Assessing What Brexit Means for Europe: Implications for EU Institutions and Actors

Bressanelli, Edoardo; Chelotti, Nicola

doi:10.17645/pag.v9i1.3982

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An important institutional innovation introduced by the RRF Regulation has been the establishment of the RRDs. Consistent with the assumption that crises act as a trigger of institutional change (see Bressanelli & Natali, 2023), the EP successfully managed to insert RRDs into the regulation as an instrument of accountability, one which was not originally included in the legislative proposal presented by the Commission. Thus, Art.…”

Section: The Recovery and Resilience Dialoguesmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Recovery and Resilience Dialogues: Cheap Talk or Effective Oversight?

Bressanelli,

Chelotti,

Nebbiai

2023

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recovery and resilience dialogues were introduced by the regulation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, and the first of such dialogues took place in May 2021. The European Parliament invites the Commission, approximately every two months, to exchange views on matters relating to the national recovery and resilience plans and progress in their implementation. Through an analysis of an original dataset composed of the questions asked by the MEPs in the 10 dialogues held between May 2021 and April 2023, this article provides a systematic empirical assessment of the European Parliament’s capacity to hold the Commission accountable. Drawing on the literature on the economic and monetary dialogues and adapting the operationalisation of key variables to the new instrument, this article shows that the recovery and resilience dialogues are an effective instrument for information exchange and debate, but they serve as a weak instrument of political accountability. Additionally, it casts new light on significant differences between MEPs: South and East European members are considerably more active than members from Northern Europe. At the same time, parliamentarians only occasionally ask questions targeting other member states.

show abstract

Section: The Recovery and Resilience Dialoguesmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Recovery and Resilience Dialogues: Cheap Talk or Effective Oversight?

Bressanelli,

Chelotti,

Nebbiai

2023

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Institutions: Change Under the Surfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The articles by Bressanelli et al (2023) and Müller (2023) analyse, instead, the European Parliament (EP). Bressanelli et al (2023) ask whether the Recovery and Resilience Dialogues-a new instrument to hold the Commission accountable for the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)-is fit for the purpose. In principle, the Dialogues are an important institutional innovation-modelled on the dialogues established with the euro crisis-as they allow the EP to scrutinise how funds are allocated and spent.…”

Section: Institutions: Change Under the Surfacementioning

confidence: 99%

Tested by the Polycrisis: Reforming or Transforming the EU?

Bressanelli,

Natali

2023

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thematic issue addresses the question: To what extent have the latest crises—the pandemic crisis and Russia’s war in Ukraine—triggered institutional and policy change in the EU? It contributes to the literature on the impact of crises on integration and the EU political system, presenting new research based on fresh theoretical insights, empirical data, or a combination of both. Theoretically, the contributions collected in the thematic issue explore whether the crises represent a critical juncture for the EU, leading to institutional and/or policy innovations or, rather, set in motion more incremental processes of adaptation. Empirically, all articles—some of which are qualitative, while others are quantitative—are based on original or new data. The first group of contributions deals with institutional change, focusing both on formal (i.e., treaty reform) and informal (i.e., codes of conduct) institutions. A second group moves the focus to policy change, looking at the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on several policy areas and the energy crisis. Overall, the key lesson is that the EU can now manage and absorb new shocks quite effectively. At the same time, however, it does not promote ambitious and coherent political models or policy paradigms. Instead, it provides room for experimentation through patchwork-like strategies where old and new instruments and settings mix.

show abstract

“…Change does not, however, necessarily follow from a crisis. Instead, as discussed in the introduction to this thematic issue (Bressanelli & Natali, 2023), scholars have found that while crises may produce pressure for rapid change, it may also "reinforce well-known organisational solutions and governing arrangements" (Riddervold et al, 2021, p. 8). Numerous studies already argue that the pandemic has triggered immense and rapid political, institutional, and legal changes in the EU and in the member states (Greer & Jarman, 2021;Riddervold et al, 2021).…”

Section: Analytical Framework: Europeanisation Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Policy Europeanisation in Response to the Covid‐19 Crisis: The Case of Job Retention Schemes

Sønstevold,

Riddervold,

Gunnarsdottir

2023

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>To what extent and how did the Covid-19-pandemic trigger the Europeanisation of public policy in the EU member states? This article addresses this question by exploring member states’ responses to the labour market implications of the pandemic. Although the EU due to its free movement principles in effect has a common labour market, labour market policies have remained in the hands of the member states. Nonetheless, we find that they responded in a surprisingly similar manner to rising unemployment caused by lockdowns. Was this policy change linked to Europeanisation processes, and if so, in what way? We find that member states’ responses were related both to economic incentives and to contingent learning playing out in largely informal settings at the EU level. Our findings shed light on how crises may function as a critical juncture that triggers policy change, and how the EU may play a key role in such change. Our study thus also adds insights to our understanding of the mechanisms that underpin Europeanisation, in particular by shedding light on the importance of informal learning processes and the influence of the European Commission also in formally less integrated policy areas.</p>

show abstract

Assessing What Brexit Means for Europe: Implications for EU Institutions and Actors

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

The Recovery and Resilience Dialogues: Cheap Talk or Effective Oversight?

The Recovery and Resilience Dialogues: Cheap Talk or Effective Oversight?

Tested by the Polycrisis: Reforming or Transforming the EU?

Public Policy Europeanisation in Response to the Covid‐19 Crisis: The Case of Job Retention Schemes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About