Diversity in sub-national EU implementation: the application of the EU Ambient Air Quality directive in 13 municipalities in the Netherlands

Bondarouk, Elena; Liefferink, Duncan

doi:10.1080/1523908x.2016.1267612

Cited by 28 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From this perspective, diverse approaches of problem-solving are actually an intended result of the decentralized implementation structures of multi-level systems (Joachim et al 2007: 7). However, we have very little systematic knowledge about this diversity of policy solutions (see however recently Bondarouk and Liefferink 2016;Sager et al 2014;Thomann 2015a). Multilevel implementation research -in the EU and beyond -retains a strong top-down focus on member state compliance with central state decisions.…”

Section: Studied '[H]ow Greatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The compliance concept captures the degree of conformance implementation, but does not 4 necessarily help us to understand performance (Thomann 2015a). Or, as Bondarouk and Liefferink (2016: 2) put it, the 'approach, by which compliance is juxtaposed to noncompliance, masks potentially great variance in responses between authorities and does not tell much about the extent of the domestic efforts to implement the policy'. In fact, there is growing evidence that under certain circumstances, legal compliance with EU law may be unrelated to its practical application (Falkner et al 2005;Versluis 2003Versluis , 2007Zhelyazkova et al 2016).…”

Section: Studied '[H]ow Greatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond legal compliance, very little is known about other possible transposition outcomes. Recent research suggests that member states differ notably in the substantial similarity of domestic policies (e.g., Bondarouk and Liefferink 2016;Steunenberg 2007;Sager et al 2014) and that fully compliant member states go beyond the minimum requirements of superordinate law (Voermans 2009). Thomann (2015a) highlights the prevalence of the legitimate 'customization' of EU law and its implications for understanding member states as bottom-up problem-solvers.…”

Section: Contribution To the State Of The Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

Thomann¹,

Sager²

2019

Innovative Approaches to EU Multilevel Implementation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on implementation in the European Union (EU) is characterized by a strong focus on legal conformance with EU policy. However, this focus has been criticized for insufficiently accounting for the implications of the EU's multilevel governance structure, thus providing an incomplete picture of EU implementation, its diversity and practice. The contributions of this collection represent a shift toward a more performance-oriented perspective on EU implementation as problem-solving. They approach implementation fundamentally as a process of interpretation of superordinate law by actors who are embedded within multiple contexts arising from the coexistence of dynamics of Europeanization, on the one hand, and what has been termed 'domestication', on the other. Moving beyond legal compliance, the contributions provide new evidence on the diversity of domestic responses to EU policy, the roles and motivations of actors implementing EU policy, and the 'black box' of EU law in action and its enforcement.

show abstract

Section: Studied '[H]ow Greatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Studied '[H]ow Greatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contribution To the State Of The Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

Thomann¹,

Sager²

2019

Innovative Approaches to EU Multilevel Implementation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be of particular interest for the study of administrative structures. As EU policies often give little prescription for the details of administrative implementation, there is much leeway for adaptation to existing administrative structures, capacities, and cultures (Bondarouk & Liefferink, 2016;Bondarouk & Mastenbroek, 2017;Heidbreder, 2014;Meyer-Sahling & Van Stolk, 2015). However, there may be pressures toward the development of a so-called European administrative space (Trondal & Peters, 2013), featuring similar decision making procedures and administrative structures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Differentiated Implementation of European Participation Rules in Energy Infrastructure Planning. Why Does the German Participation Regime Exceed European Requirements?

Fink¹,

Ruffing²

2017

European Policy Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The building of electricity grids is a major challenge of infrastructure planning. According to Directive 2009/72/EU, “ten‐year network development plans” outline which grids are to be built. Regulatory agencies have to consult “actual or potential system users” on these plans. However, Germany exceeds these requirements and conducts three rounds of full‐fledged public participation. Using rational choice and sociological institutionalism, this article argues that the over‐implementation of Directive 2009/72/EU is due to two causes: First, the old German corporatist system of grid planning was dysfunctional. Second, there was a major discourse on public participation following the contentious railway project “Stuttgart 21.” The domestic implementation of Directive 2009/72/EU then opened a window of opportunity for advocates of public participation to implement their preferences. A comparison with France corroborates the argument that both conditions must be fulfilled to cause a major reform.

show abstract

“…First, legal compliance is simply one of many possible transposition outcomes, and far from 'the end of the story'. Thus, if the interest lies in joint solutions to shared policy problems, then we need to consider the dynamics of customization (Thomann 2015) and performance in practice (Bondarouk and Liefferink 2016;Bondarouk and Mastenbroek 2017). Second, EU steering matters, as national deviations from EU rules relatively consistently follow the direction of flexibility indicated by EU legislation (Thomann and Zhelyazkova 2017 <THIS ISSUE: PUBLISHER TO ADD /UPDATE DETAILS AT PROOF>).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a better understanding of implementation performance in the EU multilevel system

Thomann

Sager

2017

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of this collection allow for preliminary conclusions about the nuanced interplay between Europeanization and domestication forces in EU implementation, which await testing in different contexts. Some policies lend themselves more to a strategy allowing for extensive domestication than others; but to be effective, decentralized implementing actors need both power and capabilities. Europeanization dynamics strongly influence the direction of domestication of EU policy, but if EU requirements are incompatible with national political preferences domestication trumps Europeanization. Domestication equally prevails if the relationship between EU and national policy is ambiguous and frontline implementers have high discretion. The trend toward the Europeanization of direct EU enforcement challenges its legitimacy. This has implications for EU researchers and practitioners, and suggests methodological challenges and future research trajectories for a performance perspective on EU implementation. More comparative research is needed about the trade-offs between conformance, diversity, and performance in EU multilevel governance.

show abstract

Diversity in sub-national EU implementation: the application of the EU Ambient Air Quality directive in 13 municipalities in the Netherlands

Cited by 28 publications

References 27 publications

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

Moving beyond legal compliance: innovative approaches to EU multilevel implementation

The Differentiated Implementation of European Participation Rules in Energy Infrastructure Planning. Why Does the German Participation Regime Exceed European Requirements?

Toward a better understanding of implementation performance in the EU multilevel system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About