Lobbying in the EU Comitology System

Abstract

Comitology is an important part of the EU's regulatory framework. Hence, lobbying by outside interests is to be expected. However, lobbying in the comitology system has received almost no scholarly attention. This paper provides the first understanding of the subject by analysing the access of business interests to actors in the comitology system. The analysis is designed as a most likely study of two cases, aviation safety and CO 2 quotas. Based on Bouwen's rationalist theory of access goods, the empirical analysis shows that lobbying is prevalent, especially by sectoral interests providing expert knowledge and targeted mainly at the Commission, but also at the member states in the comitology committees, and the European Parliament. The case studies therefore indicate that lobbying is widespread in the comitology system and important to study in order to understand the outputs from this part of the EU political system.

Interest groups and strategic constructivism: business actors and border security policies in the European Union

“…8. Comitology (EU-1, EU-2, EU-5): Lobbying within the comitology system is widespread (Norgaard, Nedergaard, and Blom-Hansen 2014). Since the security industry is involved in implementation of EU legislation, periodic communication between implementing partners and the Commission-chaired committees takes place.…”

Non‐State Actors and the New Intergovernmentalism

“…A large literature on EU lobbying confirms these insights in the post‐Maastricht era, showing that the influence of private interests (especially the large private firm) on EU policy has ‘snowballed’ since the 1990s (Coen, , , p. 341; Eising, ). It has been demonstrated that private firms and business associations have regular access to the Commission, the Council, the Parliament, the comitology system and expert groups (Chalmers, ; Eising, ; Norgaard et al , ). Furthermore, under conditions of globalization, the concentration of power of national and supranational actors has grown in parallel with the concentration of power of transnational private actors, a development which has transformed rather than undermined state sovereignty (Sassen, ).…”