The Problematic Coexistence of Functional and Territorial Representation in the EU

Abstract

The paper explores the difficult coexistence between territorial and functional representation in the European Union. It starts by presenting a rather general framework for the analysis of territorial and functional claims that distinguished between ‘lumpy’ claims — indivisible claims that can be made only by representatives of collective actors on the basis of shared identities and that cannot, therefore, be parceled out or compromised upon — and ‘divisible’ claims — claims forthcoming from individual actors that can be aggregated and presented as ‘categorical’, but whose aggregation does not give rise to any collective identity. After discussing (and discarding) the more radical views that consider territorial representation as wholly outdated and ineffective, it sketches two more nuanced solutions to the problematic coexistence of territorial and functional representation — democratic experimentalism and multi-level governance — that purport to describe the ways in which binding decisions are made in the EU. It concludes that the representational mixes embodied in these solutions are indeed viable, but that they both require the willingness on the part of territorial and functional representatives to shed their ‘lumpy’ claims and to be ready to compromise over ‘divisible’ claims.

Key Words:

• Representation
• functional
• territorial
• multi-level governance
• democratic experimentalism
• EU

Notes

1. I here use ‘lumpy’ to mean collective, indivisible claims that can be made only by collective actors on the basis of a shared identity and that cannot, therefore, be parcelled out and ‘divisible’ to mean claims that, although made by individual actors, can be aggregated and presented as ‘categorical’, but whose aggregation does not give rise to any collective identity.

2. For an opposite view based on an analysis of German federalism, see Scharpf (1988).

3. The Commission has requested the creation of (at least) administrative regions also in the recent enlargement countries, only to then retrench somewhat from fully involving them, given the difficulty of handing over to them the management of the Structural Funds (see Hughes, Sasse, and Gordon 2003).

4. This definition, taken from Wikipedia, summarizes effectively the essence of Gestalt theory: ‘Gestalt psychology (German: Gestalt — ‘essence or shape of an entity’s complete form’) of the Berlin School is a theory of mind and brain positing that the operational principle of the brain is holistic, parallel, and analog, with self-organizing tendencies. The Gestalt effect is the form-generating capability of our senses, particularly with respect to the visual recognition of figures and whole forms instead of just a collection of simple lines and curves..sGestalt psychologists find it is important to think of problems as a whole’. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_psychology (accessed 17 March 2011).