Success Factors of European Syndromic Surveillance Systems: A Worked Example of Applying Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Introduction: Syndromic surveillance aims at augmenting traditional public health surveillance with timely information. To gain a head start, it mainly analyses existing data such as from web searches or patient records. Despite the setup of many syndromic surveillance systems, there is still much doubt about the benefit of the approach. There are diverse interactions between performance indicators such as timeliness and various system characteristics. This makes the performance assessment of syndromic surveillance systems a complex endeavour. We assessed if the comparison of several syndromic surveillance systems through Qualitative Comparative Analysis helps to evaluate performance and identify key success factors. Materials and Methods: We compiled case-based, mixed data on performance and characteristics of 19 syndromic surveillance systems in Europe from scientific and grey literature and from site visits. We identified success factors by applying crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. We focused on two main areas of syndromic surveillance application: seasonal influenza surveillance and situational awareness during different types of potentially health threatening events. Results: We found that syndromic surveillance systems might detect the onset or peak of seasonal influenza earlier if they analyse non-clinical data sources. Timely situational awareness during different types of events is supported by an automated syndromic surveillance system capable of analysing multiple syndromes. To our surprise, the analysis of multiple data sources was no key success factor for situational awareness. Conclusions: We suggest to consider these key success factors when designing or further developing syndromic surveillance systems. Qualitative Comparative Analysis helped interpreting complex, mixed data on small-N cases and resulted in concrete and practically relevant findings

Process-Tracing as a Tool to Analyse Discretion

status: publishe

Analyzing European Union Politics

The speed and depth with which the European Communities/ European Union has evolved is breathtaking and has radically shaped the life of the continent. Ever since the beginning of this ambitious economic and political project, scholars around the world have tried to explain the underlying logic behind it and the mechanisms of its functioning. Thus, a plethora of studies developed alongside the evolution of the EU. SENT (Network of European Studies) is an innovative and ambitious project which brought together about 100 partners from the EU member states, candidate and associated countries, and other parts of the world. It was a far reaching project aimed to overcome disciplinary and geographical- linguistic boundaries in order to assess the state of EU studies today, as well as the idea of Europe as transmitted by schools, national politicians, the media, etc. SENT’s main goal was to map European studies, in order to get a comprehensive picture of the evolution of European studies over the last decades in different disciplines and countries. This approach permitted to achieve a better understanding of the direction these studies are now taking. Five disciplines were identified where EU studies have particularly evolved: law, politics, economics, history, and social and cultural studies. The mapping of EU studies thus includes a review of the most studied issues in EU studies today, the main academic schools, the most influential journals and books published, but it also shows how local realities and national identities affect the study and teaching of Europe around the world. In addition, an important work was done in mapping and discussing teaching methodologies in relation to European studies with the aim of introducing and diffusing the most up-to-date techniques

Cooperation and control in the European Union. The case of the EU as international environmental negotiator

This article examines the internal decision-making process in the European Union when the EU participates in international environmental negotiations. More particularly, the practical functioning of the relation between the member states and the EU negotiator (i.e. the Commission, the Presidency or a lead country), representing the member states externally, is examined. Starting from principal—agent theory and based on empirical research on eight EU decision-making processes with regard to international environmental negotiations, the article argues, first, that control by the member states on the EU negotiator takes place most manifestly during the course of the international negotiations, and, second, that these ad locum control mechanisms perform not only a control function, but also a cooperation function

The cultivation of GMOs in the EU: an example of multi-level and competitive governance

The European Union adopted in 2001 a directive on the cultivation of GMOs. The latter faced resistances of national and regional authorities in its implementation. Several member states have prohibited the cultivation of GMOs and regions organized themselves in a growing GMO-Free Regions Network, despite the legal uncertainty of the GMOs’ ban they enacted. The gap between the existing EU legislation and the positions of some member states and regions came to a head in March 2009 when the Council rejected the European Commission’s proposal requesting a couple of member states to repeal national measures banning the cultivation of GMOs. The Commission reacted to this deadlock situation by proposing, in 2010, a new regulation granting the “possibility for the Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory”. This paper analyze how the center of decision regarding the right to ban the cultivation of GMOs might move from the European Union back to the Member States. Using a multi-level governance perspective, the dynamics and the relations between different levels of governance (regional, national and European), will be analyzed, as well as their effect on the position of the Commission. It relies on an extensive literature review, on a review of official documents and on semi-structured interviews with key actors of the European institutions and stakeholders realized in between March and June 2012