Narrative dynamics in European Commission AI policy—Sensemaking,agency construction,and anchoring

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is arguably one of the most powerful and disruptive technologies of our times which may pose challenges as well as opportunities to contemporary political organizations. Studying AI from a lens of perceived uncertainty, this article studies the policy response of the European Commission toward this fast-paced emerging technology. By empirically focusing on the Commission's policy process from start to end, from initial communication to concrete proposal, the article shows how different types of narratives are used to construct the new policy area of AI policy. A novel theoretical framework is constructed building on a combination of narrative organizational studies and narrative policy studies, displaying how narratives play a key role in organizational sensemaking, agency construction and anchoring. The paper finds that the Commission broadly makes sense of AI technologies with a future-oriented discourse, establishes agency to existing and new forms of political organizing and anchors the policy response within the overarching frame of the EU single market policy. The main contribution of the paper is that it shows how political organizations settles uncertainty through narratives and sketches a way forward through establishing policy goals and anchoring them within pre-existing lines of political mobilization.     

监察委员会办理职务犯罪案件程序问题研究——以768份裁判文书为例

根据监察委员会成立以来法院作出的768份裁判文书的实证研究,职务犯罪案件委托律师辩护率高;留置期限整体较长、解除留置后逮捕率高;认罪认罚从宽制度和速裁程序适用率低;非法证据排除难;定案以言词证据为主,证据之间相互“印证”成为此类案件典型的办案模式。在具体操作中,还存在与刑事诉讼法衔接不畅的问题。基于此,应当保障辩护律师介入的时间和诉讼权利;提高留置措施的适用标准;明确职务犯罪案件中认罪认罚从宽制度适用标准和同步录音录像资料的调取、出示程序;庭审中应当贯彻直接言词原则,加强证据审核,建立证人、鉴定人和调查人员出庭作证机制。     

A European response to non-compliance: the Commission’s enforcement efforts and the Common European Asylum System

This article aims at systematically analysing the European Commission’s effort to enforce compliance with the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). In recent years, human rights organisations have increasingly denounced EU member states’ violations of the right to asylum and accused the EU of turning a blind eye to non-compliance with the CEAS. Although the primary responsibility to implement EU law lies with member states, the Commission ought to assist them and enforce violated legislation. How exactly does the Commission react to member states’ non-compliance with the CEAS? What can be inferred from these insights? By using infringement data, policy documents, and complementary interviews, the article scrutinises which of the available instruments are applied de facto. Subsequently, the findings are critically discussed, suggesting that the Commission prefers capacity-enhancing instruments and is rather tentative in using instruments to increase member states’ willingness to comply.     

Credible commitment without independent regulatory agent: Evidence from the Security Council's United Nations Compensation Commission

Credible commitment problems arise whenever decisions made according to short‐term incentives undermine long‐term policy goals. While political actors can credibly commit themselves to their long‐term policy goals by delegating decisions to independent regulatory agencies, the member states of international institutions rarely sacrifice control over regulatory decisions. Against the backdrop of the United Nations Compensation Commission established by the Security Council to settle claims on damage from the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, we present an institutional arrangement that promises to credibly commit member states to their previously defined interests without excluding them from the decision process. It separates the stages of rulemaking and rule application, and is reinforced by conditional agenda‐setting of an advisory body. We probe the theoretical claim with evidence from a unique data set that shows that the Commission settled compensation claims in a remarkably consistent way. The arrangement provides a blueprint for comparable regulatory tasks in many areas of international, European, or domestic politics, in which independent regulation is not feasible.     

Investigating the Institutional Norms and Values of the Productivity Commission: The 2011 and 2015 Childcare Inquiries

The Productivity Commission (PC) has a mandate to provide independent advice to government that promotes community wellbeing. Whilst it plays a significant role in social and economic reform, the underlying institutional values and norms of the PC that shape its advice have not been examined. This paper examines policy problematisations (Bacchi 2009, 2012) across two PC ‘inquiries’ into childcare (2011, 2015) between Labor and Coalition governments, and the advice provided by the PC. In doing so, this research demonstrates that PC recommendations are imbued with economic values that are highly institutionalised. These values give preference to targeted social welfare and traditional gender norms, despite current evidence suggesting alternative approaches would have better social and long‐term economic outcomes. Our findings raise questions over the conflict between the traditional economic values of the PC and providing social policy advice that reflects best practice, indicating that further investigation into the PC is urgently needed.     

Catering to Organizational Needs in Ethics Management: The Case of the European Commission

This article examines the ethical challenges encountered by European Commission officials in their day-to-day work. Based on an intra-organizational comparison between three Directorate Generals (DGs), the analysis reveals that ethical questions differ in these settings, depending on the type of external actors employees engage with. This internal heterogeneity makes the European Commission an interesting (unusual) case, which highlights the challenges of practising ethics management in a way that is truly responsive to organizational needs. The policy solution implemented by the Commission as a response—the appointment of “ethics correspondents” at DG level—has been only moderately successful.     

An Opposing View of Scotland's Ballot Paper Problem: Arbuthnott and the Government had the Right Idea

The May 2007 Scottish Parliament election used a different ballot format from the one used in the previous elections, one that combined the regional and constituency votes onto one ballot paper (two separate papers were used before). Because there were many more invalid votes in 2007, the problem was blamed on the two‐vote ballot paper, which was recommended by the Arbuthnott Commission to prevent misunderstandings about what the two votes were for. Other places that use the mixed‐member proportional (MMP) electoral system tend to use a two‐vote ballot paper, with Germany and New Zealand seeing low levels of invalid votes. While the decision to revert to two separate papers in future Scottish Parliament elections might reduce the number of invalid votes, the price could be more confusion about the proportional nature of the electoral system unless public education improves significantly.     

Lay Public or Experts? e‐Participation in Authorization for GMO Products in the European Union

In the European Union, for the first time, lay people can participate directly in the procedure of assessment of GMO (genetically modified organisms) products, an exercise normally reserved for scientists and legal experts. What makes this a unique strategy of participation is that for each single application for authorization, lay people have the opportunity to express their views. This article presents the result of the first in‐depth analysis of this type of Internet participatory exercise in the first years of its implementation. It shows that, despite generally participatory technology assessment aims at deliberative consensus on technical questions, this forum is instead a way to expose the work of regulative authorities to public scrutiny and to express dissent and opposition to the European Commission policy on GMOs.     

浅谈保险条款行政审批的法律效力

为保障保险业有序发展,中国保险监督管理委员会依法行使对保险合同条款审查、备案的行政职权,通过事先监督的方式保证条款内容的合法性,防止出现损害社会公众利益的情况。这在一定程上是对保险合同的行政干预。