The concepts of governance have the advantage of including the informal aspect of decision-making into their scope of analysis. The intention of this paper is the application of a fitting conceptual derivative of governance on the decision making process inside the institutional framework of the Commission of the European Union. The notion to be tested is the one of the Commission being by its institutional heritage inclined to promulgation of consensus among its principal actors, the members of the college of Commissioners. So what kind of governance might be characteristic for the Commission?
The political setting is that of the European Union, which is on the one hand an intergovernmental organization of member states on equal terms, but on the other hand a political institution. Apart from partly being established on a supra-national echelon, which is rationally designed and controlled for the purpose action and intervention to foster economic prosperity and integration in accordance with the concepts of functional and rational-choice institutionalism characteristic for social and political institutions of modernity. As the EU is itself an extension of the mostly politically pluralistic and socially fragmented Member States (MS), certain elements and processes influencing the promulgation of the political will on all legislative governmental echelons are present in the context of governance in the European Union as well.
The hypothesis of this paper consists of the following notions:
Due to the “sui generis”-character the EU,1 employing decisions by consensus even on intergovernmental as well as on supranational level is most effective politics possible.
Applying concepts of governance to the Commission‟s competences, institutional framework and formal as well as , if perceptible, informal decision-making procedures and customs, will show that although the Commission matches no distinct concept currently present in academia, it very well fulfils basic requirements of „good‟ governance.
Even as the supra-national institution per se, the Commission acts according to these notions.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Introduction
- 1. A Scale for Decision-Making: Consensus and Effectiveness
- a. Theoretical and functional aspects of Consensus
- b. The Struggle to define 'Effectiveness' as a Normative Category
- 2. Governance
- a. Concepts of Governance
- i. Multi-Level Governance
- ii. Open Method of Coordination
- iii. Principal-Agent Model
- b. 'Good' Governance
- a. Concepts of Governance
- 3. Formal and Informal Aspects of Decision-Making
- a. One-of-a-Kind: The European Commission as a formal Institution
- b. Identifying Informal Means of in the Commission's Decision-Making
- c. Contestation and the Commission
- Conclusions
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This paper examines the decision-making process within the European Commission, focusing on how consensus plays a role in its institutional framework. The analysis aims to determine if the Commission, due to its institutional heritage, is inclined towards consensus building among its members. The paper seeks to establish if the Commission's decision-making processes align with established governance concepts, particularly "good governance," and if the Commission's "sui generis" character makes consensus a key aspect of its effectiveness.
- The role of consensus in the decision-making process within the European Commission.
- The relationship between consensus and effectiveness in EU institutions.
- The application of governance concepts to the European Commission's institutional framework and decision-making practices.
- The importance of formal and informal aspects in decision-making within the Commission.
- The potential for contestation and conflict within the Commission's decision-making process.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- Introduction: This chapter introduces the concept of governance and its relevance to the decision-making process within the European Commission. It outlines the hypothesis that the Commission's institutional heritage encourages consensus building, contributing to its effectiveness. The chapter also provides a brief overview of the European Union's institutional framework and the unique challenges it faces.
- 1. A Scale for Decision-Making: Consensus and Effectiveness: This chapter defines the key terms of consensus and effectiveness, exploring their theoretical and functional aspects. It examines the relationship between these terms in the context of democratic decision-making and the role of stakeholders in shaping consensus. The chapter concludes by developing a convergent scale to understand the interplay between consensus and effectiveness in the Commission's decision-making process.
- 2. Governance: This chapter explores various concepts of governance, particularly multi-level governance, the open method of coordination, and the principal-agent model. It then examines the concept of "good governance" and how it relates to the European Commission's institutional framework and decision-making processes.
- 3. Formal and Informal Aspects of Decision-Making: This chapter analyzes the formal and informal aspects of decision-making within the European Commission. It examines the Commission's institutional structure, its internal decision-making processes, and the role of informal mechanisms in shaping outcomes. The chapter also explores the potential for contestation and conflict within the Commission's decision-making environment.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The primary keywords and focus topics of this paper include: European Commission, governance, consensus, effectiveness, decision-making, institutional framework, formal and informal processes, multi-level governance, open method of coordination, principal-agent model, good governance, contestation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What kind of governance is characteristic of the European Commission?
The Commission is characterized by a tendency towards consensus building among its members, reflecting its institutional heritage and unique "sui generis" nature.
Why is consensus important for the Commission's effectiveness?
Due to the fragmented nature of member states, reaching consensus is often the most effective way to ensure that political decisions are accepted and implemented across the EU.
What is the difference between formal and informal decision-making in the EU?
Formal processes follow institutional rules, while informal processes involve customs, negotiations, and consensus-seeking that happen behind the scenes.
Does the European Commission follow "good governance" principles?
The paper argues that despite matching no single academic concept, the Commission fulfills basic requirements of good governance through its institutional framework.
What is the Principal-Agent Model in this context?
It is a governance concept used to analyze how the Commission (agent) acts on behalf of the member states (principals) and the degree of autonomy it possesses.
- Quote paper
- Johannes Wiedemann (Author), 2010, Governance in EU Institutions: The Commission or Consensus as Effectiveness, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/175479
