Going full circle: the need for procedural perspectives on EU responsiveness

Abstract

Research on policy responsiveness of the European Union has adopted the systemic model from national contexts. This focusses on the static congruence or the dynamic adaptation of aggregated policy output and similarly aggregated public opinion. Approaches in this vein provide relevant insights and uncover a surprising degree of EU responsiveness. Yet, this debate contribution argues that they only insufficiently capture indirect accountability chains and the emerging challenges of public EU politicization and mediatization. We establish the need for procedural perspectives that addresses how the different EU institutions perceive and digest public opinion and subsequently influence it through communication. To further this research agenda, we sketch the contours of a procedural model by highlighting possible variation at the input, throughput and output stages. Going full circle, we suggest, allows us to better understand the responses to public opinion and their wider implications for the societal acceptance of the unfinished supranational polity.

Lobbying Brexit Negotiations: Who Lobbies Michel Barnier?

“…That is to say, we observe the nature of the policy field and issue salience as additional variables influencing whom the CN meets more often. This falls in line with a growing body of work highlighting the Commission's reaction to public opinion, and what can be more broadly termed as 'politicization' (De Wilde & Rauh, 2019). These results offer valuable information about Michel Barnier's stakeholder engagement and its purpose.…”

Blame shifting and blame obfuscation: The blame avoidance effects of delegation in the European Union

“…We focus on media coverage, instead of public opinion polls, because we understand ‘the public’ as a sphere rather than an actor or a set of actors. According to this understanding, governments are not held responsible by the public, but by a number of actors that attribute responsibility in the public (see de Wilde & Rauh, 2019; Habermas, 2008; Risse, 2015). To study media coverage, we focus on the quality press which still has a lead media function in European countries and is generally considered to be a good proxy for the public sphere (Brüggemann et al., 2009; Dolezal et al., 2016, p. 45; Koopmans & Statham, 2010; Kriesi et al., 2012; Risse, 2015).…”

Understanding Accountability in Democratic Governance

“…Of course, this virtuous circle is welcome from a democratic perspective on representation. However, the main limitation of the studies that conclude with such positive results is that the processes leading to the congruence between governments and public opinion are not scrutinized in depth (de Wilde and Rauh, 2019). Policy-making remains a black box, and it is unclear what kinds of tools decision-makers use to recognize the signals emerging from public opinion (or from narrower but more easily identifiable electoral clienteles) and to influence political demand.…”