欧盟财政治理与新自由主义宪政的管理改革

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 BUSINESS
I. Lovering
{"title":"欧盟财政治理与新自由主义宪政的管理改革","authors":"I. Lovering","doi":"10.1177/10245294221127360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the EU’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to challenge interpretations of neoliberalism as an international project. The fiscal rules of the SGP are a paradigmatic example of how neoliberalism uses constitutional techniques to put limits on national democracy. These rules, however, have never worked as intended with adherence having been the exception rather than the norm. Although scholars readily admit neoliberal rules misfire in practice, conceptualisations of neoliberalism have remained largely unscathed. In contrast, this article argues that techniques of budgetary planning have had a more crucial impact on neoliberal fiscal governance than legal rules. In the case of the SGP, supranational actors have been empowered not by their capacity to put constitutional limits on public expenditure, but by analysing and intervening in the purposes and uses of public finance through managerial techniques of budgetary planning. In making this argument, I argue that neoliberal rules matter to international fiscal governance only through their failure. Instead, supranational institutions have been empowered in the neoliberal era through a managerial reformatting of governance.","PeriodicalId":46999,"journal":{"name":"Competition & Change","volume":"27 1","pages":"534 - 550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EU fiscal governance and the managerial reformatting of neoliberal constitutionalism\",\"authors\":\"I. Lovering\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10245294221127360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyses the EU’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to challenge interpretations of neoliberalism as an international project. The fiscal rules of the SGP are a paradigmatic example of how neoliberalism uses constitutional techniques to put limits on national democracy. These rules, however, have never worked as intended with adherence having been the exception rather than the norm. Although scholars readily admit neoliberal rules misfire in practice, conceptualisations of neoliberalism have remained largely unscathed. In contrast, this article argues that techniques of budgetary planning have had a more crucial impact on neoliberal fiscal governance than legal rules. In the case of the SGP, supranational actors have been empowered not by their capacity to put constitutional limits on public expenditure, but by analysing and intervening in the purposes and uses of public finance through managerial techniques of budgetary planning. In making this argument, I argue that neoliberal rules matter to international fiscal governance only through their failure. Instead, supranational institutions have been empowered in the neoliberal era through a managerial reformatting of governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Competition & Change\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"534 - 550\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Competition & Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294221127360\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition & Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294221127360","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文分析了欧盟的《稳定与增长公约》(SGP),以挑战对新自由主义作为一个国际项目的解释。SGP的财政规则是新自由主义如何利用宪法技术限制国家民主的典范。然而,这些规则从未像预期的那样发挥作用,遵守是例外而非规范。尽管学者们欣然承认新自由主义规则在实践中失败了,但新自由主义的概念化基本上没有受到影响。相比之下,本文认为,预算规划技术对新自由主义财政治理的影响比法律规则更为关键。就SGP而言,超国家行为者的权力不是通过其对公共支出施加宪法限制的能力,而是通过预算规划的管理技术分析和干预公共财政的目的和用途。在提出这一论点时,我认为新自由主义规则只有在失败后才对国际财政治理有意义。相反,超国家机构在新自由主义时代通过治理的管理改革获得了权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EU fiscal governance and the managerial reformatting of neoliberal constitutionalism
This article analyses the EU’s Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to challenge interpretations of neoliberalism as an international project. The fiscal rules of the SGP are a paradigmatic example of how neoliberalism uses constitutional techniques to put limits on national democracy. These rules, however, have never worked as intended with adherence having been the exception rather than the norm. Although scholars readily admit neoliberal rules misfire in practice, conceptualisations of neoliberalism have remained largely unscathed. In contrast, this article argues that techniques of budgetary planning have had a more crucial impact on neoliberal fiscal governance than legal rules. In the case of the SGP, supranational actors have been empowered not by their capacity to put constitutional limits on public expenditure, but by analysing and intervening in the purposes and uses of public finance through managerial techniques of budgetary planning. In making this argument, I argue that neoliberal rules matter to international fiscal governance only through their failure. Instead, supranational institutions have been empowered in the neoliberal era through a managerial reformatting of governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
37
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信