Is the European Commission Really in Decline?

Abstract

In the academic debate on the relative powers and influence of the EU institutions, it has become common to suggest – especially in the case of advocates of the ‘new intergovernmentalism’ – that the European Commission is in decline. In this article we show that while in some limited respects this is indeed the case, the Commission's overall position in the EU system is not one of having become a weaker institutional actor. The extent of the losses of its powers and influence tends to be exaggerated, while in some aspects its powers and influence have actually been strengthened. We show this by focusing on three of the Commission's core functions – agenda‐setter, legislative actor and executive – all of which are widely portrayed as being in decline. We incorporate into our analysis both the formal and informal resources available to the Commission in exercising the functions.

Researching European Union Agencies: What Have We Learnt (and Where Do We Go from Here)?

“…Also a broader agenda and more frequent meetings in the European Council have led to the same conclusion (Carammia et al, ). Our findings are more consistent with the observations reported by Bauer and Becker () and Nugent and Rhinard () on the persistent key role of the Commission. Our conception of a political executive, or government‐like body, is that such a body possesses considerable capacity for policy development as well as for policy implementation, usually in the form of a multitude of policy departments and (regulatory) agencies.…”

Intra‐ and Inter‐Institutional Leadership of the European Commission President: An Assessment of Juncker's Organizational Reforms

“…Second, in contrast to the argument that a direct election would lead to a more partisan Commission President, and consequently less supported outside his own party family (Grabbe and Lehne, , p. 2), the evidence from the interviews reveal the opposite: the findings highlight an intensified cross‐party co‐operation between Juncker and the major political groups in the EP (see also Kaeding, , p. 3). In sum, these results resonate with those accounts favouring continued policy leadership capacity of the Commission (Becker et al, ; Nugent and Rhinard, ; Peterson, ), while it is important to acknowledge that more evidence is needed before it can be confidently stated that the Juncker Commission has substantially greater influence on Council decisions than the Barroso Commission had (Dinan, , p. 114).…”

“…The evidence from the interviews rather suggests that Juncker has in fact further cemented the presidentialization of the Commission, and has successfully improved the Commission's political leadership capacity in the dialogue with Council and EP. These findings resonate with previous accounts which challenge the ‘new intergovernmentalist’ view of a Commission in decline (Bulmer, ; Nugent and Rhinard, ; Peterson , p. 207).…”

“…While the European Council's involvement in agenda setting has certainly grown, its internal divisions due to the increased heterogeneity after Eastern enlargement often reduce the scope for agreement to vaguely defined guidelines and principles. More substantive policy discussions, therefore, increasingly require the input of the European Commission (Nugent and Rhinard, , p. 1202; Peterson, , p. 197). The absence of a strong German‐France axis, and divisions between the Member States, has given the Commission an opportunity to present itself as a leader offering a vision for the general direction of the EU.…”

The European Citizens’ Initiative: bringing the EU closer to its citizens?

“…In sum, the ECI offers campaigners a means of institutionalized agenda-setting, strengthened by provision for a hearing in the EP and of which the European Commission takes account in making its response. Given that the ECI appears to challenge the Commission's right of initiative, some observers have wondered whether the Commission's approach to it might be luke-warm (Nugent and Rhinard, 2016). In reality, the Commission has tried hard to make the concept work because of its structural interests in deepening the European project and seeking popular legitimacy for it.…”