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.     

REPRESENTING EUROPE: THE EMERGING ‘CULTURE’ OF EU DIPLOMACY

Debate over ‘loyalty transfer’ in the European Union (EU) centres on the assumption that elite socialisation and ‘spillover’ processes lead inevitably to changes in the behaviour and identities of European officials. This article interrogates that notion by exploring how officials in the EU external delegations represent Europe. The Lisbon Treaty (2009) will transform the delegations in ways that are emblematic of the EU's evolution as a global actor. Drawing on empirical insights we examine the way EU diplomats embody the European idea and understand their role in promoting ‘the European Union interests and values around the world’. At a moment of historic transition, the article highlights some of the cultural dynamics currently transforming European diplomacy and how officials conceptualize their work of ‘delivering EU external relations policy’. We argue that Europeanization and loyalty transfer are complicated by inter‐institutional rivalries that raise problematic questions over who can best claim to ‘speak for Europe’.     

THE EU AS LAWMAKER: THE IMPACT OF EU DIRECTIVES ON NATIONAL REGULATION IN THE NETHERLANDS

The impact of European directives on Dutch regulation is fairly limited when compared to the claims that are made by academics and politicians. We found that 12.6 per cent of all parliamentary acts, 19.7 per cent of all orders in council, and 10.1 per cent of all valid ministerial decisions were actually rules transposing EU directives. The total overall impact for all three types of legislation was 12.6 per cent. Departments generally employ the same type of rules in similar proportions both when transposing EC directives and when producing national rules. Departmental autonomy is a defining feature of Dutch central government in general, and this pattern persists in the coordination and implementation of EU directives. Nearly 90 per cent of the European directives in The Netherlands are transposed through delegated legislation in which no involvement of parliament is required. If we take into account the fact that the majority of formal laws are actually drafted by the executive and submitted to parliament, we could easily state that virtually all national rules that transpose European directives into the Dutch legal system are drafted by the executive.     

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.     

SCALE AND POLICY IMPACT IN PARTICIPATORY‐DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY: LESSONS FROM A MULTI‐LEVEL PROCESS

This article addresses two interrelated critiques of participatory‐deliberative democratic institutions: that they are beset by problems of scale and that they achieve weak policy impact. This article tests these criticisms through the case of the UK Sustainable Communities Act (SCA), a multi‐level process that is relatively strongly institutionalized. The evidence lends qualified support to these critiques. The article differentiates between contextual factors, related to the attempt to institutionalize participatory‐deliberative processes within existing socioeconomic and political structures, and design factors to do with institutional and process design. The case of the SCA calls for caution about the claim that multi‐level participatory‐deliberative processes can overcome problems of scale and policy impact, but the question remains open. The article ends by suggesting that expectations of direct policy impact might be too high. Rather than determinants of policy, multi‐level participatory‐deliberative processes might function best as agenda‐setters.     

POST‐ACCESSION POLITICIZATION OF NATIONAL EU POLICY COORDINATION: THE CASE OF SLOVENIA

This article focuses on how domestic and EU‐level political factors affect the functional aspect of the national coordination of EU affairs. Due to the idiosyncrasies of the post‐communist countries which have joined the EU since 2004, an analysis of dynamic changes in the national systems of coordination needs to focus on three factors: (a) functional pressures from the EU; (b) the consolidation of the national party system; and (c) existing traditions of politico‐administrative relations. The international economic and financial crisis is considered as a fourth factor that has affected the first three factors through the increase in the EU's 'informal intergovernmentalism', which adds to the politicization of EU matters. The Slovenian case points to an increased, though selective, politicization of EU business due to both national‐ and EU‐level factors.