<section name="raw">
    <SEQUENTIAL>
      <record key="001" att1="001" value="167714" att2="167714">001   167714</record>
      <field key="037" subkey="x">englisch</field>
      <field key="038" subkey="y">deutsch</field>
      <field key="050" subkey="x">E-Paper</field>
      <field key="076" subkey="">Politikwissenschaft</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="y">http://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/lib/ep15.pdf</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="z">Joerges, Christian, Integration through de-legislation? An irritated heckler (pdf)</field>
      <field key="100" subkey="">Joerges, Christian</field>
      <field key="103" subkey="">European University Institute</field>
      <field key="104" subkey="b">Fraser, Iain F. (Tr.)</field>
      <field key="200" subkey="b">(Connecting Excellence on European Governance (CONNEX) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="204" subkey="b">(New Modes of Governance (NewGov) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="331" subkey="">Integration through de-legislation? An irritated heckler</field>
      <field key="335" subkey="">EUROGOV is funded by the EU's 6th Framework Programme, Priority 7</field>
      <field key="341" subkey="">übersetzt von einer deutschen Version</field>
      <field key="403" subkey="">1. Ed.</field>
      <field key="425" subkey="">2007, July</field>
      <field key="433" subkey="">28 pp.</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="">European Governance Papers; No. N-07-03</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="h">Begg, Iain (Ed.) ; Falkner, Gerda (Ed.) ; Scherhaufer, Patrick (Ed.) ; et al.</field>
      <field key="461" subkey="">EUROGOV</field>
      <field key="517" subkey="c">from the Table of Contents: Introduction: The turn to governance as a challenge to the rule of law and the structuring of the</field>
      <field key="arg" subkey="u">ment; Governance: Remarks on the recent career of the concept and a reminder of older methodological debates; New and not so</field>
      <field key="new" subkey="">forms of European governance: A chronology; A new type of supranational conflict of laws as a form of Constitution for</field>
      <field key="Eur" subkey="o">pe; Prospects; List of References;</field>
      <field key="542" subkey="">1813-6826</field>
      <field key="544" subkey="">EP15</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Comitology</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Europeanization</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Governance</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Multilevel governance</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Open coordination</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Private international law</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Rule of law</field>
      <field key="753" subkey="">Abstract: This paper is about the difficult relationship between law and governance in the European  Union. The turn to</field>
      <field key="gov" subkey="e">rnance which the Prodi Commission has forcefully propagated is a continuation of much  older developments. By means of these</field>
      <field key="dev" subkey="e">lopments the European Community (now Union) has sought to  compensate for the inadequacies found within its institutional</field>
      <field key="des" subkey="i">gn (in particular, within the Community  Method); a design which has had constantly to be adapted to the ever more intense</field>
      <field key="and" subkey="">complex regulatory  needs of the integration project. These constant institutional innovations were functional necessities</field>
      <field key="and" subkey="">the turn to governance seems to be irresistible and irreversible. Such innovation, however, is not easily  reconcilable with</field>
      <field key="the" subkey="">Union's commitment to the rule of law, or with the very idea of law-mediated,  politically accountable rule. These tensions</field>
      <field key="are" subkey="">addressed in two steps. The first concerns the national  level and is a mainly methodological reminder: manyof the governing</field>
      <field key="tec" subkey="h">niques that are today defined as  governance can also be found within national systems and were, furthermore, the subject of</field>
      <field key="int" subkey="e">nsive debate  in the 80s within discussion on proceduralizing and reflexive methodologies which sought to capture the</field>
      <field key="spe" subkey="c">ifics of a - then so perceived - postinterventionist law. The second step concerns the European Union.  Here, a</field>
      <field key="met" subkey="h">odological approach is insufficient. It must instead be accompanied by a re-conceptualisation of  European lawas a new type</field>
      <field key="of" subkey="s">upranational conflict of laws. This law seeks to realize what the  Constitutional Treaty had called the "motto of the Union",</field>
      <field key="nam" subkey="e">ly a reconciliation of "unity and  diversity".  It is submitted that a re-conceptualisation of European law in terms of</field>
      <field key="con" subkey="f">lict-of-laws would  not only help  to rescue the rule of law but would also increase our capacity to cope with the unresolved</field>
      <field key="sub" subkey="s">tantive  tensions within the European polity.;</field>
    </SEQUENTIAL>
  </section>