IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v58y2020i4p836-855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Access to European Union Agencies: Usual Suspects or Balanced Interest Representation in Open and Closed Consultations?

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Arras
  • Jan Beyers

Abstract

To facilitate stakeholder representation, European Union (EU) agencies use a range of procedures, including closed consultation or advisory committees and open or public consultations. For analysing what kind of stakeholders gain access to advisory committees, we compare these two particular procedures. Two theoretical perspectives guide this analysis. The first is a resource‐based account, which emphasizes informational needs and leads to the expectation that not only regulated interests but also EU‐level associations and European Commission expert group members will gain representation through closed consultations. The second is a norm‐based perspective that stresses the importance for agencies to establish a credible reputation, leading them to balance interest representation. A systematic comparison of stakeholders represented in agency committee with those participating in open consultations demonstrates that regulated interests have no systematic advantage in gaining access to closed consultations. Instead, closed consultations may diversify interest representation and facilitate the involvement of non‐business interests.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Arras & Jan Beyers, 2020. "Access to European Union Agencies: Usual Suspects or Balanced Interest Representation in Open and Closed Consultations?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 836-855, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:58:y:2020:i:4:p:836-855
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12991
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.12991?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Morten Egeberg & Jarle Trondal, 2017. "Researching European Union Agencies: What Have We Learnt (and Where Do We Go from Here)?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 675-690, July.
    2. Marian Garcia Martinez & Paul Verbruggen & Andrew Fearne, 2013. "Risk-based approaches to food safety regulation: what role for co-regulation?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(9), pages 1101-1121, October.
    3. Åse Gornitzka & Ulf Sverdrup, 2015. "Societal Inclusion in Expert Venues: Participation of Interest Groups and Business in the European Commission Expert Groups," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 151-165.
    4. Rainer Eising, 2007. "Institutional Context, Organizational Resources and Strategic Choices," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 329-362, September.
    5. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    6. Stefano Pagliari & Kevin L. Young, 2014. "Leveraged interests: Financial industry power and the role of private sector coalitions," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 575-610, June.
    7. Iskander De Bruycker, 2016. "Pressure and Expertise: Explaining the Information Supply of Interest Groups in EU Legislative Lobbying," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 599-616, May.
    8. Hans Agné & Lisa Dellmuth & Jonas Tallberg, 2015. "Does stakeholder involvement foster democratic legitimacy in international organizations? An empirical assessment of a normative theory," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 465-488, December.
    9. repec:reg:rpubli:103 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Christine Quittkat, 2011. "The European Commission's Online Consultations: A Success Story?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 653-674, May.
    11. Coglianese, Cary & Zeckhauser, Richard & Parson, Edward, 2004. "Securing Truth for Power: Informational Strategy and Regulatory Policy Making," Working Paper Series rwp04-021, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joost Berkhout & Jan Beyers & Marcel Hanegraaff, 2023. "The Representative Potential of Interest Groups: Internal Voice in Post-Communist and Western European Countries," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 50-64.
    2. Matthew Wood, 2021. "Europe's New Technocracy: Boundaries of Public Participation in EU Institutions," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 459-473, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Beyers & Sarah Arras, 2021. "Stakeholder consultations and the legitimacy of regulatory decision‐making: A survey experiment in Belgium," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 877-893, July.
    2. Carl Vikberg, 2020. "Explaining interest group access to the European Commission’s expert groups," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 312-332, June.
    3. Bastiaan Redert, 2020. "Stakeholder Mobilization in Financial Regulation: A Comparison of EU Regulatory Politics over Time," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1433-1451, November.
    4. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    5. Kellee Tsai, 2015. "The Political Economy of State Capitalism and Shadow Banking in China," HKUST IEMS Working Paper Series 2015-25, HKUST Institute for Emerging Market Studies, revised May 2015.
    6. Bruch, Nils & Knodt, Michèle & Ringel, Marc, 2024. "Advocating harder soft governance for the European Green Deal. Stakeholder perspectives on the revision of the EU governance regulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    7. Iskander De Bruycker & Anne Rasmussen, 2021. "Blessing or Curse for Congruence? How Interest Mobilization Affects Congruence between Citizens and Elected Representatives," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 909-928, July.
    8. Sanjay Patnaik, 2019. "A cross-country study of collective political strategy: Greenhouse gas regulations in the European Union," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(7), pages 1130-1155, September.
    9. Adam W. Chalmers, 2020. "Unity and conflict: Explaining financial industry lobbying success in European Union public consultations," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 391-408, July.
    10. Oliver Huwyler, 2020. "Interest groups in the European Union and their hiring of political consultancies," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 333-354, June.
    11. Anne Rasmussen & Dimiter Toshkov, 2013. "The effect of stakeholder involvement on legislative duration: Consultation of external actors and legislative duration in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 366-387, September.
    12. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    13. Rodrigo M. S. Moita & Claudio Paiva, 2013. "Political Price Cycles in Regulated Industries: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 94-121, February.
    14. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    15. Francesco Caselli & Nicola Gennaioli, 2008. "Economics and Politics of Alternative Institutional Reforms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(3), pages 1197-1250.
    16. Hahn Robert, 2010. "Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Bommer, Rolf, 1995. "Environmental policy and industrial competitiveness: The pollution haven hypothesis reconsidered," Discussion Papers, Series II 262, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    18. Thomas Wyrick & Roger Arnold, 1989. "Earmarking as a deterrent to rent-seeking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 283-291, March.
    19. Pavel Ciaian & Ján Pokrivčák & Dušan Drabik, 2008. "Prečo sú niektoré sektory v tranzitívnych ekonomikách menej reformované ako ostatné? prípad výskumu a vzdelávania v oblasti ekonómie [Why some sectors of transition economies are less reformed than," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2008(6), pages 819-836.
    20. Kris James Mitchener & Matthew Jaremski, 2014. "The Evolution of Bank Supervision: Evidence from U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 20603, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:58:y:2020:i:4:p:836-855. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.