Power to the people? Evaluating the European Commission’s engagement efforts in EU copyright policy

Abstract

This paper asks to what extent the European Commission's stakeholder participation model takes into account non-expert citizen contributions in policy processes pertaining to copyright. In theory, the increasing scale of citizen engagement in stakeholder consultations on copyright could help address the EU's democratic deficit. The paper analyses the European Commission's consultation processes in copyright policy across the Barroso 1&2 and Juncker Commissions (2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019). It documents the scale and the type of stakeholder involvement in public consultations. Through expert interviews and a survey, the paper gives critical insight into stakeholders' perception of the Commission's consultation practices and citizens' role in policymaking. It concludes that the Commission is inclusive of different types of stakeholders, but casts doubt on the (perceived) motivation and appropriateness of its stakeholder participation model for non-expert citizens. The paper thus sheds light on the attempts and the struggle to engage with citizens in a digital age.

Does policy context matter for citizen engagement in policymaking? Evidence from the European Commission's public consultation regime

“…Vetulani-Cęgiel and Meyer (2020) find variation in citizen participation in consultations over time, even within the same policy issue. Therefore, it seems necessary to control for time trends, as it is likely that participation will increase over time as the public becomes more familiar with the Commission's online participation portal.…”

“…While there are several existing studies of citizen participation in the Commission's consultations, they tend to be descriptive and/or restricted to examining participation on specific topics, such as the EU copyright policy (Vetulani-Cęgiel and Meyer, 2020), the REACH chemical policy (Persson, 2007) or an assessment of GMO products (Ferretti and Lener, 2008; Steffek and Ferretti, 2009). The existing studies show variation in citizen participation in consultations, yet they do not propose a cohesive framework for explaining this variation based on policy context.…”

“…Most of this research reports low levels of mobilisation (Coglianese, 2006; Persson, 2007), with the following exception. Vetulani-Cęgiel and Meyer (2020) conduct a longitudinal study of citizen participation in the Commission's consultations on copyright policies between 2004 and 2019 to gain insight into the efforts of the Commission in engaging citizens within this policy area. They find increasing citizen participation in the copyright policy initiatives over time, although they also observe variation across the analysed consultations.…”

“…Including stakeholders in policymaking processes can create a more responsive procedure and decrease the distance between public opinion and policies proposed by the European Commission (Binderkrantz et al, 2022; Bunea and Nørbech, 2022; Røed and Hansen, 2018). The concept of stakeholder refers here to all third parties who want to contribute to policymaking (Vetulani-Cęgiel and Meyer, 2020) which may include both citizens and interest groups (Bunea, 2019). However, most recent research on stakeholder participation and diversity in policymaking focuses mainly on interest groups (but see Bunea, 2019; Bunea and Nørbech, 2022), even though the ability of interest groups to represent the policy preferences of the general public is frequently challenged.…”

What is the role of civil society in Internet governance? Confronting institutional passive perspectives with resource mobilization in Portugal

“…In fact, and although the EC has presented itself as a supporter of the multistakeholder model, civil society has not been at the forefront of its attention. In the particular case of the Copyright Directive, in which citizen activity has been intensively noted in the policy process, its main takeaways have not been much considered: citizens and civil society “are effectively denied their own voice” (Vetulani‐Cęgiel & Meyer, 2020, p. 13).…”