Neofunctionalism vs Liberal Intergovernmentalism

Seminar paper from the year 2010 in the subject Politics - Political Theory and the History of Ideas Journal grade: 10 University of Hamburg (Institute of Political Science) course: European Integration Theories language: English abstract: Neofunctionalism and Liberal Intergovernmentalism (from now on I will use the abbreviations: NF and LIG in this paper) have been predominant approaches to theorizing Integration processes especially in the first phase of theorizing European Integration. In the following essay I will begin by briefly lay out the main assumptions of the two approaches drawing especially on their differences and similarities. In a second part I will discuss what these theories set out to do and raise questions about the actual accomplishments. Thirdly I will turn to a critique of LIG and NF identifying their weaknesses refering to Thomas Risse`s argument that Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Neofunctionalism are both lacking `...some categories necessary to capture distinctive features of the EU`2. This will lead me to the fourth part of my analysis in which I will demonstrate what and how other approaches can fill in the theoretical gaps and wholes that I have pointed out in my critique. In My conclusion I argue that European Integration Theory does not need overarching universal theories but rather is a useful conglomerate of different theories3 that might be combined in eclectically and offer various toolkits for different suitable areas and levels of analysing and explaining Integration.