Policy Entrepreneurship and Multilevel Governance: A Comparative Study of European Cross-Border Regions

This article was publsihed in the journal, Environment and Planning C [© Pion]. The definitive version is available at: http://www.envplan.com/C.htmlThis article addresses the recent proliferation of Cross-Border Regions, or Euroregions, in Europe. It argues that EU multi-level governance patterns generate opportunities for entrepreneurial policy organisations to attract policy tasks and resources. This is conceptualised as policy entrepreneurship and applied to a comparative case study analysis of three Euroregions: EUREGIO (Germany – Netherlands), Viadrina (Poland – Germany) and Tyrol (Austria – Italy). The analysis focuses on the ability of these initiatives to establish themselves as autonomous organisations. It finds considerable variation across the cases in this respect. Following on from this, the paper shows how different administrative and institutional environments in different EU member states affect the ability of Euroregions to engage in policy entrepreneurship. It concludes that is it premature to perceive Euroregions as new types of regional territorial entities; rather, they are part of the policy innovation scenario enabled by EU multi-level governance

Die Europäisierung der öffentlichen Aufgaben

Die zunehmende Europäisierung der öffentlichen Aufgaben ist einer der wichtigsten Trends im Wandel der Staatstätigkeit in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in anderen Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union. In diesem Essay werden die Stufen der Europäisierung der Staatstätigkeit nachgezeichnet, in Weiterführung von Lindberg/Scheingold (1970) und Schmitter (1996) quantifiziert und hinsichtlich ihrer Kosten und ihres Nutzen erörtert. Inhalt: Stufen der Europäisierung der öffentlichen Aufgaben Der Europäisierungsgrad der öffentlichen Aufgaben von 1950 bis zum Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts Vom Nutzen und von den Kosten der Europäisierung der öffentlichen Angelegenheiten Verzeichnis der zitierten Literatu

Political Leadership in the European Union: An Introduction

In light of recent crises in the European Union (EU) there is a need for more systematic analysis of political leadership in the EU, which is what we seek to do in this collection. This introduction offers a theoretical and conceptual background for the volume. Drawing on Burns, Blondel, Elgie, Young, and others, this contribution identifies how political leadership can be analysed in various institutions and institutional settings of the EU. The questions we ask are: what kind of leadership is there in different domains; how and with what tools does political leadership occur and operate in various case studies and how effective have those been? Although difficult to synthesise the results into one overarching leadership concept, or indeed locus, we argue that the individual studies demonstrate that the EU is by no means leaderless.FSW – Publicaties zonder aanstelling Universiteit Leide

Balancing experimentalist and hierarchical governance in European Union electricity and telecommunications regulation: A matter of degrees

While the widespread diffusion of experimentalism across sectors and polities is well documented, less is known about the extent of the shift to this non‐hierarchical form of governance, which continues to coexist with traditional hierarchical governance and involves more inclusive rulemaking and revision based on review of alternative implementation experiences. By comparing and process‐tracing electricity and telecommunications regulation in the European Union, we find diversity in experimentalism over time and across two sectors often considered similar. We explain varying degrees of experimentalism with strategic uncertainty and the constellation of preferences, which we label “de facto polyarchy.” Thus, we confirm the emphasis on uncertainty documented in the experimentalist literature, while addressing a conventional critique by also highlighting the relevance of “politics.” Moreover, while corroborating the common spread of experimentalism, we suggest that an analytical framework based on ideal types offers the best route forward to develop comparative analysis of experimentalism and non‐hierarchical forms of governance more broadly