How bureaucratic elites imagine Europe: towards convergence of governance beliefs?

Karl O'Connor, Claudio Radaelli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Does the emerging parallel Community administration share a common set of beliefs about governance and the broad policy direction of European integration? Or do different policy arenas, institutions, and types of committees shape governance beliefs? This article compares original evidence from two policy areas, that is, better regulation and direct corporate taxation. Within economic policies, these two sectors provide the most dissimilar cases in terms of conflict around institutions, the purpose of EU-level coordination, and the distribution of pay-offs among the member states. We use the ‘most dissimilar cases’ strategy to probe hypotheses about (a) common governance beliefs (b) the influence of policy-level variables on beliefs and (c) the role played by the EU institutions. We find more evidence for the ‘shared governance beliefs’ hypothesis than for the ‘policy-matter’ or ‘institution-matter’ explanation. Common beliefs revolve around a technical approach to public policy-making, an under-estimation of the role of the European Parliament, and more attachment to the paradigm of competitiveness than to social protection.
LanguageEnglish
Pages971-989
JournalJournal of European Public Policy
Volume16
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2009

Fingerprint

elite
governance
EU
European Parliament
policy area
European integration
taxation
Economic Policy
competitiveness
evidence
public policy
paradigm
regulation
community

Cite this

@article{f05476083f404c46b28542ca1d66b816,
title = "How bureaucratic elites imagine Europe: towards convergence of governance beliefs?",
abstract = "Does the emerging parallel Community administration share a common set of beliefs about governance and the broad policy direction of European integration? Or do different policy arenas, institutions, and types of committees shape governance beliefs? This article compares original evidence from two policy areas, that is, better regulation and direct corporate taxation. Within economic policies, these two sectors provide the most dissimilar cases in terms of conflict around institutions, the purpose of EU-level coordination, and the distribution of pay-offs among the member states. We use the ‘most dissimilar cases’ strategy to probe hypotheses about (a) common governance beliefs (b) the influence of policy-level variables on beliefs and (c) the role played by the EU institutions. We find more evidence for the ‘shared governance beliefs’ hypothesis than for the ‘policy-matter’ or ‘institution-matter’ explanation. Common beliefs revolve around a technical approach to public policy-making, an under-estimation of the role of the European Parliament, and more attachment to the paradigm of competitiveness than to social protection.",
author = "Karl O'Connor and Claudio Radaelli",
year = "2009",
month = "10",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "971--989",
number = "7",

}

How bureaucratic elites imagine Europe: towards convergence of governance beliefs? / O'Connor, Karl; Radaelli, Claudio.

Vol. 16, No. 7, 01.10.2009, p. 971-989.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - How bureaucratic elites imagine Europe: towards convergence of governance beliefs?

AU - O'Connor, Karl

AU - Radaelli, Claudio

PY - 2009/10/1

Y1 - 2009/10/1

N2 - Does the emerging parallel Community administration share a common set of beliefs about governance and the broad policy direction of European integration? Or do different policy arenas, institutions, and types of committees shape governance beliefs? This article compares original evidence from two policy areas, that is, better regulation and direct corporate taxation. Within economic policies, these two sectors provide the most dissimilar cases in terms of conflict around institutions, the purpose of EU-level coordination, and the distribution of pay-offs among the member states. We use the ‘most dissimilar cases’ strategy to probe hypotheses about (a) common governance beliefs (b) the influence of policy-level variables on beliefs and (c) the role played by the EU institutions. We find more evidence for the ‘shared governance beliefs’ hypothesis than for the ‘policy-matter’ or ‘institution-matter’ explanation. Common beliefs revolve around a technical approach to public policy-making, an under-estimation of the role of the European Parliament, and more attachment to the paradigm of competitiveness than to social protection.

AB - Does the emerging parallel Community administration share a common set of beliefs about governance and the broad policy direction of European integration? Or do different policy arenas, institutions, and types of committees shape governance beliefs? This article compares original evidence from two policy areas, that is, better regulation and direct corporate taxation. Within economic policies, these two sectors provide the most dissimilar cases in terms of conflict around institutions, the purpose of EU-level coordination, and the distribution of pay-offs among the member states. We use the ‘most dissimilar cases’ strategy to probe hypotheses about (a) common governance beliefs (b) the influence of policy-level variables on beliefs and (c) the role played by the EU institutions. We find more evidence for the ‘shared governance beliefs’ hypothesis than for the ‘policy-matter’ or ‘institution-matter’ explanation. Common beliefs revolve around a technical approach to public policy-making, an under-estimation of the role of the European Parliament, and more attachment to the paradigm of competitiveness than to social protection.

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 971

EP - 989

IS - 7

ER -