Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:40:45.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Emergency Politics to Authoritarian Constitutionalism? The Legal and Political Costs of EU Financial Crisis Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Jan Christoph Suntrup

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In his lecture on The Repressed State of Emergency, Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde argues for the constitutional possibility of a partial superimposition of certain laws in times of emergency. Repressing the state of emergency would ultimately lead to greater and more permanent damage to the rule of law and liberal rights. This warning bears some similarities to Giorgio Agamben's analysis of the emergence of a permanent state of emergency, which loses the feature of exceptionality by becoming “the dominant paradigm of government in contemporary politics.” Agamben thus proposes a shift from structure to practice, which focuses on the features of emergency politics instead of states of exceptions. The European Union's recent financial crisis is a promising object of research in this regard. After a brief discussion of Böckenförde's illuminating lecture on the repressed state of emergency, this Article will analyze a comment written by Böckenförde at the beginning of the Euro crisis. While this comment has sometimes been interpreted as an unconditional defense of unlawful emergency measures, a closer look at this statement reveals a much more nuanced argumentation. Böckenförde concurs with other legal scholars—such as Paul Kirchhof—in emphasizing the danger of an erosion of the rule of law through illegal measures. Böckenförde's intervention, however, leaves room for interpretation that this emergency action could—in principle and under specific circumstances—nevertheless be legitimate, although he was critical towards the handling of the crisis. On a more general level, this Article will discuss if the suspension of law can ever save the legal order it disregards. Next, the legality of EU crisis management—which has not been judged unanimously—will be scrutinized. At least, the circumvention and adaptation of EU primary law involved in this management has crucially changed the law of “normal affairs.” Finally, this Article will argue that the managerial style of emergency politics challenges the EU's project of “integration through law,” hollows out democratic procedures, and enforces, with its one-sided austerity policy, a form of economic integration that bears strong traces of an “authoritarian constitutionalism.”

Type
The Future of Europe
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 19 , Issue 2: Special issue - Statism, Secularism, Liberalism Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde Beyond Germany , 01 May 2018 , pp. 375 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by German Law Journal, Inc. 

References

1 See, e.g., Holzinger, Markus, Regel und Ausnahme: Zur Theorie des Ausnahmezustands, in Weltrisikogesellschaft als Ausnahmezustand 29, 61–86 (Markus Holzinger, Stefan May & Wiebke Pohler eds., 2010).Google Scholar

2 John Ferejohn & Pasquale Pasquino, The Law of the Exception: A Typology of Emergency Powers, 2 Int'l. J. Const. L. 210 (2004); Kim Lane Scheppele, Legal and Extra-Legal Emergencies, in The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics 165 (Keith Whittington, Daniel Keleman & Gregory Caldeira eds., 2008).Google Scholar

3 Matthias Lemke, Demokratie im Ausnahmezustand. Wie Regierungen ihre Macht ausweiten 52–118 (2017).Google Scholar

4 Giorgio Agamben, State of Exception 2 (Kevin Attell trans., 2005).Google Scholar

5 See, e.g., Post 9/11 and the State of Permanent Legal Emergency: Security and Human Rights in Countering Terrorism (Aniceto Masferrer ed., 2012).Google Scholar

6 See Scheuerman, William E., The Economic State of Emergency, 21 Cardozo L. Rev. 1869 (2000).Google Scholar

7 See, e.g., Oberndorfer, Lukas, Der neue Konstitutionalismus in der Europäischen Union und seine autoritäre Re-Konfiguration. WWU 2.0, New Economic Governance und Pakt(e) für Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, in Europäische Staatlichkeit. Zwischen Krise und Integration, 177, 177–78 (Hans-Jürgen Bieling & Martin Große Hüttmann eds., 2016).Google Scholar

8 Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, The Repressed State of Emergency: The Exercise of State Authority in Extraordinary Circumstances, in 1 Constitutional and Political Theory: Selected Writings 108 (Mirjam Künkler & Tine Stein eds., 2017).Google Scholar

9 Carl Schmitt, Political Theology. Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty 14–15 (George Schwab trans., 2005).Google Scholar

10 Id. at 15.Google Scholar

11 See Rossiter, Clinton, Constitutional Dictatorship. Crisis Government in the Modern Democracies 29–73 (1948).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Lemke, supra note 3, at 121–66.Google Scholar

13 Böckenförde, supra note 8, at 119.Google Scholar

14 Id. at 111–15.Google Scholar

15 Id. at 114. Böckenförde discusses the dangers of including the figure of the “supralegal state of emergency” into constitutional dogmatics in Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Ausnahmerecht und demokratischer Rechtsstaat, in Die Freiheit des Anderen. Festschrift für Martin Hirsch 259, 263 (Hans Jochen Vogel, Helmut Simon & Adalbert Podlech eds., 1981).Google Scholar

16 Böckenförde, supra note 8, at 125.Google Scholar

17 Carl Schmitt, Dictatorship 213, 214 (Michael Hoelzl & Graham Ward trans., 2014) (“It is intrinsic to a measure that its course of action is defined, in its content, by a concrete [konkret], given situation and that the measure itself is governed by a factual [sachlich] goal, so that it receives a different content from case to case, according to circumstances; hence it does not have a genuine legal form.”).Google Scholar

18 Böckenförde, supra note 8, at 130.Google Scholar

19 Id. at 127.Google Scholar

20 See id. at 125–131; Böckenförde, supra note 15, at 264–72.Google Scholar

21 See Anter, Andreas & Frick, Verena, Der verdrängte Carl Schmitt. Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenfördes Diagnostik des Ausnahmezustandes, in Ausnahmezustand. Carl Schmitts Lehre von der kommissarischen Diktatur 128 (Rüdiger Voigt ed., 2013); Gertrude Lübbe-Wolff, Rechtsstaat und Ausnahmerecht. Zur Diskussion über die Reichweite des § 34 StGB und über die Notwendigkeit einer verfassungsrechtlichen Regelung des Ausnahmezustandes, 11 Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen [ZParl] 110 (1980). See also Günter Frankenberg, Political Technology and the Erosion of the Rule of Law: Normalizing the State of Exception 119 (2014) (raising the important question whether Böckenförde's emergency model structure actually conceptualizes “the unforeseeable, if it really unforeseeable, better … than, for instance, the emergency constitution of the Basic Law.”).Google Scholar

22 See France Approves Tough New Anti-Terror Laws, BBC News (Oct. 4, 2017), http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41493707.Google Scholar

23 Frankenberg, supra note 21, at x.Google Scholar

24 Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life 7 (Daniel Heller-Roazen trans., 1998).Google Scholar

25 Agamben, supra note 4, at 2.Google Scholar

26 Id. at 16.Google Scholar

27 Pierre Rosanvallon, Le bon Gouvernement (2015).Google Scholar

28 Jonathan White, Emergency Europe, 63 Pol. Stud. 300, 300 (2015).Google Scholar

29 Joseph Vogl, The Sovereignty Effect. Markets and Powers in the Economic Regime, 23 Qui Parle 125, 125 (2014).Google Scholar

30 Joseph Vogl, The Ascendancy of Finance 4 (Simon Garnett trans., 2017).Google Scholar

31 Florian Rödl, EU im Notstandsmodus, 5 Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 5, 5 (2012) (my trans.).Google Scholar

32 José Manuel Barroso, Statement at the Press Conference Following the Meeting of the Heads of State or Government of the Euro Area (Oct. 27, 2011) (speech 11/713, available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-11-713_en.htm).Google Scholar

33 Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Kennt die europäische Not kein Gebot?, Neue Zürcher Zeitung (June 21, 2010), https://www.nzz.ch/kennt_die_europaeische_not_kein_gebot-1.6182412.Google Scholar

34 Id. Here I use Christian Joerges's translation of this sentence, Joerges, Three Transformations of Europe and the Search for a Way Out of Its Crisis, in The European Crisis and the Transformation of Transnational Governance: Authoritarian Managerialism Versus Democratic Governance 25, 31 (Christian Joerges & Carola Glinski eds., 2017).Google Scholar

35 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Consolidated version 2016), 2016 OJ (C 202).Google Scholar

36 Böckenförde, supra note 33 (my trans.).Google Scholar

37 Böckenförde, supra note 8, at 118.Google Scholar

38 Böckenförde, supra note 33 (my trans.).Google Scholar

39 Id. Google Scholar

40 Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Biographical Interview with Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, in 1 Constitutional and Political Theory: Selected Writings 369, 385 (Mirjam Künkler & Tine Stein eds., 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

41 Andreas Fischer-Lescano, Human Rights in Times of Austerity Policy: The EU Institutions and the Conclusion of Memoranda of Understanding, Legal Opinion Commissioned by the Chamber of Labour, Vienna (in Cooperation with the Austrian Trade Union Federation, the European Trade Union Confederation and the European Trade Union Institute) 3 (2014), https://media.arbeiterkammer.at/PDF/Human_Rights_in_Times_of-Austerity_Policy.pdf.Google Scholar

42 Paul Kirchhof, Verfassungsnot!, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (July 12, 2012), http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/europas-zukunft/paul-kirchhof-zur-krise-der-eu-verfassungsnot-11817188.html.Google Scholar

43 Id. (my trans.).Google Scholar

44 See Hallstein, Walter, Die EWG—Eine Rechtsgemeinschaft, in Europäische Reden 341 (Thomas Oppermann ed., 1979). See also Mayer, Franz C., Europa als Rechtsgemeinschaft, in Europawissenschaft 429 (Gunnar Folke Schuppert, Ingolf Pernice & Ulrich Haltern eds., 2005); Michael Stolleis, Unsere Rechtsgemeinschaft, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (June 3, 2016), http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/europas-zukunft/europas-rechtsgemeinschaft-als-antwort-auf-die-krise-14258665.html.Google Scholar

45 Andreas Vosskuhle, Europa als Rechtsgemeinschaft—Gefährdungen und Herausforderungen. Vortrag vor der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin 17 (Mar. 6, 2014,), http://jahresthema.bbaw.de/2013_2014/mediathek/EuropaKrise/AndreasVosskuhle_%20Europa%20als%20Rechtsgemeinschaft.pdf (my trans.).Google Scholar

46 See Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (rev. ed., 2006).Google Scholar

47 Paul Kirchhof, supra note 42 (my trans.).Google Scholar

48 Schmitt, supra note 17, at xliii.Google Scholar

49 Schmitt writes more precisely that “every legal norm presupposes a normal condition as a homogeneous medium in which it is valid.” Id. at 118.Google Scholar

50 See Lemke, supra note 3, at 264–65.Google Scholar

51 Jonathan White, Authority After Emergency Rule, 4 Mod. L. Rev. 585, 607 (2015).Google Scholar

52 Id. It should certainly not be overlooked that the “state of normal affairs” is also always accompanied by the dynamics of expectation building, as legal norms are always applied and enforced selectively, which cannot leave the expectations of legal subjects untouched.Google Scholar

53 See Schorkopf, Frank, Finanzkrisen als Herausforderung der internationalen, europäischen und nationalen Rechtssetzung, 71 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer [VVDStRL] 183, 205–11 (2012).Google Scholar

54 Bruno de Witte, Using International Law in the Euro Crisis. Causes and Consequences, ARENA Working Paper 4, 2 (2013), http://www.sv.uio.no/arena/english/research/publications/arena-working-papers/2013/wp4-13.html.Google Scholar

55 Council Regulation (EU) No 407/2010 of 11 May 2010 establishing a European financial stabilisation mechanism, May 12, 2010, 2010 OJ (L 118).Google Scholar

56 TFEU art. 136(3).Google Scholar

57 See, e.g., Hufeld, Ulrich, Zwischen Notrettung und Rütlischwur: der Umbau der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion in der Krise, 2 Integration 117, 122 (2011) (considering this kind of stability politics, by adopting Schmitt's terminology, a “constitution-breaking measure” [verfassungsdurchbrechende Maβnahme] and regarding the amendment of Article 136 as an attempt to give this measure a normative basis). Cf. Carl Schmitt, Constitutional Theory 154 (Ellen Kennedy trans., 2008).Google Scholar

58 See Schorkopf, supra note 53, at 205.Google Scholar

59 See Case C-370/12, Pringle v. Government of Ireland, Ireland and Attorney General of Ireland, ECLI:EU:C:2012:756.Google Scholar

60 See Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfGE] [Federal Constitutional Court] Feb. 28, 2012, 130 Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts [BVerfGE] 318.Google Scholar

61 See Christian Kreuder-Sonnen, Global Exceptionalism and the Euro Crisis: Schmittian Challenges to Conflicts-Law Constitutionalism, in The European Crisis and the Transformation of Transnational Governance: Authoritarian Managerialism Versus Democratic Governance 71, 75 (Christian Joerges & Carola Glinski eds., 2017); see also White, supra note 28, at 306; for an overview of important court rulings, see Fabbrini, Frederico, The Euro-Crisis and the Courts: Judicial Review and the Political Process in Comparative Perspective, 32 Berkeley J. Int'l L. 64 (2014).Google Scholar

62 Michelle Everson & Christian Joerges, Who is the Guardian for Constitutionalism in Europe After the Financial Crisis?, in LSE “Europe in Question” Discussion Paper Series 63, 23 (2013).Google Scholar

63 See the pamphlet by Posner, Eric A. & Adrian Vermeule, The Executive Unbound: After the Madisonian Republic 4 (2010), for possibly the most prominent example, in the context of the American debate, in which the authors declare in a triumphal fashion:Google Scholar

We live in a regime of executive-centered government, in an age after the separation of powers, and the legally constrained executive is now a historical curiosity. As against liberal constitutional theorists … and liberal theorists of the rule of law … we argue that in the modern administrative state the executive governs, subject to legal constraints that are shaky in normal times and weak or nonexistent in times of crisis.

It might be argued, however, that the authors have underestimated the veto power of American courts, as President Donald Trump has had to realize repeatedly.Google Scholar

64 See Schorkopf, supra note 53, at 207.Google Scholar

65 See id. at 208.Google Scholar

66 Christian Joerges, Europas Wirtschaftsverfassung in der Krise, 51 Der Staat 357, 357 (2012).Google Scholar

67 See Fraenkel, Ernst, The Dual State. A Contribution to the Theory of Dictatorship (1941).Google Scholar

68 Joerges, supra note 66, at 371 (my trans.).Google Scholar

69 Fraenkel, supra note 67, at 3–64.Google Scholar

70 See, e.g., Gross, Oren, What “Emergency”Regime?, 13 Constellations 74 (2006); also see White, supra note 28, for helpful information regarding the EU crisis.Google Scholar

71 See, e.g., Mair, Peter, Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy 99–142 (2013); Schmitt, Vivien A., Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union, in The Oxford Handbook of the European Union 661 (Erik Jones, Anand Menon & Stephen Weatherill eds., 2012); Armin Schäfer, Nach dem permissiven Konsens. Das Demokratiedefizit der EU, 34 Leviathan 350 (2006).Google Scholar

72 Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Which Path is Europe Taking?, in 1 Constitutional and Political Theory: Selected Writings 343, 360 (Mirjam Künkler & Tine Stein eds., 2017).Google Scholar

73 See, e.g., Neyer, Jürgen, Justice or Democracy? Power and Justification in the EU and Other International Organizations, in Conflict of Laws and Laws of Conflict in Europe and Beyond 33 (Rainer Nickel ed., 2010).Google Scholar

74 For this debate and the basic ideas and challenges of deliberative democracy on supranational and transnational deliberation, see Suntrup, Jan Christoph, Zur Verfassung der deliberativen Demokratie. Strukturelle Probleme und Perspektiven, 49 Der Staat 605, 619–21 (2010).Google Scholar

75 Joerges, supra note 34, at 41.Google Scholar

76 Astrid Séville, There is no Alternative: Politik zwischen Demokratie und Sachzwang 341 (2017).Google Scholar

77 See Curtin, Deirdre, Challenging Executive Dominance in European Democracy, in The European Crisis and the Transformation of Transnational Governance: Authoritarian Managerialism Versus Democratic Governance 203, 208 (Christian Joerges & Carola Glinski eds., 2017).Google Scholar

78 Schmitt, supra note 9, at 5.Google Scholar

79 Franziska Brachthäuser & Anton Haffner, Gekommen, um zu bleiben. Das Krisenregime in Europa und die Rede vom Ausnahmezustand, 50 Kritische Justiz [KJ] 19, 25–26 (2017).Google Scholar

80 Curtin, supra note 77, at 210–11.Google Scholar

81 Jürgen Habermas, The Crisis of the European Union: A Response 52 (Ciaran Cronin trans., 2012; trans. reviewed).Google Scholar

82 See Böckenförde, supra note 72, at 350–57.Google Scholar

83 Stephan Dreischer has argued that the avoiding of the EP is, given the dominance of the intergovernmental paradigm, less surprising than the fact that it has not received further competences with regard to the newly established structures which result from the executive emergency measures; see Dreischer, Das Europäische Parlament—Fit durch die Krise? Parlamentarische Funktionserfüllung im Kontext von Lissabon-Vertrag und Finanzkrisenbewältigung, in Supranationalität und Demokratie. Die Europäische Union in Zeiten der Krise 111, 129–30 (Nabila Abbas, Annette Förster & Emanuel Richter eds., 2015).Google Scholar

84 See Riekmann, Sonja Puntscher, Geld und Souveränität. Zur Transformation der Europäischen Union und der Mitgliedstaaten durch die Finanz- und Fiskalkrise (2008–2013), in Supranationalität und Demokratie: Die Europäische Union in Zeiten der Krise 203, 205 (Nabila Abbas, Annette Förster & Emanuel Richter eds., 2015).Google Scholar

85 See Bundesverfassungsgericht, Sep. 12, 2012, 132 BVerfGE 195.Google Scholar

86 Aleksandra Maatsch, Empowered or Disempowered? The Role of National Parliaments During the Reform of European Economic Governance 11 (Max Planck Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung [MPIfG], Discussion Paper No. 15/10, 2015).Google Scholar

87 See id. at 2.Google Scholar

88 See generally Séville, supra note 76; for information on the financial crisis, specifically, see Séville, supra note 76, at 271–411.Google Scholar

89 White, supra note 28, at 307.Google Scholar

90 Curtin, supra note 77, at 219–25.Google Scholar

91 White, supra note 28, at 307; Kreuder-Sonnen, supra note 61, at 79–80.Google Scholar

92 Frank Wendler, Parliaments as Arenas of Representation and Public Contestation: Insights from the Eurozone Crisis, in National Parliaments After the Lisbon Treaty and the Euro Crisis: Resilience or Resignation? 177, 180 (Davor Jančić ed., 2017).Google Scholar

93 Joseph H.H. Weiler, Editorial: Integration Through Fear, 23 EJIL 1, 1–2 (2012).Google Scholar

94 Böckenförde, supra note 33.Google Scholar

95 See Pollak, Johannes, Compounded Representation in the EU: No Country for Old Parliaments?, in Political Representation in the European Union: Still Democratic in Times of Crisis? 19, 32 (Sandra Kröger ed., 2014).Google Scholar

96 See Crouch, Colin, Post-Democracy (2004).Google Scholar

97 See Riekmann, Puntscher, supra note 84, at 207.Google Scholar

98 See Kreuder-Sonnen, supra note 61, at 76 (speaking of a “seizure of competences by executive self-empowerment”); also see Möllers, Christoph, Krisenzurechnung und Legitimationsproblematik in der Europäischen Union, 43 Leviathan 339, 349 (2015) for a more nuanced discussion.Google Scholar

99 See Vogl, supra note 30, at 6.Google Scholar

100 See Hodson, Dermot, The European Central Bank: New Powers and New Institutional Theories, in Institutions of the European Union 213, 231–2 (Dermot Hodson & John Peterson eds., 4th ed. 2017).Google Scholar

101 European Parliament, Report on the Enquiry on the Role and Operations of the Troika (ECB, Commission and IMF) with Regard to the Euro Area Programme Countries, Feb. 28., 2014 (2013/2277(INI)).Google Scholar

102 Böckenförde, supra note 72, at 351 (emphasis in the original).Google Scholar

103 José Manuel Barroso, Speech at the European University Institute (June 18, 2010) (cited in Oberndorfer, supra note 7, at 187).Google Scholar

104 See Oberndorfer, supra note 7; Hans-Jürgen Bieling, Volkssouveränität und europäische Integration: Zur Transformation eines ehemals komplementären Spannungsverhältnisses, in Supranationalität und Demokratie: Die Europäische Union in Zeiten der Krise 63, 77–80 (Nabila Abbas, Annette Förster & Emanuel Richter eds., 2015); Ralph Guth, EU-Krisenpolitik als Verrechtlichung der Demokratie: Autoritärer Europäischer Konstitutionalismus und die Negation der Volkssouveränität, 2 Momentum Quarterly 33 (2013).Google Scholar

105 Regulations (EU) No. 1173/2011, 1174/2011, 1175/2011, 1176/2011, and 1177/2011, and Directive 2011/85/EU, 2011 OJ (L 306/1, 8, 12, 25, 33, 41).Google Scholar

106 Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union [Fiscal Compact], available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_DOC-12-2_de.htm.Google Scholar

107 See Bieling, supra note 104, at 78–79; Falk Illing, Die Eurokrise. Analyse der europäischen Strukturkrise 53–177 (2017); Caroline de la Porte & Elke Heins, Game Change in EU Social Policy: Towards More European Integration, in The Eurozone Crisis and the Transformation of EU Governance: Internal and External Implications 157, 163–70 (Maria João Rodrigues & Eleni Xiarchogiannopoulou, eds., 2014).Google Scholar

108 See Oberndorfer, supra note 7, at 187–94.Google Scholar

109 Rödl, supra note 31, at 5, 7.Google Scholar

110 See Bieling, supra note 104, at 79.Google Scholar

111 Oberndorfer, supra note 7, at 188 (my trans.).Google Scholar

112 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000 OJ (C 364/1).Google Scholar

113 See, e.g., Fischer-Lescano, supra note 41; Salomon, Margot E., Of Austerity, Human Rights and International Institutions, in LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 2 (2015).Google Scholar

114 Portuguese Constitutional Court, April 5, 2013, Case No. 187/2013, http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20130187.html.Google Scholar

115 European Commission, The Economic Adjustment Programme for Portugal. Eighth and Ninth Review, Occasional Papers 164 (Nov. 2013), para. 88, 30, http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2013/pdf/ocp164_en.pdf. Also see the comment on the Commission's reaction in, Luca de Lucia, The Rationale of Economics and Law in the Aftermath of the Crisis: A Lesson from Michel Foucault, 12 EuConst 445, 470 (2016).Google Scholar

116 De Lucia, supra note 115, at 470.Google Scholar

117 Bieling, supra note 104, at 79.Google Scholar

118 Böckenförde, supra note 33 (my trans.).Google Scholar

119 Scharpf, Fritz W., Political Legitimacy in a Non-Optimal Currency Area 2 (Max Planck Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung [MPIfG], Discussion Paper No. 13/15, 2013).Google Scholar