Kurzer locates the book within the literature on globalization and national identity or culture. She examines the formation of national identity and institutions emblematic of the national traits of a country through an exploration of socially sensitive policies, discussing how norms cope with pressures arising out of European governance and policies. She initially suggests that constructivism and sociological institutionalism are useful analytical frames but, having explored each of the case studies, ultimately rejects a constructivist account because it cannot explain the recent changes she identifies. More significantly, she finds that constructivism points to policy learning by professional elites at the supranational and international level leading to adaptation, yet what emerges in all four case studies is that elites (experts and policymakers) were less likely to be seduced by dominant European policies in these areas. In fact, what the case studies show is that adaptation is slow because national elites see the new modes of thinking as repugnant to state national identity—a variation on the “goodness of fit” argument.

In her concluding chapter, she suggests that an institutionalist analysis better explains the very gradual change in these politically sensitive national policies. Bargaining at the European level designed to protect national values and moral norms (such as the Maastricht protocol on Irish abortion), did not reckon on the cumulative consequences of the free movement provisions and the consequent increase in the circulation of people so that they could procure alcohol, avail themselves of a less restrictive drug regime, or have an abortion by exercising their free movement rights. Because of the complex interdependencies created by the Single Market, national governments no longer retain tight control over these specific policies, creating a discursive space within which the Single Market and the Union more generally provide an alternative policy view forged at a domestic level by the previously relatively silent dissenters from the status quo. This dissent—like the position of the elites who advocated these policies—could also be framed in the language of national identity, but one that sees the state as part of Europe. All the studies point to a bottom-up push for change where the Single Market positively affected domestic actors’ interests. In effect, the actions of citizens in traveling to avail themselves of goods or services in other states undermined the argument of identity and culture that underpinned the relevant policies by showing that it was not correct to claim that the Finns, Swedes, Dutch, or Irish were fundamentally different from other European nationals and that these policy norms were an expression of difference, when so many citizens were willing and able to thwart the policy objective by exercising their travel rights. Institutional change thus occurred when organized interests took advantage of the tension between proclaimed morality standards and citizen behavior.

The approach to each case study is historical, with an examination of the role played by institutions and the impact of the Single Market on the policies. Three studies— Finnish and Swedish alcohol policy and Irish abortion policy—are concerned with restrictions of individual rights in the interest of a public good defined in terms of national identity and culture. The fourth case study—recreational drug policy in the Netherlands—is different in that it advocates greater individual liberty and less restrictive policies than those found elsewhere in Europe. The Dutch study highlights the effectiveness of Dutch negotiators at keeping drug policy a largely domestic issue despite opposition, in particular by the French government, to Dutch policy. This is in contrast to the failure of the other governments examined to limit the impact of the free movement provisions on their policies—although Kurzer correctly points out that that impact is largely indirect, save where the policy is in direct conflict with an explicit Single Market rule, for example, public monopolies rules in relation to the alcohol monopolies in Sweden and Finland.

Kurzer chose these policy areas because they reflect “national character.” She notes (p. 173) that these terms have to be used with great care as they lend themselves to “cheesy” stereotyping. It would have been helpful to have this point highlighted before the case studies themselves where such national characteristics and their influence on policy formation are discussed. This book provides a succinct analytical frame with interesting quantitative material provided in chart form throughout and an admirably clear account of the sometimes complex litigation involved. There is scope for a more exhaustive study, like K. Alter's work on the European Court (Establishing the Supremacy of European Law 2001) or D. J. Gerber's exploration of competition policy (Law and Competition Policy in Twentieth Century Europe 1998). Such a study would involve extensive in-depth qualitative interviews with national officials involved in both national policy and European negotiations, as well as those interest groups that exploited and moved the debate as a result of the circulation of people. This would greatly enrich the case studies and underpin the extent to which national identity—a slippery concept at the best of times—is embedded or not, within these polices. This approach would also, for example in the abortion study, highlight such issues as the decline in the influence of the Irish Roman Catholic Church on issues of sexual morality following the child sex and physical abuse scandals involving clergy in the last decade; the dubious basis for granting standing in court to antiabortion interest groups; and the role of law as an instrument of change or as a tool for extending the status quo. In short, Kurzer provides a thought-provoking starting point for further exploration of the nature of Europeanization.

The overall conclusion of Markets and Moral Regulation—that change has been modest and that there is unlikely to be drastic change in the future—disguises the complex and extremely useful discussion of how the question of policy fit is relevant to policy change but not decisive and of how the Union can be used as a tool for moving forward national policy debates without necessarily leading to Europeanization.