IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erp/eiopxx/p0241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The anatomy of EU policy-making: Appointing the experts

Author

Listed:
  • Field, Mark

Abstract

At 38,000, the total number of staff at the European Commission is relatively small for a body representing half a billion citizens. Likewise, the 3,500 strong research and statistical team is modest in size given that it operates across the Directorates General and other services. In order to assist policy-makers, the Commission supplements this research base by using outside expertise to advise at all stages of the policy-making process. For many years, those who observe the European Union’s institutions have recognised that this use of outside expertise to assist with the shaping of policy presents a potential democratic shortfall. The 2001 White Paper on Governance acknowledged that the line between expertise and political authority had become blurred and that, increasingly, the public questioned the independence of expert advice. The following year, the Commission published its first set of guidelines on the collection and use of expertise, listing ‘openness’ as one of three core principles. Despite considerable changes that have occurred in the transparency landscape in the intervening period, the Commission’s commitment to this core principle of expertise remains. This article investigates the measures the Commission introduced specifically to facilitate this openness. Applying a structure-agency approach, the article characterises an expert group as a ‘community of knowledge’ and contrasts the transparency of the Commission’s formal appointment procedures with the less visible but frequently used informal measures through which individuals are identified and approached. Based on a recent and highly relevant case, the article employs data gathered from the near contemporaneous accounts of expert group members and Commission officials. It finds that the reported appointment processes do not reflect the widespread incidence of individuals selected based on previous contact or personal recommendation and argues that this may undermine the integrity of the Commission’s core principle of openness in the use of expertise and in its broader transparency measures. In terms of the motivation of those responding to the Commission’s call for experts, the article finds that membership of an expert group confers a degree of professional prestige that directly benefits individual members and offers competitive advantage to their parent organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Field, Mark, 2013. "The anatomy of EU policy-making: Appointing the experts," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2013-007a.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2013-007.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:47:y:2009:i::p:719-740 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jens Blom‐Hansen & Gijs Jan Brandsma, 2009. "The EU Comitology System: Intergovernmental Bargaining and Deliberative Supranationalism?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 719-740, September.
    3. Jan Beyers & Guido Dierickx, 1998. "The Working Groups of the Council of the European Union: Supranational or Intergovernmental Negotiations?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 289-317, September.
    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. Sophie Jacquot, 2020. "Small Decisions? The European Commission and the Transformation of the Role of Legal Expert Groups: The Case of Gender Equality and Non‐Discrimination," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 545-561, May.

    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. Roland Vaubel, 2008. "The political economy of labor market regulation by the European Union," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 435-465, December.
    2. Semin Suvarierol, 2009. "Networking in Brussels: Nationality over a Glass of Wine," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 411-435, March.
    3. Jolyon Howorth, 2011. "Decision-Making in Security and Defence Policy - Towards Supranational Intergovernmentalism?," KFG Working Papers p0025, Free University Berlin.
    4. Roland Vaubel, 2004. "Federation With Majority Decisions: Economic Lessons From The History Of The Unite D States, Germany And The European Union," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 53-59, December.
    5. Arjan Uilenreef, 2016. "‘Multiple Bilateralism’ within the European Union: the Dutch Coalition-Building Network during the Budget Negotiations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 426-443, March.
    6. Frans Stokman & Robert Thomson, 2004. "Winners and Losers in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-23, March.
    7. Frank M. Häge, 2007. "Committee Decision-making in the Council of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 299-328, September.
    8. Smeets, Sandrino, 2013. "How issues move or get stuck: Or how to be effective in the EU Council of Ministers," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 17, July.
    9. Michael Kaeding & Kevin M. Stack, 2015. "Legislative Scrutiny? The Political Economy and Practice of Legislative Vetoes in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(6), pages 1268-1284, November.
    10. Daniel Naurin, 2007. "Network Capital and Cooperation Patterns in the Working Groups of the Council of the EU," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 14, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    11. Reini Schrama, 2023. "Expert network interaction in the European Medicines Agency," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 491-511, April.
    12. Bernhard Boockmann & Roland Vaubel, 2009. "The Theory of Raising Rivals’ Costs and Evidence from the International Labour Organisation," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(6), pages 862-887, June.
    13. Stefanie Bailer, 2004. "Bargaining Success in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 99-123, March.
    14. Christina Zimmer & Gerald Schneider & Michael Dobbins, 2005. "The Contested Council: Conflict Dimensions of an Intergovernmental EU Institution," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(2), pages 403-422, June.
    15. Markus Johansson, 2021. "Explaining Cooperation in the Council of the EU Before and After the Brexit Referendum," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 5-15.
    16. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:47:y:2009:i::p:411-435 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Yoo, Boonghee, 2009. "Developing an overall ranking of 79 marketing journals: An introduction of PRINQUAL to marketing," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 160-174.

    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:p0241. 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: 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.