The European Commission’s Role in EU–Turkey Relations

Based on a review of the relations between the European Commission (EC) and Turkey across a selection of policy areas, this chapter illustrates two aspects of EC influence in EU–Turkey relations. First, as a defender of the rules of the (enlargement) game, the Commission has rebuffed attempts by some member states to undermine Turkey’s membership prospects. The EC’s influence in the debate on the most appropriate approach to Turkey underlines its autonomous role within the EU system and the relevance of its norm-based argumentation. However, due to Turkey’s current alienation from the EU’s normative standards, norm-based arguments in favor of Turkey’s membership have lost much of their weight even within the Commission. Second, the EC has been an important ‘agent of change’ in Turkish domestic politics, even in times of deteriorating political relations with the EU. Because of its contributions to regular interactions, in particular, in the framework of projects financed by the EU’s Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance, the EC has continued to increase administrative capacity and policy learning processes within Turkey’s bureaucracy, which, in turn, contributed to Ankara’s continued harmonization with the EU acquis in some sectors, despite the waning relevance of the EU’s conditionality strategy

The Globalization of Health and Safety Standards: Delegation of Regulatory Authority in the SPS Agreement of the 1994 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

Buthe examines why states delegated regulatory authority in the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures, an integral part of the founding treaty of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Buthe argues that, to explain this case of international delegation, principal-agent theory must be complemented by an analysis of cost-benefit calculations of the relevant domestic interest groups. Given these domestic interests, governments decided to institutionalize international cooperation on SPS measures outside of the WTO because they believed that such delegation would minimize the political costs of the loss of policymaking autonomy. Buthe notes, however, that in retrospect it appears that the widespread positive association of international standards with multilateralism and international consensus led many countries to underestimate those autonomy losses. Material and ideational factors thus interacted to shape the definition of national interests and the outcome of international delegation

The European Union and refugees: towards more restrictive asylum policies in the European Union?

Several scholars have argued that European countries have decided to cooperate on asylum and migration matters at the EU level in order to develop more restrictive policies. In particular, it has been argued that European states have ‘venue-shopped’ to a new policy-venue in order to escape national constraints. This paper puts this argument to the test by assessing the extent to which the development of EU cooperation on asylum matters has indeed led to the adoption of more restrictive asylum standards. The paper argues that, actually, EU asylum cooperation has led to an overall increase in protection standards for asylum-seekers and refugees. This outcome is explained by two main factors: the increasing ‘judicialisation’ of asylum in the EU and institutional changes in the EU asylum policy area that have strengthened the role of more ‘refugee-friendly’ institutions

"Regulating Healthcare Technologies and Medical Supplies: A Comparative Overview"

A complex relationship exists among EU regulations, current national practices and rules, institutional capacities to implement regulatory adjustments and the legacy of past health and regulatory policy and traditions. However, there is little empirical information on medical devices policy, the medical devices industry, and the assurance of medical device safety and usage. Drawing on a review of the secondary literature and on-going field work, the evidence suggests that the current mix of statecentric and self-regulatory traditions will be as important in determining the implementation and final outcomes of EU-rules as the new rules themselves. EU directives redesign rules, but they do not necessarily lead to institutional change, create institutional capacities, or alter old practices in the short term. Neither EU directives nor national regulatory adjustments determine the "man-machine/skill-experience" interface which is shaped and influenced by local medical traditions and the acceptance of these traditions by local publics

Liberty versus security? EU asylum policy and the European Commission

The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) experienced significant developments during the Tampere programme (1999 – 2004). This article analyses how security is constituted or viewed by the European Union in the area of asylum policy; more importantly how the European Commission, in the face of the emerging discourse on the ‘war on terror’ decided to push for a more inclusive agenda. Thus, the European Commission can (though not always does) play a significant role in this process - the role of a supranational policy entrepreneur that enables the normative construction of a policy. The article analyses the high-profile case of the first phase of the CEAS, particularly the four main directives, its legal and political construction, and suggests the significance of the Commission in the political and normative process. Despite the challenges of the ‘war on terror’, the Commission managed to keep the CEAS within the limits of the Geneva Convention

"Subsidiarity, Federalism and Regulatory Competition: A Political Economy Perspective"

This paper shows different effects implied by the subsidiarity principle as viewed from a rational choice perspective. It is conceived as a survey of ideas and of relevant literature. The article gives an overview of theoretical approaches relevant to the issues which bridge the dichotomy of economics and of political science. A main focus is on the link between institutional features and policy outcomes. In this contribution, three main aspects of subsidiarity are looked at. Firstly, the allocation of decision-making power to lower political levels will have repercussions on the behavior of member states and on actors on the sub-national levels (such as national interest groups). In the absence of decisions by institutions of the Union, many policy areas will basically constitute collective action problems: mutually beneficial outcomes (or public goods) can only be secured if member states have no incentives to free ride and if special interest groups are prevented from obtaining benefits to the detriment of the "public interest". Such aspects are considered in Section II. Secondly, subsidiarity may lead to a redistribution of policy competences between the Union institutions and the member states. This has implications on the degree of centralization within the Union (and on political legitimacy). Very prominently, it may to a certain degree introduce competition between national bureaucracies. These issues are addressed in Section 111. Finally, enhanced legislative power for the member states will by necessity lead to the maintenance of a divergence in the laws and the regulations of member states with respect to several policy areas. From an economic perspective, within a common market framework, this implies that national rules and regulations will be in competition with each other -- an effect also provoked by the introduction of the "new approach" in the framework of the internal market program. Section IV provides an overview of theoretical approaches cornected to regulatory competition and illustrates selected evidence from EU practice

A Policy Development Perspective on Drinking Water Policy

This paper seeks to address the lack of knowledge in the water industry of how policy development can be understood to have shaped the development and application of European Union (EU) drinking water policy. In particular, the paper develops a comparative understanding of how policy development can be viewed as having affected the development and application of the Drinking Water Directive (80/778/EEC) in England/Wales and the Republic of Ireland. As a result of this focus, the paper explores policy development issues relating to conflicting interests, invalid causal theories, political symbolism, lack of attention to detail by policy makers, and the allocation of duties and resources. It is subsequently established that consideration of these issues is useful in fostering a focused understanding of how policy development may have affected policy application. Despite the significant changes which took place with regard to the development of the current Drinking Water Directive (98/883/EC), the paper concludes by arguing that greater attention should be accorded the conflicting interests and abilities of Member States during the development of EU water policy, particularly if attempts are to be made to identify measures targeted at improving the application of EU water policy in a diverse political and economic union of member states.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

The creation of FRONTEX and the politics of institutionalisation in the EU external borders policy

In a context of high politicization, if not securitization, of asylum and migration in Europe, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the EU – also known under its acronym FRONTEX – was created in 2004. Its activities have drawn a significant amount of attention and have been heavily criticised by human rights and pro-migrant groups. In contrast with most of the literature on FRONTEX, which focuses on its activities, this article examines the institutional issues associated with the creation and the work of FRONTEX, that is, the reasons for which Member States chose to create an agency, rather than establish another form of cooperation, and the specific mechanisms that they have put in place to exercise control over the activities of the Agency. The article, which is theoretically informed by the literature on European agencies, unveils a complex institutionalisation process, characterised by the existence of various models for increased cooperation and political struggles amongst the actors involved in the policy-making process

Three Generations of Participation Rights in European Administrative Proceedings

This paper develops a conceptual framework for analyzing the development of participation rights in Community administration from the early 1970\u27s to the present day. Procedural rights can be divided into three categories, each of which is associated with a distinct phase in Community history and a particular set of institutional actors. The first set of rights, the right to a fair hearing when the Commission inflicts sanctions or other forms of hardship on individuals, first emerged in the 1970\u27s in the context of competition proceedings and later in areas such as anti-dumping and structural funds. This phase was driven by the Court of Justice and an English, and to a lesser extent, German conception of the value of a fair hearing. The rise of transparency in the 1990\u27s-- the requirement of openness in all Community institutions, including administration--marks the second stage. The drive for transparency was led by certain member countries with longstanding traditions of open government--the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden--as well as the European Parliament. The most recent phase in the development of process rights is the debate on whether and under what conditions, individuals, firms, and their associations, billed civil society, should take part in Community legislative and rulemaking proceedings. The Commission and now the Convention on the Future of Europe have been the keenest proponents of giving citizens and their associations a right to participate in rulemaking and legislative proceedings. Civil society participation is then critically examined. Representation--not expertise or good management practices--is the only justification for allocating power, within the Community policymaking process, to individual citizens and their organizations. Yet there is no consensus in Europe, where republican, corporatist, and liberal traditions continue to flourish, on the legitimacy of representation outside of political parties and the electoral process. Without wider consensus, I conclude that associational participation in Community policymaking should not be entrenched and that the Commission should, in mediating the informal influence of civil society actors, act in awareness of its innate institutional bias toward liberal interest group pluralism

Three Generations of Participation Rights in European Administrative Proceedings

This paper develops a conceptual framework for analyzing the development of participation rights in Community administration from the early 1970\u27s to the present day. Procedural rights can be divided into three categories, each of which is associated with a distinct phase in Community history and a particular set of institutional actors. The first set of rights, the right to a fair hearing when the Commission inflicts sanctions or other forms of hardship on individuals, first emerged in the 1970\u27s in the context of competition proceedings and later in areas such as anti-dumping and structural funds. This phase was driven by the Court of Justice and an English, and to a lesser extent, German conception of the value of a fair hearing. The rise of transparency in the 1990\u27s-- the requirement of openness in all Community institutions, including administration--marks the second stage. The drive for transparency was led by certain member countries with longstanding traditions of open government--the Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden--as well as the European Parliament. The most recent phase in the development of process rights is the debate on whether and under what conditions, individuals, firms, and their associations, billed civil society, should take part in Community legislative and rulemaking proceedings. The Commission and now the Convention on the Future of Europe have been the keenest proponents of giving citizens and their associations a right to participate in rulemaking and legislative proceedings. Civil society participation is then critically examined. Representation--not expertise or good management practices--is the only justification for allocating power, within the Community policymaking process, to individual citizens and their organizations. Yet there is no consensus in Europe, where republican, corporatist, and liberal traditions continue to flourish, on the legitimacy of representation outside of political parties and the electoral process. Without wider consensus, I conclude that associational participation in Community policymaking should not be entrenched and that the Commission should, in mediating the informal influence of civil society actors, act in awareness of its innate institutional bias toward liberal interest group pluralism