国务书讯 | 张亚宁英文专着《欧盟对委员会违法行为的容忍》近日由牛津大学出版社出版

发布者:刘可 发布时间:2025-05-06 浏览次数:10




The European Commissions Toleration of Noncompliance with EU Law: A guardian with two faces》

张亚宁

Oxford University Press

2025年3月

ISBN:9780198921080



Image     

作者简介


张亚宁

复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院
青年副研究员

主要研究领域为欧洲一体化、欧盟政治和中欧关系。主持国家社科基金青年项目,上海市白玉兰人才计划浦江项目,外交部“中欧关系指南针项目”等多项科研项目。研究成果发表于《JCMS-Journal of Common Market Studies》,《Journal of European Integration》,《欧洲研究》、《国际政治研究》等国内外高水平期刊。曾获当代欧洲研究大学联盟(UACES)2023年度最佳博士论文奖和第十二届“全国国际关系、国际政治专业博士生学术论坛”一等奖等。


Image     

 内容提要 

欧盟法被广泛认为欧洲一体化的制度基石。然而,作为欧盟法的守护者,欧盟委员会在执法过程中却呈现出鲜明的选择性与策略性特征。本书指出,这种选择性执法现象根植于欧盟委员会双重制度角色的内在张力——它既是积极推动特定政治议程的代理人(agent),也是维护法律秩序的受托人(trustee)。这两种角色分别对应着差异化的执法逻辑:前者追求政治目标的实现,后者则致力于法律体系的稳定。当二者相互作用时,便形成了欧盟委员会对成员国违规行为的多元容忍逻辑。通过对药品平行贸易的限制措施、不透明的国防采购案、难民权益的侵害性政策及歧视性的汽车通行费等成员国违法案例的深入剖析,本书揭示欧盟委员会的策略性执法既非单纯的权力算计,亦非机械的法律适用,而是多重执法逻辑动态博弈的结果。这一研究理解欧盟法律与政治之间的复杂互动关系提供了创新性分析框架。



Image     

 目录 

1. Introduction 

1.1 ToN with EU law: a widely acknowledged but under-researched phenomenon 

1.2 Conceptualizing ToN 

1.3 The theoretical argument in brief 

1.4 Research design 

1.5 The structure of the book 

2. Theorizing Toleration of Noncompliance 

2.1 Conceptualization of ToN 

2.2 An analytical typology of ToN 

2.3 The alternative explanations 

2.4 Analytical steps of case studies 

2.5 Conclusion 

3. Altruistic ToN: Coping with Limits of the EU Legal Order concerning Pharmaceutical Parallel Trade 

3.1 Theorizing altruistic ToN: coping with inherent limits of the EU legal order 

3.2 The Commission tolerated the restrictive measures against pharmaceutical parallel export 

3.3 Explaining the Commission‘s ToN: evading the litigation dilemma 

3.4 Evaluation of the alternative explanations 

3.5 Conclusion 

4. Egocentric ToN: Disarming the Czech Republics Defence Offset Autonomy 

4.1 Theorizing egocentric ToN: the dual pathway of the policy impact of the strategic enforcement 

4.2 The Commission tolerated the problematic defence procurement contract of the Czech Republic 

4.3 Explaining the Commission’s ToN: phasing out defence offsets through the ‘backdoor

4.4 Evaluation of the alternative explanations

4.5 Conclusion

5. Active ToN: Failing Forward towards a Functional Common European Asylum System? 

5.1 Theorizing active ToN: failing forward through lenient enforcement 

5.2 The Commission tolerated the degrading asylum practices of Italy 

5.3 Explaining the Commissions ToN: towards a functional European asylum system? 

5.4 Evaluation of the general alternative explanations 

5.5 Conclusion 

6. Passive ToN: Overcoming the Domestic Political Crisis over the German Road Charge Scheme 

6.1 Theorizing passive ToN: coping with a domestic political crisis 

6.2 The Commission tolerated the discriminatory German Pkw-Maut law 

6.3 Explaining the Commission’s ToN: to defuse the domestic coalition crisis 

6.4 Evaluation of the alternative explanations 

6.5 Conclusion 

7. Conclusion: Assessing the Typology and Evidence of ToN 

7.1 The conceptualization and analytical framework of ToN revisited 

7.2 Theoretical implications of ToN 

7.3 Legitimacy assessment of ToN 

7.4 The outlook for future research 

Appendix 

Bibliography