Eu Enlargement

EU enlargement: two integrations: can be deepen and widen expansion of EU by joining more members. Why did they want to join, for existing and new members, for some Eastern and central members cost of being a member they had to incur some costs in order to benefit from joining advantages.

Costs and benefits: it is like the economic analysis of club – occupy between private and public goods – do not get the membership advantages if not join. Non rival to a certain point, they show characteristics of public goods, which are non excludable and non rival.

Benefits of non rival: equal access to free trade aspect of CU, benefits to new members joined free trade, not taking into account of existing members of free trade have equal rights of joining the eurozone, private – non excludable – do not get benefits if not join.

Costs: of ensuring that EU institution represents members, pay for parliament, contribution to EU budget, financial side, proportion of CU tax, it costs real money to join the club. Loss of sovereign over competition policy, trade policy with the rest of the world, agricultural and environmental policies – they become more interdependent. Lose of independency over monetary policy if join the eurozone. MC is high for most of the members, bigger parliament, more expenses, bigger bureaucracy to run it, equilibrium of optimal number of membership. Essentil tendency with 25 members MC>MB, should stop, if it is right then 2004 enlargement is over expended, there is a research that you can go over 7, but no more than 20, if optimal looks only about 20, too big, then if they are rational, they gain. One country has left EU – Greenland joined in 1973, with Denmark, as it is its colony, gained autonomous in 1975 and decided to leave EU. Switzerland 1992, neutral institution does not allow to join with anybody, Norway referendum changed, but decided to join, not to join after referendum. A lots of other countries wanted to join who are part of Europe, may...