THE POLITICISATION OF SOCIAL EUROPE. CONFLICT DYNAMICS IN THE POST-CRISIS DEBATE OVER EU SOCIAL AND EMPLOYMENT POLICIES

The bulk of the literature on ‘Social Europe’ has described the latest development of the social dimensions of the E(M)U in negative terms by referring to the absorption, the displacement, the decline and the marginalization of the EU social policies. Notably, the ruling of the European Court of Justice and the new post-crisis governance of the Economic and Monetary Union have contributed to increase the centrality of social issues in the European public debate, exacerbate the conflicts between political actors on EU social and employment policy and mount the dissensus towards the European integration process. While academic literature has broadly focused on the mobilization of political parties in defense of national welfare states against the EU “intrusiveness” into domestic decision-making and on the heightened politicization of EU affairs at the domestic level, less attention has been paid to the ‘politicization of Social Europe’, and especially to the configuration of the political conflicts over social integration at the EU level. Indeed, traditional literature on dimensions of politics in the European Parliament and the Council has ignored the specific conflict dynamics that characterize the political debate in this specific policy area. Therefore, the objective of this thesis is to fill this gap, and especially so by focusing on the new conflict constellations that emerged in the aftermath of the EU crisis. Drawing on the “clash syndrome” theory elaborated by Ferrera, I argue that the political debate over EU social integration is characterized by the overlapping of four lines of conflict of a functional, normative and territorial nature. Contrary to traditional literature, which has described the conflict over EU integration as mainly one- or bi-dimensional, the main finding of this thesis is that the political confrontation over EU social and employment policy is characterised by the coexistence of multiple and criss-crossing divides, which differently combine according to the arena where the debate takes place, the actors involved, the rules of the decision-making process and the issue at stake. The way these political divides interact leads to the creation of different conflict constellations, which can hinder the adoption of specific social policy proposal, but that can also open possibility spaces for the emergence of new coalitions that facilitate the adoption of an ambitious Social policy agenda.