Informal Governance in the European Union

Kleine, Mareike

doi:10.1080/13501763.2013.870023

Cited by 32 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 90 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To which extent and under which conditions this explanation can be generalized calls for more research. If it is true that “governance through the systematic departure from formal rules” (Kleine, , p. 305) is common practice, there is reason for some concern: while a compromise at the expense of coherence can be frustrating from a technical standpoint, it may still be normatively appealing because of its potential to recognize the views of all those affected by a decision (Reh, , p. 429). By contrast, coherence by subterfuge relies on nonpolitical and bilateral arenas to avoid political opposition; it runs counter to the democratic principle of giving equal consideration to all affected.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Deters

2018

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper looks at how policy-makers use various alternative decision arenas to avoid internal policy incoherence. Inconsistency between goals and measures in a policy indirectly results from conflicting interests pulling in different directions within a heterarchical institutional setting. To avoid deadlock, negotiators rely on consensusbuilding techniques such as watering down, issue redefinition, and the setting of targets without actions. These techniques facilitate moving away from the status quo, but they come at the expense of coherence. This paper shows that alternative decision arenas may bypass conflict, and thereby make the use of consensus-building techniques unnecessary, resulting in more coherence. Examples from the emerging field of energy efficiency policy substantiate this claim.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Deters

2018

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since 2011, the European Commission has sought to promote an EU-wide network, which includes local authorities and street-level practitioners ("Radicalization Awareness Network") and attracts increasing amounts of official functions. This initiative complements further Member States-led informal groups ("Policy Planners Network") 44 and initiatives for the development of counter-narratives ("Syria Strategic Communication Network").…”

Section: Network Across Different Areas Of Internal Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 Frevel and Schulze [28]. 13 Verdier [77], Kleine [44], Pauwelyn et al [61], Christiansen and Neuhold [11], Stacey [70]. 14 List and Zangl [49].…”

Section: Informal and Formal Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Policy networks for European internal security governance: toward a more systematic empirical and normative assessment

Bossong¹

2020

J Transatl Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European cooperation on internal security is usually seen through the lens of highly salient normative debates, such as the appropriate balance between freedom and security. This paper provides an alternative and long-term perspective on this policy area. The first theoretical part condenses four alternative theoretical perspectives on European internal security governance that relate to the wider relationship between informal and formal governance mechanisms. The second part presents a matching empirical overview of more than 180 European governance networks on police and criminal cooperation, counterterrorism, border security, migration policy, cybersecurity and disaster prevention. Expertise-driven and policy field-specific dynamics appear significant to account for the breadth and variety of policy networks. In contrast, executive empowerment, venue-shopping or deliberate side-stepping of formal decision-making forums do not appear as dominant trends, although there are severe structural shortcomings with regard to the transparency and legal basis of the mapped policy networks.

show abstract

“…Informal accommodation in recognition of strong national interests and identitybased ideas has been a legitimizing force in the EU for a very long time. Making exceptions to the rules, or 'informal governance,' as Mareike Kleine (2013) explains, has been a normal part of processes of negotiated agreement in the Single Market, and has actually reinforced the legitimacy of the formal governance processes in cases where the political fallout from domestic groups' objections could jeopardize consensual EU-level politics or national political stability (Kleine, 2013).…”

Section: Politics and The 'New' Dynamics Of Eu Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking EU Governance: From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Approaches to Who Steers Integration^*

Schmidt

2018

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EU scholars have long been divided on the main drivers of European integration. The original approaches were at odds on whether EU level intergovernmental actors or supranational actors were better able to exercise coercive or institutional power to pursue their interests, with Andrew Moravcsik's liberal intergovernmentalism serving as a baseline for one side of those debates. Newer approaches are similarly divided, but see power in terms of ideational innovation and consensus‐focused deliberation. The one thing old and new approaches have in common is that they ignore the parliamentarists, new and old. What all sides to the debates have failed to recognize is the reality of a ‘new’ EU governance of more politically charged dynamics among all three main EU actors exercising different kinds of power. This has roots not only in the national level's increasing ‘politics against policy’ and its bottom up effects on the EU level. It also stems from EU institutional interactions at the top, and its ‘policy with politics’.

show abstract

Informal Governance in the European Union

Cited by 32 publications

References 90 publications

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Policy networks for European internal security governance: toward a more systematic empirical and normative assessment

Rethinking EU Governance: From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Approaches to Who Steers Integration^*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Informal Governance in the European Union

Cited by 32 publications

References 90 publications

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Policy coherence by subterfuge? Arenas and compromise‐building in the European Union's energy efficiency policy

Policy networks for European internal security governance: toward a more systematic empirical and normative assessment

Rethinking EU Governance: From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Approaches to Who Steers Integration*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Rethinking EU Governance: From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Approaches to Who Steers Integration^*