里斯本條約於2009年12月1日生效，取代尼斯條約成為歐洲聯盟一切運作之根本。歐盟此一回合之條約改革從一場針對「歐洲之未來」的全歐跨國大辯論演化為由制憲會議所主導之歐盟制憲運動，而後在2005年法國及荷蘭選民公投否決了憲法條約後，整個條約改革進程嘎然而止。在經過了一段思考蟄伏期之後，透過與制憲時期極其不同但卻是會員國所最為熟悉之傳統修約方式，歐盟以里斯本條約取代憲法條約，並獲得了會員國一致支持。本文針對公民在條約改革當中的參與及影響力就「制憲模式」與「里斯本模式」進行比較。結論指出，儘管排除公民之參與及影響就短期而言似乎致使整合進行較為順利，但長期而言卻為整合埋下更多阻力及變數。

On 1 December 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon replaced the Treaty of Nice as the legal foundation of the European Union. The round of treaty reform that eventually produced the Treaty of Lisbon started off with a Europe-wide debate, adventured into a Constitution-making process, and came to a halt when French and Dutch voters rejected the Constitutional Treaty in 2005. It was with an approach radically different from the one used in the making of the Constitutional Treaty yet comfortably in line with the routine treaty-reform business of the Union that essence of the Constitutional Treaty was rescued. This article compares the approaches adopted in the making of the Constitutional Treaty and the making of the Treaty of Lisbon in terms of the degree to which the public was allowed or encouraged to play a role. It further discusses the implications of this detour of treaty-reform process for future developments of European integration and concludes that the continual exclusion of the public from policy-making and treaty-reform constrains rather than facilitates integration.