How Robust Are Compliance Findings? A Research Synthesis

Angelova, Mariyana; Dannwolf, Tanja; König, Thomas

doi:10.1080/13501763.2012.705051

Cited by 83 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…EU implementation research has strongly emphasized the degree of (non-)compliance with EU directives, the timeliness and correctness of transposition, the amount of non-compliance and transposition rates (Toshkov 2010). Despite their variety and sophistication (Angelova et al 2012), the concepts and explanations that have been proposed for transposition outcomes commonly focus on compliance, asking whether or not the translation into domestic law conforms to the EU directive (Treib 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Customization refers to the additional regulatory density and stringency of the domestic regulations compared to the market-correcting EU directive (Knill et al 2012). The paper expands Europeanization research to a new sector (Angelova et al 2012). It draws on original data on veterinary drug regulations in France, the United Kingdom (UK), Germany and Austria as comparable and likely cases for customization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Customizing Europe: transposition as bottom-up implementation

Thomann¹

2015

Journal of European Public Policy

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European Union (EU) implementation research has neglected situations when member states go beyond the minimum requirements prescribed in EU directives (goldplating). The top-down focus on compliance insufficiently accounts for the fact that positive integration actually allows member states to transcend the EU's requirements to facilitate context-sensitive problem-solving. This study adopts a bottom-up implementation perspective. Moving beyond compliance, it introduces the concept of 'customization' to depict how transposition results in tailor-made solutions in a multi-level system. The study analyzes the hitherto unexplored veterinary drug regulations of four member states. Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and formal theory evaluation, this paper assesses how policy and country-level factors interact. Results reveal the countries' different customization styles. The latter simultaneously reflect the interplay of domestic politics with institutions, and the 'fit' of EU regulatory modes with domestic, sectoral interventionist styles. Compliance approaches cannot fully explain these fine-grained patterns of Europeanization.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Customizing Europe: transposition as bottom-up implementation

Thomann¹

2015

Journal of European Public Policy

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Greinert,historical 45 They also point out that compliance research suffers from several flaws regarding a non-random case selection of countries and directives. Drawing a research synthesis itself is difficult given the methodological diversity and lack of statistical information as well as different conceptions of compliance (as infringement, application and transposition) in previous studies (Angelova et al 2012). 46 In the "world of domestic politics", see below, the number of veto players however do correlate negatively with the transposition performance.…”

Section: Case Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After the Lisbon Council in 2000 and the introduction of the OMC, a strand of literature emerged that deals with new questions and research agendas brought up by the OMC and the increased 26 Angelova et al (2012) provide a research synthesis on compliance. 27 Moreover, socialisation approaches identified two further mediating factors: norm entrepreneurs and cooperative informal institutions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Europeanisation of Vocational Education and Training

Ante

2016

Contributions to Political Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reconsidering EU Compliance: Implementation performance in the field of environmental policy

Bondarouk¹,

Mastenbroek²

2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European Union (EU) environmental policy can only work in practice when it is implemented by and within the member states. Yet, despite its importance, we still lack a solid and cumulative understanding of the practical implementation of EU environmental policies, mainly because of the dominance of case‐specific empirical insights and the dichotomous conceptualization of compliant implementation. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for analysing implementation performance, which is built around three dimensions: substance, scope and effort. The framework's relevance and analytical quality are substantiated by a systematic review of empirical studies on practical implementation of 18 EU environmental directives. We find evidence of three types of knowledge deficits: there is neglect of the ‘scope’ and ‘effort’ dimensions of implementation; disproportionate attention to the Water Framework Directive, and the Northern and Western European member states. The proposed conceptual framework aims to inform future research on EU environmental implementation. © 2017 The Authors. Environmental Policy and Governance published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

show abstract

How Robust Are Compliance Findings? A Research Synthesis

Cited by 83 publications

References 58 publications

Customizing Europe: transposition as bottom-up implementation

Customizing Europe: transposition as bottom-up implementation

The Europeanisation of Vocational Education and Training

Reconsidering EU Compliance: Implementation performance in the field of environmental policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About