Abstract
The “widening” and “deepening” of a pan-European political entity, which proceeded at a startling pace during the 1990s and began the twenty-first century with a common currency (the Euro) and a membership of 27 member-states, has raised a series of both practical and theoretical questions. Initially a response to the tragedies of World War II and a way to limit any possible military aspirations in post-Fascist Germany, the European Union (EU) has become a case study in globalization. Characterized by multiple, often intersecting and overlapping levels of decision-making (see for example Hooghe and Marks 2001), transnational policy networking, and a reconfiguration of Westphalian sovereignty, the EU has been referred to, perhaps erroneously, as the first postmodern state. This “regulation of deregulation” above the nation-state in the EU has not only weakened or modified traditional locations of political authority, it has also coincided with processes of fragmentation, subnational and regional empowerment, and the decline of state-based authority.
Or did I think that the pollution would be blacker just because it has been recently more publicized?
—Eva Hoffman (1993)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Agh, Attila. 1999. “Processes of Democratization in the East Central European and Balkan States: Sovereignty-Related Conflicts in the Context of Europeanization.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 32: 263–79.
Andersen, Svein. S. and Kjell Eliassen. A. 1996. The European Union: How Democratic Is It? London: SAGE.
Barry, Norman. “Germany and the Third Way.” Accessed January 20, 2003 <http://www.libertyhaven.com/countriesandregions/germany/thirdway.shtml>.
Baubock, Ranier. 2000. Public lecture at the Austrian Permanent Representation at the European Union.
Beck, Ulrich. 2002. Macht und Gegenmacht in globalen Zeitalter. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
Bulmer, Simon. 1997. “New Institutionalism, The Single Market and EU Governance.” Accessed January 18, 2002 <http://www.arena.uio.no/pulications/wp97_25.htm>.
Chryssochoou, Dimitris. N. 1998. Democracy in the European Union. London: Tauris Academic Studies.
Coleman, William. 2003. Globality and Transnational Policy-making in Agriculture: Complexity, Contradictions, and Conflict. Institute on Globalization and the Human Condition Working Papers. No. 6.
Czech Ministry of Environment. 1999. Report on the Environment in Czech Republic in 1998. Prague: MoE.
—. 1999. State Environmental Policy. Prague: MoE.
Dalton, Russel J. and Robert Rohrschneider. 1999. “Transnational Environmentalism: Do Environmental Groups Cooperate Globally?” Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of California, Irvine. Research Papers.
Delamaide, Darrell. 1994. The New Superregions of Europe. New York: Pengu in Books.
European Commission. 2002. “The Enlargement of the European Union on May 1, 2004.” EU Info, 6, 1.
Fagin, Andrew and Petr Jehlicka. 1998. “Sustainable Development in the Czech Republic: A Doomed Process?” Pp. 113–28 in Dilemmas of Transition: The Environment, Democracy and Economic Reform in East Central Europe, ed. S. Baker and Petr Jehlicka. London: Frank Cass.
Fric, Pavel. 1999. Activities and Needs of the Non-Profit Organizations in the Czech Republic. Prague: ICN—Information Center for Foundations and Other Not-For-Profit Organizations.
Glinski, Piotr. 1998. “Polish Greens and Politics: A Social Movement in a Time of Transformation” Pp. 129–53 in Environmental Protection in Transition: Economic, Legal and Socio-political Perspectives on Transition, ed. Daniel H. Cole and John Clark. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hallström, Lars. K. 2004. “Eurocratizing Enlargement? EU Elites and NGO Participation in European Environmental Policy” Pp. 175–93 in EU Enlargement and the Environment: Institutional Change and Environmental Policy in Central and Eastern Europe, ed. J. Carmin and Stacy Vandeveer. New York: Routledge.
Hicks, Barbara, E. 1996. Environmental Politics in Poland: A Social Movement Between Regime and Opposition. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks. 2001. “Types of Multi-level Governance.” European Integration Online Papers, 5, no.11.
Institute for Social Studies, University of Warsaw. 1999. Polish General Social Surveys. Warsaw, Poland.
Jancar-Webster, Barbara. 1998. “Environmental Movement and Social Change in the Transition Countries.” Environmental Politics 7, no.1: 69–92.
Kaldor, Mary. 2003. Global Civil Society: An Answer to War. London: Polity.
Kolarska-Bobinska, Lena. 1994. “Social Interests and Their Political Representation: Poland in Transition.” British Journal of Sociology 45, no.1: 109–25.
Kuehls, Tom. 1996. Beyond Sovereign Territory. Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press.
March, James G. and Johan P. Olson. 1984. “The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life.” American Political Science Review 78: 734–49.
Mazey, Sonya and Jeremy Richardson. 1993. Lobbying in the European Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Millard, Frances. 1998. “Environmental Policy in Poland.” Environmental Politics, 7, no.1 (Spring): 145–61.
ÖGUT (Austrian Society for Environment and Technology) 2002. Environmental Policies, Strategies and Programmes of the EU Accession Countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Austria: ÖGUT.
Orenstein, Mitchell and Raj M. Desai. 1997. “State Power and Interest Group Formation.” Problems of Post-Communism 44, no. 6: 43–53.
Pehe, Jiri. 1993. “Waning Popularity of the Czech Parliament.” RFE/RL Research Reports 2/45.
Potucek, Martin. 1999. Not Only the Market: The Role of the Market, Government and Civic Sector in the Development of Postcommunist Societies. Budapest: CEU Press.
Rosenberg, Tina. 1995. The Haunted Land: Facing Europe’s Ghost After Communism. New York: Vintage Books.
Sofres-Factum, s. r. o. 2000. Prague: Sofres-Factum.
Tarrow, Sidney. 1998. “Fishnets, Internets and Catnets: Globalization and Transnational Collective Action.” Pp. 228–44 in Challenging Authority, ed. Hanagan, M. Leslie Page Mooch and Wayne Brake Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press.
Telò, Mario. 2001. European Union and New Regionalism: Regional Actors and Global Governance in a Post-Hegemonic Era. Aldershot: Ashgare.
Tucker, Aviiezer, Karel Jakes, Marian Kiss, Ivana Kupcova, Ivo Losman, David Ondracka, Jan Outly, and Vera Styskalikova. 2000. “From Republican Virtue to Technology of Power: Three Episodes of Czech Nonpolitical Politics.” Political Science Quarterly 115, no. 4: 421–45.
Vecernik, Jiri. 1999. “The Middle Class in the Czech Reforms: the Interplay between Policies and Social Stratification.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 32: 397–416.
Weber, Cynthia. 1995. Simulating Sovereignty—Intervention, the State and Symbolic Exchange. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Weiler, Joseph. 1995. “European Democracy and its Critique: Five Uneasy Pieces.” EUI Working Papers.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2005 Janie Leatherman and Julie Webber
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hallström, L.K. (2005). Environmental Movements in East Central Europe: Between Technocracy and the “Third Way”. In: Leatherman, J., Webber, J. (eds) Charting Transnational Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403981080_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403981080_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-4039-6977-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4039-8108-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)