Transnational Bureaucratic Politics: An Institutional Rivalry Perspective on Eu Network Governance

Bach, Tobias; Francesco, Fabrizio De; Maggetti, Martino; Ruffing, Eva

doi:10.1111/padm.12252

Cited by 62 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The CEER was created by a group of European national energy regulators in 1997 (Vasconcelos, 2005). This seems to contradict earlier (Coen & Thatcher, 2008) and later (Bach, De Francesco, Maggetti, & Ruffing, 2016) findings asserting that regulatory networks are inconsequential for regulatory convergence. Thatcher (2011) understands the longevity of informal networks as the regulators' attempt to preserve their role in the European regulatory system, resisting the empowerment of European agencies.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundcontrasting

confidence: 65%

Regulatory relationships across levels of multilevel governance systems: From collaboration to competition

Vantaggiato

2019

Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union and the United States are paradigmatic examples of multilevel governance systems that are also regulatory states. In both settings, informal networks of regulators preceded and existed alongside supranational (federal) regulatory agencies. The literature understood their rationale as preparatory to the creation of higher level agencies. This approach, however, cannot explain why informal regulatory networks still exist, years after the establishment of higher level agencies. What explains the persistence of informal regulatory networks? The argument of this article is that in multilevel governance systems, the relationship between regulatory networks and the supranational level of governance is coevolutionary and embodies struggles for autonomy and authority: as the multilevel governance system consolidates, the character of this relationship evolves from collaborative to competitive. The argument relies on a comparative historical analysis of two voluntary networks of energy regulators from the European Union and the United States, based on 27 interviews and archival research.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundcontrasting

confidence: 65%

Regulatory relationships across levels of multilevel governance systems: From collaboration to competition

Vantaggiato

2019

Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent explanations have pointed to the importance of autonomy and resources in prompting regulators to network transnationally (Vestlund 2015;Bach et al 2016). Moreover, existing literature usually employs the word "network" as a useful descriptive metaphor, but rarely studies it as a relational structure (Isett et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The drivers of regulatory networking: policy learning between homophily and convergence

Vantaggiato

2018

J. Pub. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on transnational regulatory networks identified interdependence as their main rationale, downplaying domestic factors. Typically, relevant contributions use the word "network" only metaphorically. Yet, informal ties between regulators constitute networked structures of collaboration, which can be measured and explained. Regulators choose their frequent, regular network partners. What explains those choices? This article develops an Exponential Random Graph Model of the network of European national energy regulators to identify the drivers of informal regulatory networking. The results show that regulators tend to network with peers who regulate similarly organised market structures. Geography and European policy frameworks also play a role. Overall, the British regulator is significantly more active and influential than its peers, and a divide emerges between regulators from EU-15 and others. Therefore, formal frameworks of cooperation (i.e. a European Agency) were probably necessary to foster regulatory coordination across the EU.

show abstract

“…The embedding of national administrative units in international networks has extended the chain of delegation from politicians to bureaucrats and the chain of accountability running in the opposite direction, making it increasingly difficult for national executives to manage and steer the administration. Moreover, a new type of bureaucratic politics is emerging in these post-national administrative spaces (Bach et al 2016). The outcomes of policymaking processes within the networks are more affected by endogenous and quite autonomous network dynamics than by the interventions of national politicians in agency decisions.…”

Section: Multi-level Public Service Bargainsmentioning

confidence: 99%

International public administrations: a critique

Christensen

Yesilkagit

2018

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent decades have seen an expansion and proliferation of administrative bodies at the international level. An emerging literature on 'international public administrations' attempts to conceptualize and theorize these bodies, by applying a public administration perspective to international organizations. This essay critically examines how this literature addresses key issues relating to international administrative bodies: bureaucratic autonomy, administrative behavior and policy-making influence. It argues that existing theorizing suffers from two important weaknesses: concepts are poorly developed and not firmly rooted in public administration scholarship, and the literature pays insufficient attention to international administrations' relationship with politics. The essay proposes an alternative theoretical framework for understanding international public administrations, centered on the notion of 'public service bargains'. Drawing on this perspective, the essay indicates promising avenues for research on international administrations focusing on expertise, bureaucratic representation and multi-level public service bargains.

show abstract

Transnational Bureaucratic Politics: An Institutional Rivalry Perspective on Eu Network Governance

Cited by 62 publications

References 72 publications

Regulatory relationships across levels of multilevel governance systems: From collaboration to competition

Regulatory relationships across levels of multilevel governance systems: From collaboration to competition

The drivers of regulatory networking: policy learning between homophily and convergence

International public administrations: a critique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About