Limits to EU technocratic regulation?

Abstract

This article has three main objectives. Firstly, it seeks to re-formulate the debate on technocracy in the European Union by drawing upon the concept of the EU regulatory state as developed by Majone (1996). Secondly, it illustrates the limits and tensions of a once politicised technocratic policy-making process by tracing the formulation of media ownership regulation. Although media ownership policy has been presented by the European Commission as a typical regulatory policy, it has followed a more politicised path than previous EU regulatory policies. This implies that media ownership policy does not follow the model of technocratic regulation presented by Majone in his characterisation of the EU regulatory state. Thirdly, the paper contributes to the debate on EU regulation by suggesting a new typology of regulatory policies in the EU. In the conclusion, it is argued that politicisation (which includes inefficiency and prolonged conflict) may be the price that the EU is forced to pay in its progress toward a more democratic polity.

The choice for EU theorists: Establishing a common framework for analysis

“…They thus tend to be resistant to politicisation and a force for continuity more than change. We need more cases that test the extent to which EU policy networks operate autonomously of national governments and democratic controls, thus reinforcing the impression of the EU as a technocracy (see Harcourt & Radaelli 1999;Radaelli 1999) as opposed to a political system (Hix 1999) subject to political control.…”

Codecision since Amsterdam: a laboratory for institutional innovation and change

“…Without any opposition, in the EP or elsewhere, no rival solutions or alternative programmes are presented to the voters (Neunreither 1998). Reducing inter-institutional rivalry contributes to the technocratization or depoliticization of decision-making that arguably is ill-suited to the present-day Union (Harcourt and Radaelli 1999). Political conflict can no longer be avoided.…”

Culture, policy, and subsidiarity in the European Union: from symbolic identity to the governmentalisation of culture

“…It also limits an understanding of one of the more important political trends of the last two decades: popular opposition to forms of public expertise seen as distant and unaccountable". In this respect, policy-making in the EU exemplifies the tendency for the monopolisation of knowledge by experts to generate broader crises of legitimacy and accountability in decision-making (Harcourt & Raedelli 1999, Raedelli 1999. And in the case of the EU, the legitimacy problems associated with technocratic decision-making 8 procedures have stimulated the emergence of new forms of consultation, participation, and representation over the last decade.…”