European Administrative Networks are networks of national actors who interact to improve the implementation and enforcement of EU policies. Drawing on new research, Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen, Reini Schrama and Ellen Mastenbroek illustrate the role and structure of these networks, together with some of their key limitations

Mastenbroek, Ellen

Schrama, Reini

Sindbjerg Martinsen, Dorte

English

LSE Research Online

How	European	Administrative	Networks	aid	theimplementation	and	enforcement	of	EU	policiesEuropean	Administrative	Networks	are	networks	of	national	actors	who	interact	to	improve	the	implementation	andenforcement	of	EU	policies.	Drawing	on	new	research,	Dorte	Sindbjerg	Martinsen,	Reini	Schrama	and	EllenMastenbroek	illustrate	the	role	and	structure	of	these	networks,	together	with	some	of	their	key	limitations.Despite	being	the	core	executive	of	the	European	Union,	the	European	Commission	has	limited	competences	whenpolicies	are	to	be	implemented	and	enforced	in	the	member	states.	To	compensate	for	this	executive	deficit,	theCommission	employs	an	extensive	set	of	tools	to	monitor	and	ensure	compliance	with	EU	rules.	Infringementprocedures	are	undoubtedly	the	best	known	and	most	researched	among	these	tools.European	Administrative	Networks	(EAN)	are	an	increasingly	popular	instrument	for	filling	this	gap	in	the	EuropeanAdministrative	Space,	however,	they	have	received	less	academic	attention.	European	Administrative	Networks	arenetworks	of	national	administrative	entities	such	as	ministries	or	agencies,	which	interact	to	improve	the	nationalimplementation	and/or	enforcement	of	common	EU	policies.	Their	importance	as	tools	of	governance	has	beenhighlighted	by	the	Commission	in	its	Better	Regulation	agenda	from	2017	and	recently	in	its	Action	Plan	for	BetterImplementation	and	Enforcement	of	Single	Market	Rules.	But	how	do	they	function	and	do	they	manage	to	bringtheir	members	together	on	how	to	improve	the	application	of	EU	rules?	In	an	ongoing	research	project,	we	exploreand	aim	to	explain	the	role	of	EANs.Interaction	as	a	key	premiseInteractions	are	a	core	feature	of	networks,	and	an	essential	premise	for	their	effectiveness.	For	networks	to	matter,their	members	need	to	interact.	In	two	recent	studies,	we	have	assessed	whether	interaction	takes	place	and	theextent	to	which	domestic	institutions,	i.e.,	welfare	and	healthcare	institutions,	condition	such	interaction.Our	research	aims	to	bridge	and	contribute	to	two	strings	of	literature	that	do	not	often	meet:	literature	on	newmodes	of	governance	in	EU	implementation	and	enforcement	and	the	literature	on	welfare	typologies.	We	areinterested	in	the	extent	to	which	national	institutions	structure	how	national	administrative	organisations	engagewith	their	European	counterparts.	However,	existing	welfare	typology	research	is	insufficient	for	this	purpose	as	itmainly	covers	the	EU-15	or	a	selected	set	of	OECD	states.	Therefore,	in	order	to	examine	networked	welfaregovernance	in	its	current	form,	we	decided	to	update	welfare	and	healthcare	cluster	analysis,	covering	the	EU-27plus	the	United	Kingdom,	Norway	and	Iceland.Networks	as	apolitical	forums?Existing	literature	tends	to	portray	network	interaction	as	conducive	to	integration	and	implementation.	The	literaturepresents	that	since	EAN	members	are	civil	servants,	often	acting	as	experts,	the	networks	constitute	relativelyapolitical	forums.	Surrounded	by	other	experts,	members	act	without	the	strings	of	politics,	acknowledginginterdependence	and	thus	the	necessity	to	interact.	Furthermore,	the	dominant	assumption	seems	to	be	thatinteraction	will	happen	across	the	board	and	members	will	learn	from	the	diversity	brought	together	in	the	network.However,	an	emerging	string	of	literature	looks	to	domestic	institutions	and	political	factors	as	structuring	suchinteraction.	This	insight	is	relevant	to	our	studies	of	network	interactions,	as	national	welfare	and	healthcaresystems	reflect	different	institutional	and	political	choices.	We	thus	assume	that	these	differences	inform	networkmembers	and	make	them	selective	as	to	which	other	peers	are	relevant	to	approach	and	interact	with.EU	welfare	and	healthcare	networksIn	one	study,	we	examine	interaction	patterns	in	one	of	the	EU’s	oldest	administrative	networks	established	in	1958,which	deals	with	welfare	across	borders	for	EU	citizens:	the	so-called	Administrative	Commission	for	theCoordination	of	Social	Security	Systems.LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: How European Administrative Networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies Page 1 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-10-06Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/10/06/how-european-administrative-networks-aid-the-implementation-and-enforcement-of-eu-policies/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/In	this	administrative	network,	bureaucrats	from	all	EU	member	states	interact	frequently	to	exchange	views	andsolve	problems	related	to	cross-border	welfare.	The	network	has	extensive	competences:	1)	facilitating	uniformapplication	of	Community	law,	2)	issuing	recommendations	and	making	decisions	on	how	to	apply	EU	regulation	inpractice,	3)	settling	administrative	disputes	between	member	states,	and	4)	preparing	legislative	proposals	forreforming	the	rules	on	cross-border	welfare.Our	second	study	examines	network	interactions	between	national	civil	servants	in	the	Cross-Border	HealthcareExpert	(CBHC)	group,	set	up	as	part	of	the	Patient	Rights	Directive.	Here	we	deal	with	a	much	younger	network,operating	in	a	policy	area	marked	by	member	states’	reluctance	to	delegate	competences	to	the	supranational	leveland	based	on	a	directive	with	mixed	purposes	and	vague	formulations.	The	members	of	the	network	have	toexperiment	their	way	forward	and	find	the	common	denominator.Welfare	and	Healthcare	Cluster	AnalysisTo	explain	interactions	in	these	two	networks,	we	performed	two	cluster	analyses,	portraying	the	welfare	andhealthcare	typologies	of	contemporary	EU.	Our	welfare	cluster	analysis	of	the	Administrative	Commission	wasperformed	for	the	EU-27	plus	the	UK.	We	identified	patterns	of	institutional	similarity	among	EU	member	states	onthe	basis	of	three	key	fiscal	welfare	state	attributes:	1)	quantity	of	welfare	provided,	2)	type	of	financing	and	3)investment	in	welfare	services.	The	welfare	indicators	for	the	individual	EU	member	states	can	be	found	here.As	shown	in	Figure	1,	we	identified	four	welfare	clusters	in	the	contemporary	EU.	The	first	is	a	continental	welfarecluster,	composed	of	Germany,	the	Netherlands,	France,	Austria	and	Belgium,	and	characterised	by	relatively	hightotal	social	expenditures	as	a	percentage	of	GDP,	financed	mainly	by	contributions	and	displaying	a	relatively	lowlevel	of	welfare	services.	The	second	cluster	is	the	Nordic-Atlantic	welfare	cluster,	characterised	by	a	relatively	highlevel	of	welfare	services	and	primarily	tax-based	financing.	Sweden,	Finland,	Denmark,	the	UK,	Ireland	and	Maltabelong	to	this	cluster.	Although	the	UK,	Ireland	and	Malta	score	lower	on	total	social	expenditures	as	a	percentageof	GDP	than	their	Nordic	counterparts,	they	nevertheless	fall	into	this	cluster	because	they	share	a	relatively	highservice	emphasis	and	tax-financed	welfare.The	Eastern	European	welfare	cluster,	thirdly,	includes	Slovenia,	Croatia,	the	Czech	Republic,	Hungary,	Slovakia,Estonia,	Lithuania	and	Romania.	This	group	of	countries	has	thus	far	remained	largely	unmapped.	It	is	interesting	tosee	that	they	represent	a	distinct	welfare	cluster.	In	this	cluster,	total	social	expenditures	as	a	percentage	of	GDPare	low	and	mainly	contribution	financed.	There	is,	however,	a	certain	relative	service	emphasis.	However,	this	isindeed	a	relative	measure	drawn	on	the	basis	of	benefits	in	kind	as	a	percentage	of	total	social	benefits.	The	fourthand	final	cluster	is	the	Southern-Mixed	welfare	cluster,	which	includes	Italy,	Greece,	Spain,	Portugal	and	Cyprus	aswell	as	Luxembourg,	Poland,	Bulgaria	and	Latvia.	This	welfare	cluster	is	characterised	by	relatively	low	total	socialexpenditures	as	a	percentage	of	GDP,	the	lowest	score	on	service	emphasis	across	the	four	clusters,	and	itswelfare	is	primarily	contribution-financed.Figure	1:	Welfare	clusters	in	the	EU	and	UKLSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: How European Administrative Networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies Page 2 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-10-06Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/10/06/how-european-administrative-networks-aid-the-implementation-and-enforcement-of-eu-policies/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/Note:	For	more	information,	see	the	authors’	accompanying	papers	in	the	Journal	of	European	Public	Policy	andthe	British	Journal	of	Political	Science.Turning	to	our	healthcare	cluster	analysis,	we	conducted	this	for	the	EU-27	plus	the	UK,	Norway	and	Iceland.	Thecluster	analysis	is	based	on	indicators	of	financing,	expenditure,	and	provision	of	and	access	to	healthcare	–	theraw	data	for	the	healthcare	indicators	can	be	found	here.We	identified	five	healthcare	clusters,	which	are	presented	in	Figure	2	below.	First,	a	cluster	of	elaborate	socialinsurance	healthcare	systems,	including	Germany,	Austria,	Belgium,	France	and	Luxembourg.	Second,	a	cluster	oflimited	social	insurance	healthcare	systems,	containing	the	Czech	Republic,	Lithuania,	Hungary,	Slovakia,	Croatia,Bulgaria,	Latvia,	Greece,	Slovenia,	Estonia,	Poland	and	Romania.	Third,	a	cluster	of	limited	public	healthcaresystems,	incorporating	Ireland,	the	United	Kingdom,	Italy,	Cyprus,	Malta,	Spain	and	Portugal.	Fourth,	a	cluster	ofelaborate	public	healthcare	systems,	which	includes	Norway,	Iceland,	Denmark,	Finland	and	Sweden.	And	finally,the	Netherlands	forms	a	distinct	elaborate	hybrid	healthcare	cluster.	Figure	2	presents	the	healthcare	clusters	as	aso-called	‘heatmap’,	with	blue	denoting	high	values	and	red	denoting	low	values,	scaled	in	the	colour-key.Figure	2:	Healthcare	cluster	analysisLSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: How European Administrative Networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies Page 3 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-10-06Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/10/06/how-european-administrative-networks-aid-the-implementation-and-enforcement-of-eu-policies/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/Note:	For	more	information,	see	the	authors’	accompanying	papers	in	the	Journal	of	European	Public	Policy	andthe	British	Journal	of	Political	Science.Social	Network	AnalysisTo	examine	network	interactions,	we	used	social	network	analysis	on	the	basis	of	collected	survey	data	on	theexchange	of	information,	advice	and	best	practices	within	the	networks.	The	surveys	were	distributed	among	allnetwork	members,	each	member	organisation	receiving	one	survey.	For	the	welfare	network	analysis,	we	got	a100%	response	rate.	For	the	healthcare	analysis,	the	response	rate	was	87%.	Based	on	these	data,	we	developedan	Exponential	Random	Graph	Model	to	describe	interactions	and	test	the	extent	to	which	these	are	conditioned	bydomestic	policy	institutions,	as	captured	by	the	welfare	and	healthcare	typologies.LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: How European Administrative Networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies Page 4 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-10-06Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/10/06/how-european-administrative-networks-aid-the-implementation-and-enforcement-of-eu-policies/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/For	both	networks,	we	found	that	interactions	do	take	place	across	the	board.	Network	members	do	relate	toanother,	exchanging	information,	best	practices	and	advice.	At	the	same	time,	we	found	the	interactions	turned	outto	be	clustered.	For	the	cross-border	welfare	network,	we	found	that	domestic	institutional	and	political	factorsindeed	structure	network	interaction.	When	interacting,	peers	mainly	seek	out	peers	from	similar	welfare	typologies.The	finding	for	healthcare	was	similar:	institutional	differences	condition	patterns	of	interaction	in	the	Cross-BorderHealthcare	Expert	group	–	to	an	even	larger	degree	than	in	the	Administrative	Commission.	In	particular,	the	Nordicstates	tend	to	stay	by	themselves,	connected	to	the	network	only	by	their	Baltic	counterparts,	as	shown	in	Figure	3.Figure	3:	Network	graph	of	interactions	in	the	Cross-Border	Healthcare	Expert	groupNote:	For	more	information,	see	the	authors’	accompanying	papers	in	the	Journal	of	European	Public	Policy	andthe	British	Journal	of	Political	Science.ImplicationsOur	network	analyses	have	several	overall	implications.	They	show,	firstly,	that	domestic	institutions	conditioninteractions	and	thus	the	extent	to	which	learning	across	institutionally	diverse	members	takes	place.	It	also	showsthat	some	actors	are	more	central	and	better	positioned	to	navigate	the	networks	examined	than	others.Central	actors	are	powerful	actors	with	more	opportunities	to	set	or	shape	the	agenda	and	put	a	stamp	on	the	futurecourse	of	the	policy,	its	implementation	and	enforcement.	They	exchange	information,	best	practices,	and	advicemore	frequently,	thus	having	more	leeway	to	define	the	way	forward.	Other	actors	remain	more	at	the	margins	ofthe	network,	with	less	access	to	the	core	resources	exchanged.Although	European	Administrative	Networks	are	increasingly	important	governance	tools,	their	members	neitherengage	nor	benefit	evenly	from	this	type	of	co-operation.	Uneven	interaction	implies	that	although	EANs	areimportant	tools	to	improve	the	implementation	and	enforcement	of	EU	rules,	they	are	mainly	so	for	the	core	of	thenetwork	whereas	its	periphery	may	be	left	largely	unaffected	by	the	interaction	of	its	European	counterparts.	It	alsoimplies	that	the	full	potential	of	learning	is	not	realised,	their	added	value	limited	by	institutional	similarities.For	more	information,	see	the	authors’	accompanying	papers	in	the	Journal	of	European	Public	Policy	andthe	British	Journal	of	Political	ScienceNote:	This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	authors,	not	the	position	of	EUROPP	–	European	Politics	and	Policy	or	theLondon	School	of	Economics.	Featured	image	credit:	Jonatan	Svensson	Glad	(CC	BY-SA	2.0)LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog: How European Administrative Networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies Page 5 of 5		Date originally posted: 2020-10-06Permalink: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2020/10/06/how-european-administrative-networks-aid-the-implementation-and-enforcement-of-eu-policies/Blog homepage: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/

How European administrative networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/107286/1/europpblog_2020_10_06_how_european_administrative_networks_aid_the.pdf

How European administrative networks aid the implementation and enforcement of EU policies

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online