years without anyone taking great notice of it either inside or outside of Belgium.What exactly would it have meant for the US to default on its loans?There is no chance that the US will default on any substantial proportion of its loans – either now, or in February when the debt limit will again be an issue.

HITTING THE DEBT CEILING©US Congress; © trekandshoot 2013

11 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

What is at issue are particular loans that are to be redeemed at a particular time - a very small part of US debts. Moreover, as debt is retired, Treasury can legally issue new debt, so that only the interest pay-ments on short terms bonds are in question. Treas-ury might or might not choose to prioritise those payments over other payments, so may or may not choose to default. The bond-holders (including the Federal Reserve Bank) might or might not choose to demand repayment. Are there different stages of default? Default is not a single thing. In the end it amounts to not paying your bills. The state of “default” is a com-plicated one legally, with Congress telling the Execu-tive on the one hand: “you must spend money,” and on the other “you may not borrow,” both within its legal rights, and the Executive on the other hand say-ing: “it is impossible to spend the money you have ordered us to without borrowing.” The Executive then faces the question of which Congressional man-date to violate.Payments to numerous people and businesses in-cluding public employees and private firms with government contracts were defaulted on for several weeks prior to the current agreement. What were the likely short-term, and long-term consequences?If an agreement had not been reached, the conse-quences in both the short-term and long-term would have been likely to be mild for both the US and world economies. Given that there is no long-term issue in getting paid, most interested parties, including gov-ernments and central banks throughout the world

have a great deal of incentive to mitigate any ill-ef-fects of a default, technical or otherwise. Obviously central bankers and ordinary bankers did not like the possibility because they would have had to rush around dealing with all the legal technicalities. Bear in mind that the world is a big place and the US a large country, so even a very small effect in percent-age terms means real pain to a very large number of real people.Will the possibility of future default af-fect market confidence in the US? Do the dollar and US government bonds remain a re-liable investment? There was some impact on the term-structure of in-terest rates for bonds maturing immediately at or af-ter October 17. There were fluctuations in the stock market that some attribute to news about progress or

David Levine

12 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

David Levine is Professor of Microeconomics at the EUI, and holds a Joint Chair in the Economics Department and the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. He is on leave as John H. Biggs Distinguished Professor of Economics at Washington University in St. Louis.

non-progress on the debt limit, but there are always fluctuations in the stock market, and who can say if congressional negotiations have anything to do with it. Basically, for all the talk, those actively buying and selling in markets have not seemed too concerned about the possibility of default except for some mi-nor short-term unpleasantness. Of course, they may have been confident that an agreement would be reached in time. For the longer term - California continued to issue bonds and people bought them because - despite the various political fighting - they thought the state had a strong economy and would be able to repay. Po-litical fighting in Congress doesn’t have much effect on the long-term prospects of the US economy, so is unlikely to change people’s views of it.Will the events of the last weeks strengthen markets in other countries now seen as a safer bet than a few weeks ago?Other countries have been eager to replace the US dollar and US bonds as a reserve currency for dec-ades now, but with only limited success. Whatever the uncertainties about the dollar, nobody is propos-ing that the United States should split up with differ-ent states adopting their own currencies - as is the case with the Euro. At the end of the day, investors must ask themselves which is more likely: the US Government never gets around to paying its bills, or Germany gets sick of propping up the Southern part of the EU, and withdraws from the Euro, leaving Italy and Spain to follow Greece into default?Is this a situation that is likely to re-occur?There are two problems - a long term fiscal problem that current commitments to future expenditures and current plans for future tax revenues lead over a very long period to eventual insolvency. Nobody on either side of the political divide has proposed to do anything about this problem, so no doubt that will continue to get kicked down the road - as it is and has been in virtually every country in the world. There is also a short-term political problem that the Republicans would like to cut many programs, but cannot agree either with each other or with the Democrats about which programs to cut. This is the

reason for the brinksmanship over default, and this political problem will also not go away (it lasted for decades in California) so that can has been kicked down the road too. Where there any economic/political winners from this?Mostly losers, especially the Republicans. (One might argue that the Republicans’ loss is the Democrats’ gain, but the general harm has probably exceeded the short-term political gain for the Democrats). It may be true that the government requires us to go through unnecessary and onerous procedures to open a busi-ness, buy a house, or whatever. But a shutdown that leaves intact the laws that say we need government approval for these things, but closes down the offices that give the approval, is not likely to be popular. A lot of Republicans dislike big government and are visibly gleeful at the closure and prospect of default. Unfortunately all those people who use government services and can’t get them aren’t going to say “but someday if this keeps up and also a whole bunch of laws get changed, the private sector will take over and things will be much better.” Rather they are likely to conclude that the government officials responsible are jerks, and those officials gleefully going around saying “close ‘er down” are likely to be singled out for blame. As they seem to have been.

13 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

Profiles FacultyA new director for the RSCAS

Brigid Laffan has taken over as the new Director of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. At the beginning of her five year term Professor Laffan talks to the EUI Times about what she hopes to achieve during her time in Florence.“The Robert Schuman Centre is in my view an essential pillar of the EUI; it is the external face of the Institute for a lot of stake-holders- European Institutions, governments, and regulators. Europe is in a deep crisis and we are at a time of big changes. The attraction of developing and promoting an intellectual agenda on the European Union and Eu-rope’s place in the world is an op-portunity that I relish.”Established in 1992, the Robert Schuman Centre engages in re-search on a wide variety of top-ics, notably regulation, migration, economic and monetary union, EU democracy, and global gov-ernance. It focuses not only on issues of academic interest, but also undertakes applied policy re-search relevant to decisions being made in Brussels. “The Schuman Centre in my view is a bridge; it’s a bridge between

disciplines, a bridge between the Institute and the outside world. It’s a bridge between basic research and applied policy research. That’s its great strength.”After first coming to the EUI in 1981 to attend a summer school in

political science, Laffan has since then gone on to be a Jean Mon-net Professor at University Col-lege Dublin (UCD) where she was founding director of the Dublin European Institute (DEI), before becoming UCD vice-president in

Brigid Laffan

14 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

2005. In 2012 she won the THE-SEUS Award for Outstanding Re-search on European Integration.“I would not describe myself as a Europhile. I would describe my-self as a political scientist who works on Europe and the Euro-pean Union,” says Laffan. “If you ask me ‘on balance do I think the broad trajectory of European in-tegration has been good for this part of the world?’ I would say yes’.“If you ask me, on the other hand, to consider what’s happening in the Union today and the cost and consequences for different social

groups and European democracy of the crisis, and ask if I am content with what I see? The answer is no.”Laffan is adamant the Schuman Centre is a resource for Europe’s political, administrative and regulatory policy makers as they grapple with the consequences of deepening integration at a time of economic difficulty. Laffan be-lieves the future of the EU will be defined by the dynamics that play out as a result of the economic cri-sis, defining what type of Europe will emerge and how it will inter-act with the outside world. To help

ensure the centre maintains its policy relevance, Laffan intends to sharpen the focus of the centre, and has identified three broad re-search themes that will form the basis of the centre’s work.These themes are integration, gov-ernance and democracy; regulat-ing markets and governing mon-ey; and 21st century world politics and Europe.“A key question is whether, the EU is capable of being strategic in the world or to put it anoth-er way, to what extent Europe is now a shaper of global dynamics or a taker?”Closer to home Laffan hopes to build on the previous successes of the Robert Schuman Centre to create a scholarly community fo-cused on conducting both basic and applied research to the high-est standard, while continuing the Centre’s tradition of executive training and policy relevance.  “If I achieve these things, then I will be pretty happy when my time here comes to an end.”

“A key question is [...] to what extent Europe is now a shaper of global dynamics or a taker?”

RSCAS - Convento

15 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Profiles FellowA non-traditional academic

Ben Hammersley is a Robert Schuman Fellow with the Global Governance Programme. He is currently working on a paper reframing responses to terrorism through the lens of public health.“Wherever you are in the world that has had a spate of terrorism, there have been noticeable counter terrorism measures that have an effect on the entire populace,” he explains. “If you look at terrorism as a public health issue, it leads you into interesting ways of combating it that don’t do as much harm as if you view terrorism as a massive existential threat.”Hammersley’s work uses parameters used in the pharmaceutical industry to evaluate the costs and benefits to the public of counter-terrorism techniques. For example, one can weigh up the inconvenience caused from being asked to remove your shoes before air travel, as opposed to the likelihood of the practice foiling a terrorist plot.A “purposefully eclectic” career has seen him write for The Times and The Guardian, be banned from Burma for interviewing Ann San Suu Kyi, and serve as ambassador to Tech City in East London for the

UK Prime Minister, while coining the term “podcasting” in an article in 2004. His current roles include editor at large of the UK edition of Wired magazine, Innovator-in-Residence at Goldsmiths University, and non-residential fellow at the Brooking Institute. “I try to work on two things at the same time, I find they tend to feed off each other, sometimes in unexpected ways.”“In all the fields that I work in, they are all very fast moving. Nothing I have ever done in my career is something that existed

even 10 years before, aside from this. It would be nuts to make plans further in advance than about two years.”Before taking up his fellowship with the EUI, Hammersley worked alongside former EUI professor Miguel Maduro as a member of the European Commission’s High Level Expert Group on Media Freedom, and previously visited the EUI to consult with Professor Parcu of the Centre for Media Freedom and Plurality.“In any organisation you need your hedgehogs and you need

Ben Hammersley

16 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

your foxes, the value I can bring is to come in and draw parallels.”His current work does exactly that, exploring how cost-benefit analysis used in the pharmaceutical industry can be used to measure counter-terrorism practices and thus decide whether such practices are in the public interest.The NICE guidelines which are used to decide which drugs are

administrated to which patients in the UK’s National Health Service take into account the drug’s effectiveness and cost, but also the patients’ quality of life, and age. “If you treat terrorism as a public health matter, it allows you to have a similar conversation.”Invariably, when asked about particular measures, security services respond that if such practices weren’t in place lives would be lost. Hammersley suggests we consider other areas where an accepted level of risk is weighed against convenience, such as road travel, which, for example, causes 20,000 deaths a year in the US.“What’s worse, an ‘X’ number of people dying from terrorism versus everyone being inconvenienced? The amount of intellectual currency that has been dedicated to terrorism is more of a cost than the terrorism.”Hammersley will be at the EUI for the rest of the semester and regards the Institute as the ideal location for his current work:  “For the political theory that I do it is certainly the best place in

Europe. The Schuman fellowship is an amazing gift. The location, the atmosphere is completely unique. I’m not a traditional academic. I don’t have any academic qualifications at all. I’ve certainly given more classes and lectures in universities than I ever attended as a student. To have that connection with the EUI afterwards is deeply powerful.”

“In any organisation you need your hedgehogs and you need your foxes, the value I can bring is to come in and draw parallels.”

17 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

Profiles ResearcherLanguage and democracy

Joseph Lacey is a researcher in the Department of Political and So-cial Science, and is spending the

2013/14 academic year at Princeton University on a Fulbright Fellowship. His work explores democratic legiti-macy in multilingual federal states and sits at the crossroads between democratic theory, EU studies and comparative politics.While salient for the troubles facing the EU, Lacey’s work is also appli-cable to nation states such as Swit-zerland and Belgium where large proportions of the electorate speak different languages and share differ-ent cultures. “I’m interested in the question of whether or not democ-racy can satisfactorily work in multi-national political systems,” explains Lacey. “Especially when the issue of multilingualism is thrown in.”Before coming to the EUI, Lacey spent time as an MPhil researcher at KU Leuven, which helped crystallise his research field: “Living in Belgium during 2010/2011 was an interesting time. Not only was Brussels at the institutional heart of the on-going Euro-crisis that provoked pretty se-

vere nationalistically charged politi-cal divisions in Europe, but Belgium was also suffering its own internal problems as nationalistic tensions between Flemish and Walloons pre-vented the formation of a federal government for well over a year.” His background in philosophy has a notable effect on how Lacey conducts his research, as he prefers to start from a firm theoretical base before beginning his empirical research: “Many go the other way, but I have found that the more well worked out the problem is in abstraction the eas-ier it is to make sense of cases when they are tackled.”“The most exciting part for me is when theory meets political real-ity. It’s very satisfying when you find your theoretical work has explanato-ry power when applied to actual cas-es. But what’s most interesting (and sometimes frustrating) are the times when the theory must be revised, de-veloped, or even abandoned because it’s not doing the explanatory work that good theory should.” Lacey was notified of his Fulbright award in April. “I was pretty sur-prised when I got the e-mail. My in-terview, I thought, could have gone a lot better and so I didn’t have very

high hopes. Though I got the im-pression that having some publica-tions in hand helped to strengthen my case.”While the quality of academic life and the beautiful surroundings are qualities both institutions have in common Lacey has noticed a few differences to the EUI. “Of course, the accents are a bit more homo-geneous at Princeton. Also, in US universities PhD candidates are still considered (both by themselves and their professors) to be ‘students’. At the EUI, there is a feeling that PhD candidates have a more collegial sta-tus which seems to be deliberately promoted by the use of the word ‘researcher rather than student.’” While at Princeton, Lacey will con-sult with faculty and take advantage of graduate seminars at the Univer-sity Center for Human Values and at the European Union Program.On his return to Florence, Lacey hopes to arrange a workshop on multi-national democracy before turning his attention to post-doctor-al deadlines, as he looks to develop a career in academia: “I have a strong interest in continuing to do research. But I enjoy teaching and would like to make it part of my future.”

18 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Opinions

As the public d e b a t e c o n t i n u e s about the e l e c t r o n i c sur vei l lance

by national governments, it is becoming increasingly clear that the US broke the law.Many of the technical details about programmes used by the US government for the collection of communications data remain unknown. Nevertheless, the Snowden revelations make it obvious the US has been involved in activities in violation of its legally binding obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which the US is a party.The central privacy provision in the ICCPR is brief, and fails to fully articulate permissible limitations. However, Article 17 explicitly prohibits “arbitrary or unlawful interference” with anyone’s privacy or correspondence. It establishes a positive obligation for states to create a legal framework for the effective protection of privacy rights against interference or attacks, irrespective of whether they come from the state itself, foreign states, or private actors.

When I was UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism (2005-2011), I produced a report presenting an analytically rigorous test for permissible limitations upon privacy rights, including data protection. It includes the following conditions to determine whether an interference with privacy rights is justified, or whether it amounts to a violation of the ICCPR, The conditions are that (a) Any restrictions must be provided by the law; (b) The essence of a human right is not subject to restrictions; (c) Restrictions must be necessary in a democratic society; (d) Any discretion exercised when implementing the restrictions must not be unfettered; (e) For a restriction to be permissible, it is not enough that it serves one of the enumerated legitimate aims; it must be necessary for reaching the legitimate aim; (f) Restrictive measures must conform to the principle of proportionality; they must be appropriate to achieve their protective function; they must be the least intrusive instrument amongst those which might achieve the desired result; and they must be proportionate to the interest to be protected; and (g) Any restrictions

must be consistent with the other rights guaranteed in the Covenant.The application of this test concludes the electronic mass surveillance engaged in by the US, divulged by Edward Snowden, and to a certain extent confirmed by US authorities, did result in breaches of the legal obligations of the United States under ICCPR Article 17. This assessment follows independently from multiple grounds, as most of the NSA’s mass surveillance programmes fail to comply with several separate elements of the permissible limitations test. A detailed assessment of the additional programmes within the NSA mass surveillance architecture will require more work (and possibly more revelations). SURVEILLE, the EU funded project we run at the EUI, seeks to assess surveillance technologies for their technological usability, ethical implications, and intrusiveness upon fundamental rights. The hope is that in the future the discourse in this area will be able to move away from abstract ‘balancing’ to more rigorous assessment.

ELECTRONIC MASS SURVEILLANCE VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS

Martin Scheinin is Professor of International Law and Human Rights. From 1997 until 2004 he was a member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and in 2005 was appointed the first United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism, a position of trust he held until 2011.

19 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Opinions

THE GERMAN ELECTIONS AND EUROPE

No experi-ments – this was the slogan of the CDU under Kon-rad Adenauer

in the 1950s, and this still seems to have been the winning formula in the German elections this fall. The incumbent chancellor won in a big way. The voters seemed to appreci-ate the prudent incrementalism she stands for; her lack of vision did cer-tainly not work against her. The Ger-mans, apparently, can live very well without a daring pitch. Given that the German economy is humming along, the voters were not in the mood for a change. The campaign was utterly boring, big issues were conspicuously absent. The CDU won with the smiling image of the Chancellor, whose understatement and common sense won the sym-pathy of the voters. With respect to the key issues, an unexpressed agree-ment has existed between the two camps in the Bundestag for some time, given that the CDU under Merkel had moved considerably to the left in the course of the last legis-lature. This unexpressed agreement not only characterized domestic

policies such as the family policy, or energy policy after the government had abandoned nuclear energy and adopted the ‘Energiewende’, but also the way to deal with the Eurocrisis. Europe did not play a role in the elec-tions, because the positions of the CDU, SPD and the Greens on the European debt crisis were so similar. The implications of the election re-sult for Europe depend on the out-come of the coalition formation which may still take some time. Al-though the CDU and Angela Merkel triumphed, the election outcome makes coalition formation very dif-ficult. An exceptionally large num-ber of votes were wasted since two parties narrowly failed to gain rep-resentation in parliament due to the 5 percent threshold: the CDU’s preferred coalition partner (FDP) and the Alternative for Germany, the Eurosceptic upstart that did well for a brand new party, but did not quite make it. Three parties from the left actually got a majority of the votes, and it is only due to the refusal of the SPD and the Greens to form a coali-tion with the Linke that the CDU is going to lead the next government once more. As the Economist put it, ‘around Europe they sit and wait for

Angela. They waited for her to fight her election campaign. Now they must wait for her to form a coalition’. It is unlikely that she will change her prudent approach to the Eurocri-sis. She is unlikely to become any less insistent on fiscal discipline and greater competitiveness in the Euro-zone. The Economist believes that Mrs. Merkel will be keener than ever to protect German taxpayers not just because the voters demand it, but also because the challenge of the Al-ternative for Germany came close to obtain representation in the Bunde-stag. Alternatively, one might argue that the Alternative for Germany mostly took votes from the FDP and does not constitute a direct threat to the CDU, and that a grand coali-tion, the most likely outcome of the coalition formation, might actually be promising for Germany’s leader-ship role in Europe. The formation of a grand coalition would give the government a two-thirds majority allowing it to change the constitution and to impose far-reaching decisions making for institutional integration in Europe – a way out of the Euro-crisis.

Hanspeter Kriesi holds the Stein Rokkan Chair of Comparative Politics in the Department of Political and Social Science at the EUI. He has been a visiting professor at Cornell University (1994-95) and at the WZB-Berlin (2000-2001). At the University of Zurich, he has directed the Centre for Comparative and International Studies (2002-2005), and the Swiss National Competence Centre for Research on Democracy (2005-2012).

20 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

6TH CHINESE IN PRATO & 4TH WENZHOUESE DIASPORA SYMPOSIA ON CHINESE MIGRATION, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMY

The RSCAS' Migration Policy Centre (MPC) is collaborating with Monash University Prato Centre, PIN University of Florence, and the Business School

of Wenzhou University to organise the 6th Chinese in Prato & 4th Wenzhouese Diaspora Symposia, which will take place in Prato, Italy, near Florence. This year the theme of the conference is Chinese migration, entrepreneurship and development in the new global economy.The MPC will be presenting several papers written within the framework of its pilot project 'Chinese migration and economic relations with Europe'.

THE URSULA HIRSCHMANN ANNUAL LECTURE ON GENDER AND EUROPEBodies Covered and Exposed: Feminist Reflections on '’Choice’’ in the 21st Century

Professor Leora Auslander (University of Chicago) will deliver the 2013 Ursula Hirschmann Annual Lecture on Gender and Europe, discussing the choices women face about

their bodies in public spaces, and how the debate has progressed since the 1970s. The Lecture series is named in honour of Ursula Hirschmann, who created the group Femmes pour l'Europe in Brussels in 1975 as a space to reflect on, critique and contribute to the contemporary debate on the construction of Europe. The lecture series aims to promote an understanding of the linkages between gender and European issues, as well as an idea of Europe which recognises differences, including that of gender. The Ursula Hirschmann Lecture series is organised by the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies and the Departments of History and Civilization.

Events

5 NOVEMBER 2013

29-30OCTOBER 2013

21 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

MAX WEBER LECTURE

Quo vadis Europe? Banks, Sovereigns and the Crisis

Professor Martin Hellwig (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods) will examine why Europe has found it so difficult to deal with the so-called "euro crisis”, looking at the weaknesses in the available

governance mechanisms and the inadequacy of national and supranational discourse to address the complex crises. Professor Hellwig will also discuss the role of banking union in the reform of European governance, and the political issues associated with it.The monthly Max Weber Lectures are given by distinguished scholars from the four fields of Economics, History, Law and Political and Social Sciences. The series is coordinated and planned by the Max Weber Programme.

Register online

ACADEMY OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE EXECUTIVE TRAINING SEMINAR European Union and Global Governance

The Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies' Academy of Global Governance offers an executive training seminar on the role of the EU on the global stage, discussing the issues of national identity and how the EU fits into the existing structures of multilateral organisations such as the UN, WTO and IMF.The scientific coordinator of this seminar is Professor Nuno Severiano Teixeira (New University of Lisbon), former national defence minister of Portugal and EUI alumnus.

Participation by application onlyApplication Deadline: 10 November 2013

Apply online

27 NOVEMBER 2013

2-4 DECEMBER 2013

Events

22 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

PHD RECRUITMENT ROADSHOWSEvents

Learn about the EUI through our new video.

GENEVA 31 October

DUBLIN 4 November

LONDON 6 November

TURKU 11 November

ZURICH 15 November

The EUI is going on the road with a new recruiting initiative.

EUI faculty and/or researchers will be on hand in the listed cities to answer questions from prospective applicants to the PhD programmes.

For more information, including specific times and locations, please write to the EUI Communications Service at eui.pr@eui.eu

VIENNA 15 November

GLASGOW 19 November

EDINBURGH 20 November

TARTU 20 November

HELSINKI 2 DecemberApplication deadline for 2014/15 academic year: 31 January 2014

23 EUI TIMES | Spring 2013

Publications

Religious Conversions in the Mediterranean World Olivier Roy and Nadia MarzoukiPalgrave Macmillan, 2013

EUI Professor Olivier Roy and Nadia Marzouki have edited a book exploring the social and political impacts of religious conversions in the Mediterranean world.“What we consider a new phenomena is religious con-versations that are both massive, and individual. It is not local populations coming into a religion, but a collec-tion of individuals who choose for themselves a differ-ent religious affiliation. It is now reaching a quantitative threshold,” explains Roy.These conversions, says Roy, pose questions not only for the converted, but increasingly for the societies in which they live, breaking the established consensus be-tween religion, the state, and nationality. Conversions can pose problems for employers who have to quickly adapt to new religious behavior, it can also cause problems in courts as converts are often less willing to accept traditional compromises such as the separation between church and state. According to Roy, such converts are causing states around the world to rethink what religion is and what freedom of religion is: “When you have a convert, they want the real thing. They are not interested in traditional compromises.”

“One of our colleagues studied the phenomena of black French citizens self-converting to Judaism. This has consequences for Israel, how do they define what is a Jew, how do they define who has the right to check con-versions? Even if there is a relatively small number of converts to a religion, it has an impact.”In Tunisia, their consensus is they are a Muslim society. In this context eating during Ramadan can, and is, seen as a disturbance to public order. However there is an increasingly large community of evangelical, ethically Arab Christians, who see no reason not to be allowed to eat during Ramadan. In these cases, how should the law, which is partly based on Sharia, treat Christians? In Europe the converts are readdressing the way dif-fering religions are seen in the context of an individual country: “In Germany you can be protestant, Catholic or perhaps Jewish, but Muslims are viewed as foreign, but converts can be white German.”The book, which comes out of a conference which took place three years ago at the EUI, also looks at the phe-nomena such as Turkish Muslim women who vener-ate the Virgin Mary and the growth of Mormonism in France. The work fits into the framework of the Eu-ropean Research Council-funded ReligioWest project at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, which studies how states are redefining their relation-ships to religion.

24 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

Publications

Democracy: An Ongoing ChallengeNCCR Democracy, Hanspeter Kriesi, Lars Müller (eds)Zürich, Lars Müller Publishers 2013

Democracy: An Ongoing Challenge: This is a ‘vis-ual reader’, an illustrated textbook for the public at large. It presents the ongoing challenge of democ-racy from a variety of perspectives, making clear that democracy is not a state that can be reached once and for all but instead requires dialogue and confrontation, time and time again, posing an en-during challenge both for those who are governed and those who govern.This volume follows the long road to democracy as we know it today. It discusses what ‘rule by the peo-ple’ means, shows the variety of ways people rule, it introduces the preconditions for democracy and as-sesses its performance, uncovers traditional forms of participation, moves to the smaller scale of de-mocracy in everyday life, points to the challenge of mediatization and globalization, and asks whether democracy is on the right track or whether we are moving toward post-democracy. The text is present-ed in a combination of topical chapters and shorter texts devoted to case studies and special issues rang-ing from the question of whether small is beautiful

to democracy in megacities and the democracy of democracies. Brief citations and classic statements from some of democracy’s heroes illustrate the gen-eral argument.In addition to the mosaic of texts, Democracy: An Ongoing Challenge builds on the power of images. Individual images as well as galleries of pictures bring seemingly abstract concepts like democratisa-tion, globalisation, and internationalization to life. As addressed here, democracy is not just an abstrac-tion. It is shown in its many and varied dimensions: as a utopia, as a challenge, as normalcy. The photos of Nelson Mandela as president and images of the fall of the Berlin Wall illustrate how once-utopian notions have become reality.

25 EUI TIMES | Autumn 2013

PublicationsBrisku, Adrian. Bittersweet Europe : Albanian and Georgian discourses on Europe, 1878-2008 (Berghan, 2013)

Francioni, Francesco ; Gordley, James. Enforcing international cultural heritage law (Oxford U Press, 2013)

Mair, Peter. Ruling the void: the hollowing of western democracy (Verso, 2013)

Radi, Yannick. La standardisation et le droit international : contours d’une théorie dialectique de la formation du droit (Bruylant, 2013)

Burke, Ciarán. An equitable framework for humanitarian intervention (Hart, 2013)

Geary, Michael J. Enlarging the European Union : the Commission seeking influence, 1961-1973 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013)

Millet, François-Xavier. L’Union européenne et l’identité constitutionnelle des États membres (Lextenso editions et Karine Roudier, 2013)

Rose, Richard. Representing Europeans : a pragmatic approach (Oxford, 2013)

Cole, David; Fabbrini, Federico; Vedaschi, Arianna. Secrecy, national security and the vindication of constitutional law (Edward Elgar, 2013)

Lixinski, Lucas. Intangible cultural heritage in international law (Oxford U Press, 2013)

Pérez-García, Manuel. Vicarious consumers : trans-national meetings between the West and East in the Mediterranean world (1730–1808) (Ashgate, 2013)

Triandafyllidou, Anna; Gropas, Ruby; Kouki, Hara. The Greek crisis and European modernity (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013)

SELECTEDEUI BOOKS

cadmus.eui.eu

26 NOVEMBER, BRUSSELS

CONNIE HEDEGAARD

European Commissioner

for Climate Action

JOS DELBEKEDirector General,

DG Climate Action

KNOWLEDGEPARTNER

PHILIP LOWE

Director General,

DG Energy

ØYSTEINLØSETHCEO, Vattenfall

FULVIO CONTI CEO, Enel

DIRKFORRISTER President & CEO, IETA

GRÉGOIREPOUX-GUILLAUME President, Alstom Grid

FLORENCE SCHOOL OFREGULATION

EUEUEn

erg

yEn

erg

yEn

erg

yEn

erg

y po

licy

po

licy

po

licy

:

CLIMATECLIMATECLIMATECLIMATE

FSR 2013 FO

RU

M

???WHEREWHEREWHERE

andandand

do we godo we godo we godo we godo we godo we godo we goWHERE

do we goWHEREWHERE

do we goWHERE

A one day high-level Forum on European energy and climate policy organised by the European University Institute (EUI) and the Florence School of Regulation (FSR) in partnership with the Financial Times.

Leading policymakers, business leaders as well as regulators and academics will gather to discuss the future of energy and climate change policy in Europe.

� e forum will be followed by the FSR’s Energy Transparency Award ceremony where the 2013 winner will be announced.

EU ENERGY & CLIMATE POLICY:WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

from herefrom herefrom here

REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN

CHRISTIAN

BUCHELDeputy CEO,

ERDF

ASSOCIATEPARTNER

SUPPORTINGPARTNER

ORGANISATIONALSUPPORT

fsr@eui.eu | eecf.eui.eu

BEEUWSAERT

DIRKChairman of International Power Ltd

QM

-AJ-12-001-EN

-N

ISSN: 1977-799X