EU3D · EU Differentiation, Dominance and Democracy

The UK’s decision to leave the EU sent shock-waves through an EU that had gone through an unprecedented process of integration extending for seven decades. Brexit came at a propitious moment for a Union that was still reeling from the effects of the Euro-crisis, the refugee crisis and other challenges, which had exposed the EU’s vulnerabilities, and served as a reminder that member states may not continue on the same integrationist track. It is widely recognised that the EU that emerged from the crises is more differentiated, but it is not clear if differentiation is part of the problem or part of the solution. All political systems are differentiated, but the EU is distinct in the way it is structured, and in the way in which the process of integration is structured and conducted. The EU’s White Paper contains proposals that variously recommend more and less differentiation. EU3D’s main objective is to develop and apply to the EU and beyond a theory of differentiation that specifies the conditions under which differentiation is politically acceptable, institutionally sustainable and democratically legitimate, and the conditions under which it is not, i.e. when conditions of dominance prevail. EU3D does that through comprehensive analyses of the multilevel EU’s institutional and constitutional make-up across a range of policy areas. To properly address this critical issue, EU3D has devised an innovative analytical approach and a framework of research that provides the necessary benchmarks and that moves research well beyond the state-of-the-art, both theoretically and empirically. Further, EU3D will have an impact on the debate on the future of Europe by a) systematically analysing a broad range of proposals; b) mobilising knowledge and competence of a broad and multidisciplinary network of scholars, practitioners, stake-holders and publics from across Europe; and c) providing policy and polity recommendations that have been tested against EU3D’s benchmarks.