Abstract:The proliferation of European Union (EU) agencies, known as 'agencification', has been widely studied by scholars of EU governance. In spite of the success in explaining the roots of agencies' establishment, evidence is lacking about their development over time: have they been empowered through new resources, or have their capabilities remained the same? Which EU agencies grew the most, and why? Ultimately, how much do policymakers value these bodies? Through a newly collected longitudinal dataset, the analysi… Show more
“…These budgetary increases concern agencies involved in border management, asylum and law enforcement – namely, Frontex, EASO, Europol and EU-Lisa.Figure 1.Increase in the number of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). Figure 2.Increase in the budgets of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data updated from Migliorati, 2020a and available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). …”
Section: Empirical Observation: the Rise Of Eu Agencies With Operatio...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Increase in the budgets of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data updated from Migliorati, 2020a and available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). …”
Section: Empirical Observation: the Rise Of Eu Agencies With Operatio...mentioning
This article problematises the proliferation of European Union (EU) agencies with operational tasks as a new phenomenon capturing the exercise of joint sovereignty in European integration. While joint decision-making has been a feature of EU politics for decades, joint sovereignty is a broader category that additionally involves the creation of EU bodies able to intervene ‘on the ground’ alongside national public actors. We argue that the choice for joint sovereignty opens a Pandora’s box of implementation deficiencies which undermine the ability of both national and supranational actors to conduct operational activities effectively. We subsequently identify two frequent dysfunctions in policy implementation and connect them to ambiguity and conflict at the decision-making stage. Empirically, we illustrate the systemic link between decision-making and implementation problems in the functioning of two agencies with operational tasks active in the fields of border management (Frontex) and police cooperation (Europol).
“…These budgetary increases concern agencies involved in border management, asylum and law enforcement – namely, Frontex, EASO, Europol and EU-Lisa.Figure 1.Increase in the number of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). Figure 2.Increase in the budgets of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data updated from Migliorati, 2020a and available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). …”
Section: Empirical Observation: the Rise Of Eu Agencies With Operatio...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Increase in the budgets of EU regulatory and operational agencies over time (own account; data updated from Migliorati, 2020a and available at Freudlsperger et al, 2021). …”
Section: Empirical Observation: the Rise Of Eu Agencies With Operatio...mentioning
This article problematises the proliferation of European Union (EU) agencies with operational tasks as a new phenomenon capturing the exercise of joint sovereignty in European integration. While joint decision-making has been a feature of EU politics for decades, joint sovereignty is a broader category that additionally involves the creation of EU bodies able to intervene ‘on the ground’ alongside national public actors. We argue that the choice for joint sovereignty opens a Pandora’s box of implementation deficiencies which undermine the ability of both national and supranational actors to conduct operational activities effectively. We subsequently identify two frequent dysfunctions in policy implementation and connect them to ambiguity and conflict at the decision-making stage. Empirically, we illustrate the systemic link between decision-making and implementation problems in the functioning of two agencies with operational tasks active in the fields of border management (Frontex) and police cooperation (Europol).
“…Recent years have provided examples of the impact of crises related to immigration or the economy on the European agenda (Brack et al 2019;Jones et al 2016;Niemann and Speyer 2018;Thatcher and Woll 2016). Responses to crises, in combination with advocacy, have become an important factor for institutionalisation (Boin et al 2014;Groenleer 2009;Migliorati 2020). For example, the 'mad cow' crisis in the 1990s led to the creation of the European Food Safety Authority (Boin et al 2014;Groenleer 2009;Kelemen 2002;Renda and Castro 2020).…”
Section: Crisis As Catalyst For Gradual Institutional Changementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The role of crises in the institutionalisation of health threats management is best exemplified by the creation of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the European agency in charge of monitoring health threats, created in 2004 in the aftermath of the 2002 SARS outbreak (Deruelle 2016;Greer 2012). While the creation of such a European agency does not take away Member States' prerogatives, it nevertheless furthers institutionalisation (Kelemen 2002;Lamping and Steffen 2009;Migliorati 2020;Thatcher 2011). That said, the SARS crisis did not radically transform the state of play in EU health crisis management.…”
European institutionalisation of public health policy has never been more topical than in the COVID-19 era. One European agency has come to the fore: the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Historically, the ECDC's mandate has expanded only gradually and the management of transboundary health crises has remained ultimately in the hands of Member States. The unprecedented severity of COVID-19 has led the European Commission to propose an extension of the ECDC's mandate. This study assesses the expansion of the formal and informal mandates of the ECDC over 15 years to contextualise the catalytic impact of COVID-19. It is found that while institutional change occurs in the aftermath of a transboundary health crisis, it builds on a long-term process of gradual institutionalisation that is accelerated by the crisis acting as a catalyst but not fully determined by it. KEYWORDS COVID-19; SARS; health; European integration; crisis; institutional changeThe COVID-19 crisis has highlighted the hurdles faced by the European Union (EU) in supporting the coordination of Member States' responses to a transboundary health crisis. The EU's initial response to COVID-19 has been criticised for delays in responding to the pandemic (Clemens and Brand 2020; Pacces and Weimer 2020; Renda and Castro 2020) and more recently for the slow vaccination rollout. Nevertheless, health threat management at the EU level is limited to coordinating national responses rather than managing risks -i.e. commanding responses (Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU). Coordination is facilitated by the existence of the Health Security Committee (HSC), the Council formation convening health ministries' representatives (Greer 2012). However, it ultimately remains in the hands of Member States whether to adopt measures related to treatments (vaccination) or containment (Non-Pharmaceutical
“…Following the wave of gentrification in western countries and supranational organization such as the European Union (see, e.g., Howell, 2019;Maggetti et al, 2019), this trend is adopted in the eastern and developing countries such as Papua New Guinea (Ugyel et al, 2020), Nigeria (Aliu and Ibikunle, 2020), and Indonesia (Restianto and Bawono, 2020;Waluyo, 2018). While the growing trend towards the rationalization and consolidation of the agency landscape (Szesciło, 2020) and post-agencification issues (see, e.g., Migliorati, 2020), many have claimed that the idea of agencification would trigger the agencies to be more professional, their management would be more business-like, and they would offer higher quality services compared to government bureaucracy (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992;Pollit et al, 2001). Apart from better output quality, agencies are expected to be more efficient public service providers (e.g., Bach, 2012;Pollitt et al, 2001) in achieving value-for-money in public spending (Cingolani and Fazekas, 2020).…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
