How consensual is comitology?

Dehousse, Renaud; Pasarín, Ana-Mar Fernández; Plaza, Joan Pere

doi:10.1080/13501763.2014.910819

Cited by 17 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comitology, for example, participants are formally sent as delegates of national administrations but interaction is mainly deliberative and consensus‐seeking (Joerges and Neyer, ; Pollack, ; cf. Dehousse et al ., ). It is even true of the European Council and the Council of Ministers in EU economic governance, where the oxymoron of ‘deliberative intergovernmentalism’ was coined in order to capture these new dynamics (Puetter, 2012; 2014).…”

Section: The New Intergovernmentalism: Six Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post‐Maastricht Era

Bickerton

Hodson

Puetter

2014

J of Common Market Studies

515

377

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The post-Maastricht period is marked by an integration paradox. While the basic constitutional features of the European Union have remained stable, EU activity has expanded to an unprecedented degree. This form of integration without supranationalism is no exception or temporary deviation from traditional forms of European integration. Rather, it is a distinct phase of European integration, what is called 'the new intergovernmentalism' in this article. This approach to postMaastricht integration challenges theories that associate integration with transfers of competences from national capitals to supranational institutions and those that reduce integration to traditional socioeconomic or security-driven interests. This article explains the integration paradox in terms of transformations in Europe's political economy, changes in preference formation and the decline of the 'permissive consensus'. It presents a set of six hypotheses that develop further the main claims of the new intergovernmentalism and that can be used as a basis for future research.

show abstract

Section: The New Intergovernmentalism: Six Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For some, ‘deliberation’ refers to a ‘discussion mode’, whereas ‘consensus’ is a decision‐making procedure (Dehousse et al ., , p. 845; Novak, ; Urfalino, ). In fact, both terms can also be framed as behavioural norms, which is the approach taken in this article.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post‐Maastricht Era

Bickerton

Hodson

Puetter

2014

J of Common Market Studies

515

377

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two approaches can be distinguished: one relying on rational choice institutionalism which emphasizes strategic bargaining inside comitology committees as well as strategic political choice in selecting control regimes, and one on constructivism focusing in particular on deliberative practices inside committees (cf. Joerges and Neyer 1997;Blom-Hansen 2011;Héritier et al 2012;Brandsma 2013;Dehousse et al 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling delegated powers in the post-Lisbon European Union

Brandsma

Blom‐Hansen²

2015

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most EU rules are made by the Commission, not the Council of Ministers or the European Parliament. But although the Commission is an important rule-maker, it is not autonomous. The member states have always taken care to install committees to control the Commission ('comitology'). However, the Lisbon Treaty introduced alternative control mechanisms (delegated acts) and a reform of the comitology system (implementing acts). This article investigates how the post-Lisbon control system works in daily legislative practice. It represents the first investigation of the institutional preferences of the Council, the Parliament and the Commission in the new system. Further, it utilizes better data than previous studies. The analysis is based on data on the control preferences of all actors before the first trilogue meeting for a large number of cases in the period 2010-2013. The results indicate that the institutional battle over the control of delegated rulemaking is far from over.

show abstract

“…Many highlighted the importance of comitology in shaping EU law and policy and its impacts on EU constitutionalism and democracy (e.g. Pedler and Schaefer, 1996;Wessels, 1998;Joerges and Vos, 1999;Dehousse, 2003;Christiansen and Larsson, 2007;Dehousse, Fernández Pasarín and Plaza, 2014). Much debate arose from the hypothesis of deliberative supranationalism, according to which committees were the setting for deliberative political processes undertaken in the search for a Community decision (Joerges and Neyer, 1997;Joerges and Vos, 1999;Joerges and Dehousee, 2002;Joerges, 2006).…”

Section: The Comitology Committeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The EU Administrative Institutions, Their Law and Legal Scholarship

Mendes

2019

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chapter approaches the EU administrative institutions as catalysts of the development of administrative law of the European Union. As a chapter of the Oxford Handbook on Comparative Administrative Law, it explains the main traits of those institutions, how legal scholarship has portrayed them and how it has addressed the core aspects of their legal regimes. Furthermore, it traces the emergence and current state of EU administrative law, characterising the different roles comparative administrative law has had at different stages. It highlights the initial dissonance between the specificities of the EU administrative institutions and the statematrix of general principles that were developed on the basis of functional comparison; the role of legal scholarship in shaping EU administrative law, in its efforts to give effect to an "utopia" (Chiti, 2007) of an integrated administration constitutionally framed by general principles and fundamental rights; the limits of resorting to comparative administrative law in the context of EU integration and, briefly, the crossroads at which EU administrative law currently stands.The dominance of administrative institutions in regional and global governance is a truism in many important areas of social and economic life. Food quality, pharmaceuticals, product safety, environment, technology and communications are only a few examples. In all these areas, regulation relies on specialised knowledge, discourses and legal acts developed within and adopted by international, regional and national administrative institutions, which, thereby, and by force of the powers allocated to them, have become central to modern government. At the same time, the proliferation of administrative institutions beyond the state challenged the role and functions of their national counter-parts. They have emerged largely detached from constitutionally framed or stable procedural and substantive rules that, within a state-setting, had provided safer ground for the protection of rights and the legitimacy of democratic processes (Sand, 1998, 274), and they evolved as those rules were being framed. As they progressively changed the governing conditions within the state, the challenges they have posed to democratic government and to rights' protection soon became those of national administrative institutions too (Sand, 1998, 276). From this perspective, the 'level' image, whereby supranational and transnational administrative institutions operate 'beyond the state' is as deceptive as it is descriptively appealing. This chapter will focus on the administrative institutions of the EU. It is hoped that the Eurocentric-bias of the analysis can nevertheless be useful as a reference point for the study of 1 I would like to acknowledge helpful suggestions by Peter Cane and Filipe Brito Bastos.

show abstract

How consensual is comitology?

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post‐Maastricht Era

The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post‐Maastricht Era

Controlling delegated powers in the post-Lisbon European Union

The EU Administrative Institutions, Their Law and Legal Scholarship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About