Agency Escape: Decentralization or Dominance of the European Commission in the Modernization of Competition Policy?

Wilks, Stephen

doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2005.00283.x

Cited by 120 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Top-down groups, such as ERGEG and BEREC (which recently replaced the ERG), were established through EU directives and Commission decisions, in order to function as advisory bodies and to foster harmonization of national regulations, thanks to the enactment of "soft law" prerequisites . The ECN (European Competition Network) also consists of national competition authorities and the EU Commission, but has the distinctive feature of enjoying closer support from the Commission and of not being organised by committees drawn from member states (Wilks, 2005). This network is mostly dedicated to the effective enforcement of EC competition rules across Europe by acting as a powerful system that favors the spread of information and the coordination of national authorities.…”

Section: The Ceer/ergeg (Council Of European Energy Regulators/europementioning

confidence: 99%

The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards

Maggetti¹,

Gilardi²

2011

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European regulatory networks (ERNs) constitute the main governance instrument for the informal co-ordination of public regulation at the European Union (EU) level. They are in charge of coordinating national regulators and ensuring the implementation of harmonized regulatory policies across the EU, while also offering sector-specific expertise to the Commission. To this aim, ERNs develop 'best practices' and benchmarking procedures in the form of standards, norms and guidelines to be adopted in member states. In this paper, we focus on the Committee of European Securities Regulators and examine the consequences of the policy-making structure of ERNs on the domestic adoption of standards. We find that the regulators of countries with larger financial industries tend to occupy more central positions in the network, especially among newer member states. In turn, network centrality is associated with a more prompt domestic adoption of standards. policies across the EU, while also offering sector-specific expertise to the Commission. To this aim, ERNs develop "best practices" and benchmarking procedures in the form of standards, norms, and guidelines to be adopted in member states. In this article, we focus on the Committee of European Securities Regulators and examine the consequences of the policy-making structure of ERNs on the domestic adoption of standards. We find that the regulators of countries with larger financial industries tend to occupy more central positions in the network, especially among newer member states. In turn, network centrality is associated with a more prompt domestic adoption of standards.

show abstract

Section: The Ceer/ergeg (Council Of European Energy Regulators/europementioning

confidence: 99%

The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards

Maggetti¹,

Gilardi²

2011

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most attention has gone to network sectors such as competition policy (Blauberger and Rittberger 2015;Kassim and Wright 2009;McGowan 2005;Thatcher 2011;Wilks 2005), telecommunications (Blauberger and Rittberger 2015;Thatcher 2005, 2008;Eberlein and Grande 2005;Kelemen and Tarrant 2011;Majone 2000;Mathieu 2015;Thatcher 2011;Thatcher and Coen 2008) and energy Thatcher 2005, 2008;Eberlein and Grande 2005;Eberlein and Newman 2008;Thatcher 2011;Thatcher and Coen 2008), at the expense of sectors of 'positive integration' like environment, social policy and food safety. As shown by Table 1 in the Online Appendix, no attention has been paid to the following (sub-) domains: international trade; taxation; education; agriculture and fishing; undertaking laws; state subsidies; foreign policy; foreign aid; migration; employment; and structural/regional funds.…”

Section: Ean Establishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The literature has emphasized networks of national regulatory agencies -often dubbed European regulatory networks/ ERNs (Blauberger and Rittberger 2015;Thatcher 2005, 2008;Danielsen and Yesilkagit 2014;Maggetti 2014aMaggetti , 2014bGilardi 2011, 2014;Newman 2008;Van Boetzelaer and Princen 2012;Yesilkagit 2011). Yet, several other terms have been used: networks (Versluis and Tarr 2013); transnational regulatory networks (Eberlein and Grande 2005); transnational administrative networks (Bach et al 2016); transnational networks (Wilks 2005); administrative networks (Martens 2008a); and transgovernmental networks (Bignami 2005;Eberlein and Newman 2008;Hobolth and Martinsen 2013;Hollis 2010;Martens 2008b;Raustiala 2002;Slaughter 2004).…”

Section: Conceptualizing European Administrative Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Filling the gap in the European administrative space: the role of administrative networks in EU implementation and enforcement

Mastenbroek

Martinsen

2017

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European administrative networks (EANs) are a key building block of the European Administrative Space (EAS). Crucially, they are to fill the gap between the EU's policy ambitions and its limited administrative capacities. Whereas ample research has been done on policy preparation networks, the role of implementing EANs has received less attention in the EAS literature. This article fills this gap by providing a systematic review of relevant insights in four adjacent literatures: EU governance; international relations; public administration; and EU compliance. Employing a systematic literature review, it reports divergent findings on EAN establishment, functioning and impact, as well as variant normative evaluations. These variant findings partly relate to a lack of comparative research, selective policy coverage and predominant focus on North-western states. We conclude by suggesting a number of lines for future research on these four important themes, arguing that the crucial question will be which impact these EANs have on the national implementation and enforcement of EU law.

show abstract

“…3. See Wilks (2005) for an argument that suggests that rather than decentralizing, the impact of the reform was to increase the centralized power of the Commission. 4.…”

Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenges and Trajectories of EU Competition Policy in the Twenty-first Century

Aydin

Thomas

2012

Journal of European Integration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sixty years have now passed since the signing of the Treaty of Paris establishing the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, and during that period competition policy has become firmly anchored as one of the key pillars of European integration. A regime of European competition governance has emerged that centers on the European Commission, specifically its Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP), and has matured to tackle the four constituent parts of the EU competition policy brief, cartels, monopolies, mergers and state aid. The focus and enforcement of EU competition policy is constantly being reviewed in response to new challenges and opportunities as DG COMP seeks greater consistency in competition norms and greater policy convergence both within the EU and the wider global environment. The opening article of this volume introduces the context in which substantive changes to the EU competition regime has occurred in the twenty-first century. It identifies the major drivers for such change including economic interdependence, the proliferation of national competition laws, and the current financial and economic crisis, and describes how EU competition policy has evolved in response to these challenges.

show abstract

Agency Escape: Decentralization or Dominance of the European Commission in the Modernization of Competition Policy?

Cited by 120 publications

References 11 publications

The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards

The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards

Filling the gap in the European administrative space: the role of administrative networks in EU implementation and enforcement

The Challenges and Trajectories of EU Competition Policy in the Twenty-first Century

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About