SUPRANATIONAL GOVERNANCE OR NATIONAL BUSINESS‐AS‐USUAL? THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF EU STRUCTURAL FUNDS IN THE NETHERLANDS AND DENMARK

The partnership principle in EU cohesion policy was introduced in order to involve subnational authorities and interest organizations in policy formulation and implementation. In this article we examine how the member states have reacted to this call for a new way of making public policy. We argue that the multi‐level governance literature and the critics of the multi‐level governance framework have not examined implementation structures properly, but have focused on regional influence. We conduct a comparative analysis of the Dutch and Danish implementations of the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund. Our findings show that when examining implementation structures it becomes clear that member states are in full control of the re‐allocation of EU funds. They show that Denmark and The Netherlands have been able to absorb EU cohesion policy within already existing national implementation structures of labour market policies and regional development. One central theoretical implication of our study is that the focus of studies of any fundamental re‐allocation of power resources in cohesion studies should comprise the entire network of implementation rather than the strategies of its individual component actors.     

The Victims’ Directive and What Victims Want From Restorative Justice

Following fierce campaigning by victims’ groups, the European Commission has entered into a process of legislative and policy reforms with the aim of repositioning the victim in criminal proceedings. By November 2015, member states will need to have demonstrated that they have modified their domestic laws to give effect to the Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support, and protection of victims of crime. For the first time, restorative justice is explicitly regulated at EU legal level, as the Directive aims to establish a baseline for its safe implementation across member states. With this EU-wide policy backdrop and using original data, the article posits evidence-based recommendations for the implementation of the Directive. The research was carried out in 2013–14 as part of the “Restorative Justice in Europe” project co-financed by the European Commission. The research took place in the United Kingdom and combined desk research and qualitative research strategies with victims, while it triangulated its findings with follow-up surveys with offenders and professionals.     

Administrative Reform and Regional Development Discourses in Hungary. Europeanisation Going NUTS?

Starting from the empirical observation of high levels of absorption of EU cohesion funds but strikingly low levels of substantive change in regional cohesion, this essay offers a contextual analysis of regional development policies in Hungary. Based on theoretical frameworks dealing with Europeanisation, new regionalism and participative development, it explores the reasons for this observation by analysing the role of administrative and planning structures and of development discourses. The essay shows that the Europeanisation of regional development policy triggered several changes in the planning process and led to the partial inclusion of new actors. However, the main effect of this was a growing centralisation of development policy making. The essay explains this by pointing to the domestic political context and the historical foundations of regional development discourses of the conservative and leftist liberal parties. While there are overlaps between the discourses on both sides of the ideological divide, they are perceived as incompatible by political actors. Thus, it is argued that considerations of political power, rather than ideological nature, shape Hungarian regional and development policy and explain the incremental reform process.     

Cross-border Cooperation in Central Europe: A Comparison of Culture and Policy Effectiveness in the Polish–German and Polish–Slovak Border Regions

Cross-border cooperation is recognised as an important aspect of regional development and especially EU cohesion policy. Policy effectiveness depends on how well programmes are suited to different border regional contexts. This essay analyses the factors that shape cooperation by comparing the Polish–German and Polish–Slovak border regions. Particular emphasis is placed on the cultural factors that set these two regions apart. The essay reveals that close-knit networks across the Polish–Slovak border promote successful policy definition and implementation. At the same time, the absence of such networks across the Polish–German border has led to a high degree of policy innovation.     

NEGLECTED FACES OF EUROPEANIZATION: THE DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT OF THE EU ON THE DISMANTLING AND EXPANSION OF DOMESTIC POLICIES

The objective of this article is to clarify the extent and the conditions under which the European Union (EU) induces changes in the policy arrangements of its member states. For an accurate measurement of our dependent variable, we distinguish between EU-induced policy expansion and EU-induced policy dismantling. We argue that the extent to which European requirements lead to an expansion or dismantling of national policy arrangements is crucially affected by the respective governance logic underlying the regulatory activities at the European level, that is: (1) compliance with EU rules; (2) competition between national administrative systems to achieve EU requirements; and (3) communication between regulatory agents across national levels arranged in an EU legal or institutional framework. To illustrate our theoretical argument, we develop hypotheses on the likelihood and direction of national policy change under these three modes of governance, in addition, providing empirical examples from different policy areas.     

CONVERGING UNDER PRESSURE? COUNTERTERRORISM POLICY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES

This article analyses counterterrorism policy convergence among the 27 European Union (EU) member states between 2000 and 2006. While considerable academic interest has been devoted to the common European Union policy in response to terrorism after September 11, few studies have compared counterterrorism policy-making at the member state level. This gap raises the question whether the institutional framework of European counterterrorism policy-making has stimulated convergence of national policies. Data on five policy instruments for counterterrorism show that the aggregated implementation rate increased by almost 55 per cent in this period, which indicates a trend towards policy divergence within the EU as a whole. However, the findings also reveal significant variation in the level and pace of policy instrument implementation. One potentially important variable explaining national policy developments is the degree of political pressure from the EU on member states, while EU membership accession and national counterterrorism policy legacies were less important factors.     

POLICY CHANGE AND SOFT EUROPEANIZATION: THE TRANSFER OF THE OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTION TO GREECE,CYPRUS AND MALTA

The paper adopts a historical institutionalist approach to Europeanization and argues that policy change is facilitated by three factors. First, it is driven by ‘soft’ mechanisms of Europeanization such as policy transfer. The EU provides the framework for reform and functions as a platform of best practices. Policy transfer mechanisms are implemented in order for member states to pick and choose institutions. Second, domestic mediating factors such as policy preferences are as important as EU obligations. The introduction of the Ombudsman to Greece, Cyprus and Malta demonstrates that hard mechanisms of Europeanization (for example, directives) are not always necessary for change to occur. Soft mechanisms can be equally effective, as long as the political leadership prioritizes the reform. Third, policy change depends on time. Member states adjust their policies and institutions over time. The most common outcome of this adjustment is inertia or incremental change rather than convergence.     

Quo Vadis Judicial Reforms? The Quest for Judicial Independence in Central and Eastern Europe

This article examines judicial reforms in the new member states of the EU in a comparative perspective. It explores the interactions between domestic and European actors in the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria and explains why the EU has had a differential impact on the way the principle of judicial independence has been implemented nationally. The differential impact of the EU is explained by considering both the nature of EU conditionality and the relationship between the judiciary and the political actors at the domestic level. The comparison reveals that the power of the EU is greater when tensions at the domestic level between judicial and political actors increase.     

Implementing Regional Policy in Poland: A New Era?

In 2010, Poland launched a new national strategy for regional development which is seen as an assertion of Poland's domestic regional development vision, informed by, but distinct from, EU cohesion policy which has dominated Polish regional policy since accession. A key question is whether a new model of policy implementation is emerging. The strategy includes a commitment to a place-based regional policy model. This implies spatially sensitive policy implementation capable of mobilising the potentials of all territories. However, the concept is vague. Moreover, in Poland this agenda is being launched in a context of entrenched territorial disparities, traditionally constrained policy implementation capacity and institutional change. What are the defining characteristics of place-based implementation systems? What are the challenges to the institutionalisation of the place-based model? Are these evident in delivery frameworks being developed in Poland?     

DOES THE EU STIFLE VOLUNTARY POLICY TRANSFER? A STUDY OF THE INTRODUCTION OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN PORTUGAL AND IRELAND

Traditionally, policy transfer within Europe has taken place in the form of bilateral voluntary transfer within ‘families of nations’. The creation of binding international regimes, in particular the adoption of binding EU policies, has increased instances of multilaterally obligated transfer in Europe. However, very little research has been carried out on the interaction between these two types of transfers. This paper starts from the assumption that a binding EU policy of ambiguous nature and/or with a limited scope of application creates policy space for additional voluntary transfers in member states. Evidence on the implementation of the 1990 Access to Environmental Information Directive in Portugal and Ireland is used to illustrate that three different modes of combining voluntary and obligated transfers may be used. There is, however, no ideal solution since the three modes (hybridization, fragmentation and sub‐regimes) create different types of costs and benefits.     

Czech and Slovak Relations with China: Contenders for China's Favour

This study examines the prospects for new European Union (EU) member countries in pursuing their foreign policy objectives in relations with China. Both the Czech Republic and Slovakia cherished an idea of making China an alternative economic partner. However, after 1989, China perceived these states as minor, almost unimportant partners, regardless of their efforts. Their profile was raised by EU accession but there was little change in their strength in terms of bilateral relations with China. The article investigates the failures and partial successes of the Czech and Slovak relationships with China, comparing their different approaches to the balance between focusing on political and human rights issues and the pursuit of economic and business interests.     

DO MEMBER STATES MAKE EUROPEAN POLICIES WORK? ANALYSING THE EU TRANSPOSITION DEFICIT

This article seeks to systematically describe and explain variation in European Union policy implementation performance across member states and directives. The analyses rely on a new and original dataset comprising comparable information about transposition delay for practically all EU social directives in Germany, Greece, The Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. On the basis of nearly 300 observations, we could establish that only in 42.7 per cent of our cases did member states transpose in time; 17.5 per cent exceeded the deadline by more than two years. The analysis reveals modest variation between social policy areas, more profound cross‐country differences and strong cross‐area variations within some countries. The need for inter‐ministerial coordination and administrative inefficiency are strongly associated with transposition delay. Whether a directive is new or merely an amendment is unrelated to transposition delay. The same holds for the directive’s complexity and parliamentary involvement in the transposition process. The irrelevance of the latter factors may suggest that member states anticipate some potential challenges to transposition performance and act to mitigate them. Whether and why this is the case merits further research.     

CHANGING THE DECISION SPACE: EUROPEAN POLICY INFLUENCES ON ENERGY POLICY AND SYSTEMS CHANGE IN SWEDEN

The EU takes a growing interest in governing the energy sector in its member states. Competing with national institutions, policies and organizational structures, it is however not clear whether the EU exerts a strong influence compared to other factors, and if there is such an influence, the mechanisms are not well understood. This paper examines strategic reorientation towards electricity investment in the Swedish energy sector, a ‘frontrunner case’ of Europeanization, and discusses how this change can be attributed to EU policy change, national policy change and organizational field developments respectively. It finds that EU energy policy influence has been notable, and that governance mechanisms that shape beliefs and expectations are strongly at play. However, despite growing EU clout on energy policy, field level and national policy change remain key drivers of the changing decision space in the examined time period.     

From environmental policy concepts to practicable tools: Knowledge creation and delegation in multilevel systems

The problem‐solving capacity and problem‐generating potential of multilevel systems entail the need for the delegation of authority. When the problem concerned is about how to put an abstract policy concept into a practicable policy tool, the choice of the respective delegation trajectory depends on the policy models or the policy‐relevant knowledge that the respective political levels can supply. When regarding the European Union (EU) level as the starting point of knowledge creation and delegation trajectories, and concentrating on transaction costs, policy knowledge and models generated at the international level provide the most cost‐effective solution. Only when the international level is not able to provide further policy knowledge and innovation does the EU delegate its definitional authority, first downward to the member states and then sideways to EU agencies. We illustrate the plausibility of our dynamic understanding of multilevel governance by using Environmental Policy Integration as an example.     

EU–China Regional Policy Dialogue: Unpacking the Mechanisms of an Unlikely Policy Transfer

Abstract

This article investigates EU–China dialogue on regional policy, a puzzling exercise in policy transfer because such policy is by its nature inward-oriented and the intricacies of regional development imply uncertainty about its effects in different contexts. The article sheds light on the reasons of both sides for engaging in this unlikely policy learning effort and identifies its actors and mechanisms. It also critically assesses this process, stressing its one-way nature and the active role of the EU as a ‘policy-sender’, in contrast to most policy transfer literature citing demands by the policy-recipient as the predominant reason to engage in such cooperation.     

AT A SNAIL'S PACE: ON THE LIMITED EUROPEANIZATION OF DOMESTIC CONSULTATION PRACTICES

Consultation of major interest groups is a widespread administrative practice in many EU member states. To date it is unclear, however, how advancing European integration influences domestic consultation practices. This article examines the impact of European integration on domestic consultation practices by conceptualizing how the underlying rationales of government–interest group interactions and the level of involvement of interest groups are affected by European integration. The study draws on original survey data on senior civil servants in Britain and the Netherlands to empirically examine these effects. European integration is related in a limited way to domestic consultation practices, both in Britain and the Netherlands. This small but significant effect is mostly observed during the process of domestic preference formulation in EU‐level policy making. Our findings suggest that intra‐organizational processes, for example organizational routines and task‐specialization, potentially play a greater role than has thus far been appreciated in Europeanization studies.     

THE NATIONAL COORDINATION OF EU POLICY IN HUNGARY: PATTERNS OF CONTINUITY AND CHANGE

Although European Union (EU) membership generates similar functional pressures for national administrations, member states developed institutional arrangements that show marked cross‐country variation in the coordination of EU policy. This article examines and assesses the institutions and mechanisms established in Hungary for formulating policy positions on the domestic level. In line with the general features of central government, the system is highly centralized and hierarchical, and has been characterized by a comprehensive coordination ambition from its inception. The case confirms the primary importance of national institutional factors for shaping coordination systems, but also the relevance of more actor‐centered explanations for accounting for changes in the top decision‐making tier. At the same time, the Hungarian experience also draws attention to power relations within governing parties and prime ministerial involvement as important variables so far relatively neglected in the literature.     

WHY STRONG COORDINATION AT ONE LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH STRONG COORDINATION ACROSS LEVELS (AND HOW TO LIVE WITH IT): THE CASE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

The European Union (EU) inherited ‘indirect administration’ from classical international organizations: policies adopted by the international organization are subsequently to be implemented nationally by member states themselves, and not by bodies owned by the international organization. This arrangement has often led to legislation being incorporated and applied rather differently across countries. In order to harmonize implementation practices within the EU, we have witnessed a development from ‘indirect administration’ to more ‘direct administration’ in the sense that national agencies work closely with the European Commission, EU agencies and sister agencies in other member states, partly bypassing national ministries. Thus, stronger coordination across levels may counteract strong coordination at the national level. This ‘coordination dilemma’ seems to have been largely ignored in the literatures on EU network governance and national ‘joined‐up government’, respectively. The ambition of this article is twofold: first, the coordination dilemma is theoretically and empirically illustrated by the seeming incompatibility between a more direct implementation structure in the multilevel EU administrative system and trends towards strengthening coordination and control within nation states. Second, the article discusses organizational arrangements that may enable systems to live with the coordination dilemma in practice.     

Hypocrisy as a crisis response? Assessing changes in talk,decisions, and actions of the European Commission in EU environmental policy

In this article, we assess the changing role of the European Commission in EU environmental policy. In line with organizational theory, we expect organizational hypocrisy, namely a decoupling of talk, decisions, and actions, to characterize the Commission's behaviour in the aftermath of the financial and economic crisis. We analyse the extent to which the Commission (1) promotes environmental matters and concepts in press releases and public statements; (2) proposes new and stricter environmental policy changes; and (3) takes action against member states in cases of non-compliance between the years 2000 and 2016. Our empirical analysis reveals that the Commission has indeed moved towards a pattern of hypocritical policy entrepreneurship in the post-crisis period. We argue that the decoupling of talk, decision, and action allows the European Commission to keep up its reputation as an environmental policy entrepreneur while, at the same, satisfying member states’ preference for economic recovery and less environmental regulation.     

European governance and the transfer of 'new' environmental policy instruments (NEPIs) in the European Union

This article examines the use of 'new' environmental policy instruments (NEPIs), particularly market-based instruments (for example, eco-taxes) and voluntary agreements, in the European Union (EU). It focuses on the actor motivation behind the recent increase in the adoption of new and innovative instruments in EU (and member state) environmental policies while also taking account of the external international arena. The article assesses whether new ideas put forward by policy entrepreneurs, such as member governments, EU institutions, expert groups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are the main motivation behind the EU adoption of NEPIs, or whether market and harmonization pressures are the main driving forces. It concentrates on eco-taxes, voluntary agreements and eco-labels, using the following three theoretical perspectives: (1) policy learning and transfer/ideational; (2) garbage can; and (3) institutional approaches.