Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.645629
Title: Who speaks for Europe in the ILO? : member state coordination and European Union representation in the International Labour Organisation
Author: Kissack, Robert Eoghan
Awarding Body: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Current Institution: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Date of Award: 2006
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This thesis answers the question of whether the European Union (EU) Member States have changed their behaviour in order to coordinate EU common representation in the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The study begins in 1973, when European Political Cooperation (EPC) was expanded to include EU Member States coordination in the United Nations, and ends in 2005. The thesis uses archive records and interviews to measure the level of EU representation (issuing common statements) and voting cohesion. The analysis of EU Member States' coordination is divided into technical issues (ILO labour standards) coordinated through the European Community, and political issues coordinated through EPC/CFSP mechanisms. The hypotheses tested are that technical coordination is easier to achieve than political coordination, and over time the Community driven technical coordination will develop more than EPC/CFSP driven political coordination. The core findings are that technical coordination has developed unevenly across particular issue areas and through time, while in political coordination there is evidence of a strong commitment by the EU Member States to maintaining common foreign policy positions. Liberal intergovernmental theory is shown to be the most useful for explaining EU Member State technical coordination. Key evidence includes an examination of the impact of treaties on common representation and voting cohesion, the continued importance of national interests and the European Court of Justice Opinion confirming the primacy of Member States in the ILO. Institutional theory was shown to be the most useful for understanding EU Member State political coordination. Three cases studies were used: the Arab-Israel dispute, apartheid in South Africa promoting core labour standards. Empirical research highlights the social norms and rules of the Geneva diplomats working on EU coordination. The overall conclusion is that the EU Member States remain first and foremost members of the ILO, and speaking for Europe is a secondary concern.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.645629  DOI: Not available
Share: