The EU’s reaction in the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic between centralisation and decentralisation, formality and informality

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic is a multi-faceted crisis that challenges not only the health systems and other policy sub-systems in the single Member States, but also the European Union's ability to provide policy responses that address the transnational nature of pandemic control as a union-wide 'public good' that affects health and social policies, border control and security as well as topics related to the single market. Thus, the pandemic constitutes a veritable capacity test for the EU integration project.This article attempts to take stock of the Union's early reaction to the first wave of the Covid-19 outbreak. After an introduction and a short note on the scope and methodology of the analysis a theoretical framework is developed. Scrutinising the pertinent literature on crisis management, we reflect the traditional hypothesis that in times of crisis the centre becomes more relevant against the background of the EU crisis management system, and discuss the role of informality in particular during the time of crisis. Against this backdrop, empirical evidence from interviews with EU officials and documents in selected policy fields (health and emergency management, digitalisation, and economic recovery) are analysed, before a discussion and conclusion complete the study.

Post-Covid-19 Recovery and Resiliencebuilding in the Outermost Regions of the European Union: Towards a New European Strategy

“…29 Analogous rules on thematic concentration are also employed for the European Social Fund Plus. 30 Moreover, the outermost regions have a separate allocation for the European territorial cooperation goal (Interreg), amounting to 3,5% of the total Interreg allocation. 31 The importance of sui generis arrangements for the outermost regions was particularly accentuated amid the global health and socio-economic crisis generated by the COVID-19 pandemic.…”

The EU Response to COVID‐19: From Reactive Policies to Strategic Decision‐Making

“…Before considering the initial COVID‐19 response, we must take stock of the legal framework in which these institutions were situated, and the governance challenges posed by transboundary health threats. While health policy in the EU is dominated by national policies, some transboundary emergency response capabilities have increasingly been delegated to EU bodies in the last decade (Schomaker et al ., 2021 ). Article 168 of the TFEU, referring to ‘normal’ non‐emergency situations, stipulates that a ‘high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Union policies and activities’ (Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 2012 ).…”

“…Thus, going into the COVID‐19 crisis there was an institutional and legal basis for the EU to operate; albeit other policy areas, such as humanitarian aid, had a much larger remit and more organizations supporting them in crisis responses (Schomaker et al ., 2021 ).…”

Dynamic governance of the first wave of Covid‐19 in Tunisia: An interoperability analysis

“…In the European Union (EU), for instance, the crisis reaction modes evolved in a multilevel governance system in which political arenas are interconnected. In this regard, Schomaker et al ( 2021 ) argued that the EU's reaction in the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic was based on centralized and decentralized decisions, and it was characterized by formal initiatives and informal actions given the EU has not developed a transboundary crisis management capacity, so far (Townend et al, 2020 ). On the other hand, the spread of COVID‐19 has not spared the countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), all of which are, to varying degrees and according to their means, engaged in the fight against the new, common enemy (Talbot, 2020 ).…”