Introduction: Diffuse control mechanisms in the European Union: towards a new democracy?

Costa, Olivier; Jabko, Nicolas; Lequesne, Christian; Magnette, Paul

doi:10.1080/1350176032000124023

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They are subject to 'peer' or professional accountability, to reputational and market accountability, to fiscal/ financial, administrative or legal accountability. 76 There is no guarantee however that such 'diffuse' or 'composite' control mechanisms 77 can be effective, as they operate in a fragmentary and uncoordinated way without forming a coherent system. Also, the problem of a lack of political and democratic accountability remains: only some network actors are subject to it, and control over them can be merely indirect or partial.…”

Section: Conclusion and Prospects For Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multilevel Governance

Papadopoulos¹

2018

Borders and Margins

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies converge on the growth of processes of 'multilevel governance' (MLG) in policy making, related to the often combined trends towards supranationalism and regionalism. Such processes are usually analysed under the angle of their efficiency, while their impact on the quality of democracy is neglected. This article first defines the concepts of multilevel governance and accountability, and then identifies the various dimensions of the latter. It further argues that MLG generates novel forms of accountability, but undermines its democratic dimension mainly for the following reasons: the weak visibility of MLG networks, their selective composition and the prevalence of peer over public forms of accountability.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Prospects For Accountabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multilevel Governance

Papadopoulos¹

2018

Borders and Margins

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An implication is that the conception of accountability as truth finding, a neutral technique, correct reporting, and compliance has to be supplemented by accountability politics-debates and struggles over what are considered appropriate accountability regimes and good government (Bovens, Curtin, and 't Hart 2010;Costa et al 2003;Curtin, Mair, and Papadopoulos 2010). New regimes are often related to political contestation and the rise and fall of political groups, ideologies, cleavages, institutions, and orders.…”

Section: Accountability As Restructuring Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Democratic Order, Autonomy, and Accountability

Olsen

2015

Governance

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accountability is a principle for organizing relations between rulers and ruled, and making public officials accountable is a democratic achievement. There are, however, competing claims about what is involved in demanding, rendering, assessing, and responding to accounts; what are effective accountability institutions; and how accountability regimes emerge and change. This article provides a frame for thinking about institutional aspects of accountability regimes and their cognitive, normative, and power foundations. A distinction is made between accountability within an established regime with stable power relations and role expectations and accountability as (re)structuring processes in less institutionalized contexts and in transformation periods. A huge literature is concerned with the first issue. There is less attention to accountability as (re)structuring processes. The article, therefore, calls attention to how democracies search for, and struggle over, what are legitimate accountability regimes and political orders.

show abstract

“…7 See Day and Klein (1987, 10-29) for the general context; Barberis (1998), Flinders (2001, and Sullivan (2003) for the British context; see Bovens (2003, 46-67) and Meijer and Schillemans (2007) for the Dutch discussion. For an overview of the multi-level and composite character of accountability and control in the EU, see Harlow (2002), Costa et al (2003), andHe´ritier (2003). 8 In Sweden, which has a much longer tradition of independent agencies, the Ombudsman has long been a key accountability mechanism.…”

Section: New Forms Of Accountability and European Governance: Taking mentioning

confidence: 99%