Passing the buck? Analyzing the delegation of discretion after transposition of European Union law

Dörrenbächer, Nora; Mastenbroek, Ellen

doi:10.1111/rego.12153

Cited by 27 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For the purpose of this study, the policy field of migration is selected, in which national principals typically aim to stay in control of EU law interpretation. Although Dörrenbächer and Mastenbroek (in press) have shown that national transposition actors also sometimes delegate EU discretion down to practical implementers, they highlight that transposition actors typically do so to maintain administrative and legal structures. In the field of migration, discretion is typically not delegated to explicitly encourage frontline implementers to circumvent national instructions or to leave interpretations to the frontline.…”

Section: Theory Section: An Organisational Perspective On Frontline Umentioning

confidence: 99%

Frontline uses of European Union (EU) law: a parallel legal order? How structural discretion conditions uses of EU law in Dutch and German migration offices

Dörrenbächer¹

2017

J. Pub. Pol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article tackles the question of how bureaucratic structures condition frontline implementers’ use of European Union (EU) migration law. Adopting an organisational perspective, the study expects that only under discretion do implementers draw independently on original EU law. Empirically, the article draws on qualitative interviews with migration law implementers in the Netherlands and the German Bundesland of North Rhine-Westphalia. The analysis reveals that in the nondiscretionary Dutch structure, frontline implementers only rely on EU law when receiving instructions from higher administrative levels. The use of EU law is more diverse in the German discretionary structure. Under legal tension, several German frontline implementers use EU law parallel to national law. However, not all German respondents feel comfortable in interpreting original EU law and jurisprudence. Although structural discretion conditions uses of EU law, the variation of the German case suggests that microlevel factors complement explanations for frontline uses of EU law.

show abstract

Section: Theory Section: An Organisational Perspective On Frontline Umentioning

confidence: 99%

Frontline uses of European Union (EU) law: a parallel legal order? How structural discretion conditions uses of EU law in Dutch and German migration offices

Dörrenbächer¹

2017

J. Pub. Pol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is evident that public actors cannot master the challenges associated with youth unemployment by themselves, and they have therefore designed arrangements in which private actors provide support. We could also observe this trend in other areas of state action, such as migration (see Dörrenbächer and Mastenbroek, 2019). Our study has shown that both a hierarchical structure of national political economy and prior expenditure in ALMPs affect the extent to which private actors are included in the implementation of the Youth Guarantee.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Varieties of public–private policy coordination: How the political economy affects multi-actor implementation

Trein

Tosun

2019

Public Policy and Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study seeks to introduce the concept of Varieties of Capitalism to the study of multi-actor implementation arrangements. It illustrates the analytical value of this classification scheme by drawing from original empirical data and addresses two key research questions, namely how do public and private actors cooperate in delivering on public policy, and which factors determine the scope of their cooperation? To address these questions, the article examines governance arrangements adopted by individual European Union member states for implementing the Youth Guarantee. The Youth Guarantee was selected because all European Union member states must and have indeed already started to implement it, meaning it provides a broad empirical base for observing different types of public-private coordination. The findings demonstrate that a hierarchical structure in a country's political economy and prior expenditure on active labour market policies result in different governance arrangements.

show abstract

“…As a result, the extent to which the frontline bureaucracy relies on EU law varies and produces different administrative decisions. EU law delegates discretion to practical implementers, 'who thus become, in essence, EU lawmakers' (Dörrenbächer & Mastenbroek, 2017). Implementers are creative and flexible when using legal tools, which leads to variation in implementation practices.…”

Section: Street-level Implementation and Judicial Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing European case law at the bureaucratic frontline: How domestic signalling influences the outcomes of EU law

Martinsen

Blauberger

Heindlmaier

et al. 2019

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses the implementation of European case law at the bureaucratic frontline of European Member States. Theoretically, insights from street-level implementation studies are combined with judicial impact research. Empirically, we compare how EU rules on free movement and cross-border welfare are applied in practice in Denmark, Austria and France. We find that when applying EU rules in practice, street-level bureaucrats are confronted with a world of legal complexity, consisting of ambiguous rules, underspecified concepts and a recent judicial turn by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In order to manage complexity, street-level bureaucrats turn to their more immediate superiors for guidance. As a consequence, domestic signals shape the practical application of EU law. Despite bureaucratic discretion and many country differences, domestic signals create uniform, restrictive outcomes of EU law in all three cases We, thus, show that there is considerable room for politicscommunicated by means of domestic signalling-in the EU implementation processes.

show abstract

Passing the buck? Analyzing the delegation of discretion after transposition of European Union law

Cited by 27 publications

References 39 publications

Frontline uses of European Union (EU) law: a parallel legal order? How structural discretion conditions uses of EU law in Dutch and German migration offices

Frontline uses of European Union (EU) law: a parallel legal order? How structural discretion conditions uses of EU law in Dutch and German migration offices

Varieties of public–private policy coordination: How the political economy affects multi-actor implementation

Implementing European case law at the bureaucratic frontline: How domestic signalling influences the outcomes of EU law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About