The initial, ambitious agenda of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), coupled with its ten years of operation, raised expectations for comprehensive approximation with resultant significant socio-economic reforms. Yet the initial high hopes for a systematic regulatory and legislative alignment were not realized. The article's purpose is to offer a typology and analysis of the various factors that render it more difficult to attain this strategic objective of the ENP, underscoring the limits of the Law in serving a transformative role.
|Original language||American English|
|Number of pages||24|
|Journal||European Foreign Affairs Review|
|State||Published - 2014|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Arnold Brecht Chair, European Law, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (email@example.com). The research was conducted under the aegis of Sharing Knowledge Assets: InteRregionally Cohesive NeigHborhoods (SEARCH), financed by the EU Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7-SSH-SSH-2010.2.2.1-266834). I am grateful for the first-rate research assistance of Tamar Luster, Noa Jeselsohn and Shani Bar-Tuvia and for the comments of Maya Sion-Tzidkiyahu.All references to internet sources were accessed on 2 Sep. 2014. For the original version of the Wider Europe Initiative, see COM (2003) 104 final. See also Communication from the Commission, European Neighbourhood Policy Strategy Paper’, COM(2004)373 final. For selective scholarship, see T. Casier, To Adopt or Not to Adopt: Explaining Selective Rule Transfer under the European Neighbourhood Policy, 33 Journal of European Integration 1, 37 (2011); R. Del Sarto & T. Schumacher, From EMP to ENP: What’s at Stake with the European Neighbourhood Policy towards the Southern Mediterranean?, 10 European For. Affairs Rev. 1, 17 (2005); G. Edwards, The Construction of Ambiguity and the Limits of Attraction: Europe and its Neighbourhood Policy,30 European Integration 1, 45 (2008); A. Gawrich, I. Melnykovska & R. Schweickert, Neighbourhood Europeanization through ENP:The Case of Ukraine, 48 J. Com. Mkt. Stud. 5, 1209 (2010); H. Haukkala, The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy, 60 Europe-Asia Studies 9, 1601 (2008); S. Lavenex & F. Schimmelfennig, EU Rules beyond EU Borders: Theorizing External Governance in European Politics, 16 Journal of European Public Policy 6, 791 (2009); A. Magen, The Shadow of Enlargement: Can the European Neighbourhood Policy Achieve Compliance, 12 Colum.J.Eur.L. 383 (2006); S. Lavenex, EU External Governance in ‘Wider Europe’, 11 Journal of European Public Policy 4, 680 (2004); G. Sasse, The European Neighbourhood Policy: Conditionality Revisited for the EU’s Eastern Neighbours,60 Harpaz, Guy. ‘Approximation of Laws under the European Neighbourhood Policy: The Challenges that Lie Ahead’. European Foreign Affairs Review 19, no. 3 (2014): 429–452. © 2014 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
© 2014 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands.