After 1992: Can the Commission Manage Europe?

Metcalfe, Les

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8500.1992.tb01461.x

Cited by 101 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Coombes 1970;Egeberg 1996;Page 1997;Spinelli 1966). The Commission has been pictured as organisationally segmented (Hooghe 1997;Page 1997: 135) and with an alleged 'management deficit' (Metcalfe 1992;Levy 2006). Hussein and Peterson (2011), however, suggest that this inherent logic of portfolio is increasingly challenged by bureaucratic integration, mainly forged by the Commission SG.…”

Section: Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rise of European Administrative Space: Lessons Learned

Trondal¹,

Peters²

2013

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite advances in contemporary research on the European administrative space (EAS), no widespread understanding about its meaning, mechanisms and significance yet exists. This research agenda paper offers a comprehensive conceptualisation of EAS and takes stock of accumulated lessons learned. It is suggested that the rise of EAS features a transformation of administrative order that analytically can be grasped in terms of four analytical dimensions: independence, integration, co-optation and institutionalisation. Taken together, these elements suggest that EAS features the transformation of the inherent administrative order and the rise of an emergent common administrative system. The purpose of this research agenda paper essay is three-folded. Our first ambition is conceptual by offering a new account of EAS. The second ambition is empirical examining the varied and rich research agendas currently under way. Our final ambition is to stimulate further research along the conceptual map suggested. The empirical laboratory consists of key institutions of EAS, notably the European Commission, the European Parliament administration, EU agencies, EU committees, and domestic agencies.

show abstract

Section: Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rise of European Administrative Space: Lessons Learned

Trondal¹,

Peters²

2013

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This observation echoes images of the Commission administration as fragmented with weak capacities for hierarchical steering, accompanying interservice 'turf wars' that are marginally compensated for by presidential control and administrative integration (Bellier 1997;European Commission 1999;Coombes 1970;Egeberg 1996;Page 1997;Spinelli 1966, Trondal et al, 2008. Previous studies has pictured the Commission as organisationally segmented (Hooghe 1997;Page 1997: 135) and with an alleged 'management deficit' (Levy 2006;Metcalfe 1992). Hussein and Peterson (2011), however, suggest that the inherent logic of portfolio is increasingly challenged by centre formation in the Commission General Secretariat.…”

Section: Results and Discussion: Centre Forma-tion In The Commission mentioning

confidence: 88%

Centre Formation and the European Commission: A Research Note

Trondal¹

2012

TOPOLISJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The preceding decade has witnessed a boost in research on the European Commission (Commission). One central issue debated has been Commission centre formation, both what it entails, its sources, and potential implications. Centre formation in this literature entails the internal integration of government institutions, thus reinforcing intrainstitutional administrative hierarchies. Contemporary research, however, offers inconclusive results as regards the internal integration of the Commission administration. The main motivation for this research note is to show that seemingly inconclusive findings in contemporary Commission research might in fact be complementary. Contemporary literature reports that centre formation inside the Commission is primarily observed at the helm of the Commission hierarchy within the General Secretariat -however only marginally affecting everyday decision-making within Commission sub-units (primarily the policy DGs (ministries)). Competing observations of this kind might be considered complementary because competing behavioural logics tend to co-exist within the Commission administration, albeit embedded and layered within different organisational sub-units.

show abstract

“…Lindberg 1965 (Bauer 2006;Laffan 1997;Metcalfe 1992;Menon 2004, 2010). Finally, some policy fields were by now almost saturated; the main legislative work had been done.…”

Section: Institutional and Political Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%