Over the past couple of decades a considerable number of European Union (EU) agencies have been established. Research has so far shown that they have become more than mere facilitators of transnational regulatory networks, arenas for the exchange of information on 'best practice', and vehicles for member state governments. Task expansion has taken place, e.g., by taking up (quasi-) regulatory tasks. However, the jury is still out regarding exactly where in the political-administrative landscape EU agencies are situated. Benefiting from novel data sources, this study sheds light on so far undocumented relationships between EU agencies and the European Commission. The study shows that EU agencies have become integral components in the policy-making and implementation activities of Commission departments. Secondly, this development is accounted for by an organizational approach that specifies a set of organizational factors. The study argues that such tight relationships between Commission departments and EU agencies signify a centralization of EU executive power.
Do EU administrative networks help to preserve executive power at the member-state level, or centralize executive power at the EU level? This article examines how resource pooling takes place in the European Medicines Regulatory Network (EMRN), and the relevance of organizational structure in explaining this. By doing so the article adds both empirically and theoretically to the literature. The article presents new insights on intra-network decision behaviour, showing how network participants, under the coordination of an EU agency, pool resources by sharing knowledge, information, practices and experiences, and by routinized division of labour. Furthermore, applying an organizational perspective the article identifies some organizational structural factors that facilitate resource pooling and contribute to centralization of the EMRN. The findings thus have implications for the debate on the effects of establishing EU regulaory networks.
This article contributes to the debate on the significance of organizational structure for administrative decision behaviour by exploring the effects of a reorganization in the European Commission. It is shown that the move of the pharmaceutical unit from DG Enterprise to DG SANCO impacted on the process of developing a regulatory framework on information to patients. After the reorganization, the focus of the policy process changed from industry to public health and other action alternatives became salient, which eventually led to changes in the policy outcome. The article demonstrates how horizontal specialization systematically tips the scales in the direction of certain actors, solutions, interests and concerns in decision processes, eventually resulting in a change of policy focus. The gap between organizational structure and administrative decision behaviour is thus not as large as is often assumed in the literature.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.