About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

36 Comp. Pol. Stud. 5 (2003)

handle is hein.journals/compls36 and id is 1 raw text is: Editors' Preface T here is a growing literature documenting the institutionalist turn in Euro- pean Union (EU) studies. This work is exciting and innovative and has done much to relink the study of the EU to the broader disciplines. At the same time, the three of us have shared a sense of frustration that the emerging whole-a better understanding of institutional dynamics in Europe and else- where-was less than the sum of the parts. In reviewing the literature, we saw divisions that were unnecessary, confu- sion that could be clarified and meta-theoretical bloodletting that was both needless and hindering scholarly progress. These facts led us to convene an exploratory workshop at the University of Washington in March 2000. Our initial hunch was that three divisions were motivating the debates among institutionalists. The first was geographical: Over time, scholars in Europe and the United States had come to approach the study of the EU in different ways. The second was functional: Institutionalists drew on different subfields-comparative politics (CP) or international relations (IR)- depending on how they had been trained. The third was social theoretic: Scholars studying the EU could differ meaningfully depending on whether their institutional assumptions were informed more by economics or sociology. Although the first workshop was structured to highlight the role played by all three divisions, it quickly became apparent that the first two-U.S. v. European; CP v. IR-were more apparent than real. The more potent divide was the third, social theoretic, one. Given this finding, we began to explore ways in which this latter gap could be transcended. This exploration led to the present set of essays. We wanted to understand better the putative divide separating rationalist and sociological/ constructivist institutionalisms. Much more important, though, was a desire to drive this debate down to empirical and operational levels, thus getting a better sense of complementarities-as well as of continuing antagonisms- between these traditions. Exactly how can bridges be built between them? What are the limits of such exercises? What is the value added for under- standing institutional dynamics within the EU? The articles in this special issue have been through a multistage review process. Virtually all of them were first presented and critiqued at two work- COMPARATIVE POLITICAL STUDIES, Vol. 36 No. 1/2, February/March 2003 5-6 DOI: 10.1177/0010414002239369 © 2003 Sage Publications 5

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most