IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erp/eiopxx/p0183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What kind of consensus? Conflicting notions of effectiveness within the Social Protection Committee

Author

Listed:
  • Horvath, Anna

Abstract

The Social Protection Committee (SPC) is the main forum for exchanging information and best practices among the member states within the framework of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the fields of social protection and social inclusion. This implies that looking at how and when the SPC can work 'effectively' is crucial in understanding the potentials of the so-called social OMC. As committee delegates – together with other key actors – define the acceptable and desirable modes of interactions, the successfulness of these interactions is also tied to their own perceptions of effectiveness. Therefore, this article looks at participants' perceptions in order to reconstruct abstract categories based on which the actors themselves evaluate their own working practices, taking into account both the 'uploading' and the 'downloading' dimension of the process. The article has two main goals. First, it lists the criteria of effectiveness linked to both national and European-level factors that SPC members rely on when evaluating the work of their own committee. Second, based on the abstract concepts of effectiveness that emerge on the basis of in-depth interviews, the article formulates more general hypotheses about the effective functioning of EU level committees, which can be used as bases for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Horvath, Anna, 2009. "What kind of consensus? Conflicting notions of effectiveness within the Social Protection Committee," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 13, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2009-017a.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2009-017.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:erp:eiopxx:p0183. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Editorial Assistant (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsaaea.html .

    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.