structuring the european administrative space. channels of eu penetration and mechanisms of national...

8/22/2019 Structuring the European Administrative Space. Channels of EU Penetration and Mechanisms of National Change

1/31

S E A SChannels of EU Penetraon and Mechanisms of

Naonal Change

E G. H

No. 5 | September 2009

Working Paper


2/31

2 | KFGWorking Paper No. 5 | September 2009

KFG Working Paper Series

Edited by the Kolleg-Forschergruppe T T Pw E

T KFG W P S l f Kolleg-Forschergruppe y

ll l. I x wll x

l xl E E U.

All KFG W P ll KFG w www.f. l

f-@f-l..

Cy f : E G. H

El : J Wl/F A/H K

H, E G. 2009: S E A S: Cl f EU P M

f Nl C, KFG W P S, N. 5, S 2009, Kll-F (KFG) T Tf

Pw f E, F Uy Bl.

ISSN 1868-6834 (P)

ISSN 1868-7601 (I)

T l f y G R F (DFG).

F U Bl

Kolleg-Forschergruppe

T Tf Pw f E:

T E U D f I

I. 26

14195 Bl

Gy

P: +49 (0)30- 838 57033

Fx: +49 (0)30- 838 57096f-@f-l.

www.f.


3/31

Structuring the European administrative Space | 3

Structuring the European Adminstrative Space

Channels of EU Penetration and Mechanisms of

National Change

E G. Hb

F U B

Ab

T lyl l f l l

l . T w w European administrave space

y w . I f f ly lx j ,

yly l y f w l l

ll f f l l

f E l l . Sz w f l -

E U (EU) w lly

ll . I w ly -

y. Oly x f l EU l l

f l w .

D xl f l l, y f E

w l l . T l fw

l l f f f l w l

l l .

T A

E G. Hb fllw R Cll T Tf

Pw f E F U Bl, w l w

l EU . H

f EU l ly. S l PD f

E Uy I Fl E S f

U f O, N L wll I f A

S V. C: @z.f-l.


4/31


Contents

1. I: I T E A S? 52. Tl Fw:

S Dy f EU A S 7

2.1 Channels of Interacon between Supranaonaland Naonal Public Administraon 7

2.2 Mechanisms of Supranaonal Impact onState-level Public Administraons 10

3. Ill E E A S 11

3.1 Supranaonal Principles and Subordinated Naonal Public

Administraons 123.2 Supranaonal Targets and Naonal Brokers 16

3.3 Supranaonal Prescripons for Naonal Execung Bodies 20 3.4 Naonal Responses for Independent Implemenng Agencies 23

4. Cl:M f E E A S 25

L 27


5/31


1. I: I T E A S?

An emerging European administrave space (EAS) l . T x y

f l q, l f w f E

E l (Ol 2003: 506). M l w

l w f w f l z f E

l , Gz ll f E

j f x . T E

; l w E l

(Gz 2001: 227). By , f single European administrave

space lly f f ll . El w

l y y w EU

(J 2007: 947), f Europeanized naonal administraons, networked administrave

system or EU administrave community (Sf/S 2003: 23). M lly f ly, f

l xl f f f - l l (Gz 2006: 484f),

wll l lz l f l

f EU (Kll 2001: 12).

T zzl, , l ly :

E w w l l .

Nl y y E , y EU y f

l l l l l. T y y

z f f l EU f l

f EU l l .

T f , w w EU l , wl ly f l

y f wll ly l

ll.

Tw l ql y w f f ,

xl y. F, l f

f l l f f l .

Ply y w , ly wll l llw l w l, ly f l l . T

q : w EU lly l l ? Ul l f

, q f xlly . N x

f l y x f EU lly

f f y l ly

f y y. A wll w, f

l , y, f y y qlly

, y. Cqly, ll ly l E

w ly jly x w

l EU y f y (Hf 2008: 671).


6/31


T l . D l f l, f

l Cl E E, -x f

ll l . S f l

w l , x f single E

w , f x w universalEU l.

T EU l l f l y wll f

f w x EU f

f ll EAS. F, wy

w l l f f f l

w f l w f w l xl

. T w, l l EAS

lly ll l, flly

w EU l l .1

Sly, fy l , I w - y Gz (2001,

2006); EU l wly . A ,

, l w Ol w l l f ,

ly f llly fll ly [] w,

w , q . T ll

l lyl l w xly w f

y (2003: 507). Hw, I f y . O

, Gz ll f f l f l Ez

f l f (Gz 2001: 227f). O , Ol l

y xl (llz, l )

l f l EU (Ol 2003).

I l w w xl, y f

w EU lly . T lylly fl y l

y l y f f , w

w l f y f w l l

ll. B l yl l f l EU , ly

lly x y l f

. S f l y f f , l f f Ez (Ol 2001). I f x

xl f l EU l f , I

wll w l fw lly f l l

. T llw w f , wl f f f

l EU l l , y l -

1 T l l f 12 w

2004/2007. O y-l x f l El (2009).


7/31


f l EU ll wll zl w . 2

T f y y. T l l

fw w . A yly f l f w l l

ll ly f l , ly. P l ll l f EU

. I l ly f f

f. Tf, l l , wl f

fy f l y . T l l

E ; y f

. T l :

w E , w l w wll l , w

.

2. T Fwk: S Dy EU A

S

Hw l f l E l? I wll l q

w . T ly, I yly f w l ll

flly w ll f l . E f f y f l f

l f f l l .

I , y f l l

lly . B, channels of interacon and mechanisms of change, lz

l w l z

w l w .

2.1 Channels of Interacon between Supranaonal and Naonal Public

Administraon

Channels of interacon w y f l l l

2 Europeanizaon w w l

ly w EU ll w f fl f -

l lw l: Bzl (2002); Bzl (2003); Bzl/R (2000); G Cwl l. (2001); H

l. (2001); Kll/Ll (1999); Kll/Ll (2002). I , w, wy l -

wl ylly f ll f ll f l . I w ,

l ll f ll f Tl 2 f Ez. Czl (1998), f ,

y -w ( f f, l f w l

l ly ) Ez . Al l f fl Ez

-l ly (f , Bzl 2001; Fl l. 2005; H l. 2001).

I , Ez l ll l f l f f EU- .

S f Ez l

y EU l f l ly l (Bzl 2002; Bzl 2003; Bzl/R2000; D 2005; Fl l. 2005; G Cwl l. 2001; Kll 2001; Kll/Ll 2002; Kll/L-

w 2001; Lw l. 2005)


8/31


w wy. A l f y ll f l -

(, -), f y f q l ( ,

fl ). S w l, w l

l l , ly () y standards, jly

l f f, z, ;

() y policy goals w l l l

f l ly w ly j. Wl

l zlly z f f

ly ly- f l l

l ly . Aly, w ly, l

is an end lf. W l l lly, l

are the means ly l.

T lly l, w degree of discreonof naonal actors l f l . Ally () direct if the

l w l l lly l

y q w l f l lw ll. I , () -

l l w. Ally f indirect

f l w, (Bz 2006) l

l w l l . I q,

lly ly ly f l f l

fl f f .

Tl 1 f y f ll f w . N

yly z l y f w l z ll. T

w x w wy EU w f l wll

qly , f , l . I , lly

ll f l z - , EU

y l z . W f

l f l ?

Table 1: Channels of supranaonal / state interacon

SupranationalInfuence

Applicability toPublic Administration

Standards

Generic changePolicy Goals

Change as functional offshoot

Direct

Hierarchical relationship betweenEU / MS

PRINCIPLES

generally binding / horizontalPRESCRIPTIONS

sector-specic binding / functional

IndirectNon-hierarchical relationship

between EU / MS

TARGETSvoluntary /selective RESPONSESresults-based/ instrumental


9/31


Directly applicable standards l

l f . Ty l l f l l l

f lly. D flly , ly f

l flz ll . Exl l l,

l f lw, lly l f ll l zlly ll

. Indirectly applicable standards, , targets flly .

H, f l w w f wll

j ly w wll w l y. Ily

ll ll fl ly

fl w. C w flll lz f

x w y lly l -

y j l ll l. A wll ll

l , f f f l , w,

w ly y fl. F xl, llly l f lw f l f l z y, x f , ll

f l y l (-) l. M ly, z ,

y w l (NPM),

, x f l l, l

l wll (Pll 2002; Rll 2005). I , l

l f l, lly w

f ly -l f.

O l , ly- l

l ly w l ly j. T

l l f l , q

y. T l , w, l ly

l ly l. I , directly applicable rules for policy implementaon create sector

f l l l fl

. F , f . I f

ly l f l ly j f z . If,

, ly j fl w f ly indirectly

applicable rule f l l ly w ly j.

Y, l l w l l

, w w l q responses l ly ly l.

Sy w xl: w z l y

, l j f z . T

, l l f y, l l w l

f l y. T w, w l

l f f l.


10/31


2.2 Mechanisms of Supranaonal Impact on State-level Public Administraons

W f l l y f l ? I

w, w w x lly w l l, ,

ly? A , wll l y w

lly l . T f ly l l l

. T q l w, w f l f

w lll f ll w . T

l y w EU (Bzl/R 2009) l l

y y l f ll

-l l. Aly, l f w y l l

l l f l l l l l w

f l .

Table 2: Mechanisms of change and role of state public administraon

Tl 2 z f l f , f

Tl 1. Aly, w lprinciples (ly ll/) f , EU

lly l, ly l, w l l l

f b f l y. Lw, ly ll -

prescripons (ly ll/ly l) l

. T ly l w EU xl l

l l fx b l f E C. W

EU ly , l lly f l f

w l (/). Nl f

independent brokers lly . W EU ly f y

f l f l q responses

(/ly l), l l z f independent

Supranational

Influence

Applicability to

Public Administration

Standards

Generic change

Policy Goals

Change as functional offshoot

Direct

Hierarchical relationship between

EU / MS

Subordinate of

Supranational Authority

Promotion of a single general model

Executing Body of

EU Administration

Mandatory adherence to a concrete model

Indirect

Non-hierarchical relationship

between EU / MS

Independent

Broker

Encouragement of a plurality of

models

Independent

Implementation Agency

Consent to a range of models


11/31


y: l l w

l y ly l.

3. I E E A S

T l fw ly ly w f f

q: w w l

l f l ? I wll lz fy

lly w x -l f l E U. W

l l l EU l f f l f ?

F, I wll w EU f . T f f ly ll

xl wy f y f l . Wl EU z policies, l y w public administraons.

S f EU l , ll

l -1990. T x f l. D lly

f Cl E E , w :

f l ly w acquis communautaire.

A EU , l ly ll l z lfy fl fl

l f EU lw y. R EU,

C w l f

l . S, w wll lyll . I f -

, fl w l l 1970

w ly 1990. By ,

l Cy .

S, I wll fl q f

f lly ly l. Illy, l l f

Cy lw l f . T Cy l

ly indirect administraon. E y f lwy

j xl direct administraon y C lf f Cy,

l w x f ly Single European Act l

1980 (C 2004: 40). A f l l, E C f J (ECJ)

ly l l f l y lfy

f l f l l. T - f l

f f y ll y y :

l f Cy lw. (F 2004: 183)

Wl w wll w yly f

l f EU , l ly . I

Cl Rl 1334/2000, fcommon administraon l l ly


12/31


w C w l w

. T ly l y f y

y f f l f ly. Tf,

ly lyl , y l f ly

f ll ly. Glly, w,

proposals privileging a division of tasks between the Community administraon and naonal

administraons abound. One suggeson is for the two enes to perform funconally dierent

tasks in the policy chain, so that the Community administraon makes decisions while the naonal

authority execute them(F 2004: 193f).

Aly, I wll l w l f ly ll ly-

l .3

3.1 Supranaonal Principles and Subordinated Naonal Public Administraons

T EU fl l ; l l

f ly f l y, y E policy

y competence (M 2005: 4, l l). E

EU l f l x f l f f

f EU l j f l : l

ly European Administrave Model. T EU , l, lly l

fly y l

ly w EU lw l. T fl f

f ll f y

j f E C f J (C 1999: 5). Dly ll EU

w f. F , y l lw l, w

lly y ECJ. F ,

flll f administrave capacity, l qly

x l . T w flz w EU acquis to amount

l EU f z f E

w fw jfy l

l (F 1998: 125). Aly, EU

fw w :

Shared principles of public administraon among EU Member States constute the condions of

a European Administrave Space (EAS). The EAS includes a set of common standards for acon

3 T l y l xl . A l f

ll f w lwy l , f

C lwy y f l j wll l l

lwy y C . T lfy l -l f l z l , lyl f f

l; llw f f f y .


13/31


within public administraon which are dened by law and enforced in pracce through procedures

and accountability mechanisms. [...] Although the EAS does not constute an agreed part of the

acquis communautaire, it should nevertheless serve to guide the public administrave reforms in

candidate countries.(C 1999: 5)

N ly w y f EAS l x, l w

y f ly l z y j f

ECJ.

If we aempt to systemise the main administrave law principles common to western European

countries, we could disnguish the following groups: 1) reliability and predictability (legal certainty);

2) openness and transparency; 3) accountability and 4) eciency and eecveness. (C

1999: 8)4

These fundamental shared norms represent blank concepts. Ty l

l -y- y l ly ,

w f . Cqly, l , l

l l. Tf, l

wly. I f , w, ECJ z

y f l . T ly fl f

l EU f w l f Right to Good Administraon

(Al 41) f Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms L Ty. T

l wll ECJ f l f . T ll w

f l ly w EU, I wll y w ll f l w l l l w f ECJ -

z .

F, w EU lw l? D l

ll f , l

lly. T fw xl: ly f l B, F S

f ll wl l

l A, Bl Nl, ly l f ll . Rl

f lw f f jl l f F, Gy Sw

x y lz , wl B D y

l. T ly w xl w w y l ly

. Oll w l f EU M

l Blx , F, Gy Ily ly

f l f l f

4 F (2004) fllw l: T Cy ll y w l

l, w ll , l ly ly

. T l l: (1) lly; (2) ly; (3) y; (4)

ly; (5) y ; (6) ll y; (7) l x; (8) f-

l . S l : (1) ; (2) y f l; (3) l l f ; (4) f

f; (5) y .


14/31


(Zll 1998: 144). G f qlly l l l

w f l f lw l f y

y ll l ll lly l

l y. T, f f l w ly y l

f x- l .

S, w l ll w l EU ?

R w, lly l ll y f EU

l f . Sll, ECJ ly, y l,

j l lw l w E U (C

1999: 17). Wl Cy y ll ly l, C lw

l f l l. Tf, j f

C f l, .. -l, lw U (C 1999: 17),

l f f l lw l l y l f . Tw l f l l

ll f EC lw. T z f l

ll f . I l f fy ll f EU

jl w f z, Francovich (ECJ 1991: C-6/90 C-9/90) l

l f lly f l w EC lw. T l wy f

l f l y, w C f.5 S f

lly . S

Francovich, the Court has found that naonal governments may be held liable for laws, judicial

decisions, and, [...], administrave measures that infringe European law. The court has developed a

law of administraon which applies not only to the Commission, but also to naonal bureaucracies.

(B 2004: 5f)

H, C l ly l

y w EC lw . A wll f ly

ll ly- EU , l f l l l

f l lw, w C l qlly

l f , ly l f l

x f .

T ly l f w

C y f l l (Nzz 2001: 3). I

l 1970 l f f f f f w .

Ul , w f f ly l , w

l x f Cy f f w ly. T

5 Pl y f l Cy l

l lw l l j w l w ,

ly l f ql ( f Cy l ) lf (ly f l x Cy l ) (ECJ 1976: 33/76,

Rw-Zlz EG . Lw f Sl).


15/31


f l llw l ly y

l f l. I 1980 ECJ (149/79 C . Bl)

for the purpose of reserving a post to naonals, employment in public administraon had to be

dened as employment characterisc of the specic acvies of public administraon as implyingthe exercise of powers of public law and safeguarding the general interests of the state or local

authories(Zll 1998: 140).

T l f l f l .

Al EU-w f lw , l l f

f q.

The rst consequence is the obligaon to proceed to a classicaon of jobs and careers in order to

determine whether they should be opened up or not. Then a series of steps have to be taken in order

to ensure mutual recognion of qualicaons and professional experience in public services, which

can lead to a reappraisal of exisng systems of training and mobility. Furthermore possibilies have

to be created for internaonal mobility of civil servants within the Union: this has an impact on the

organisaon of secondments, social security and pension schemes.(Zll 1998: 141)

T q f j l l l l

(f w: B l. 2001). I , l ll

f EU l ly l , ECJ lw

flly ql .

T f acquis f ECJ l

f l lw l. I l EU,

l Cy lw w l vis--vis xl . I

f w y l q

w , l w

ly x- y ll w . T f E

w f ll (My-Sl 2009: 10) f

lly -x l l ll f l l

EU.

D - EU ly z , w

l w Cy lw, w ly y l l

l , horizontal administrave capacies.

Aly, administrave capacityw y E Cl f M

1995 w f w C 1997Avis l

f (Vj 2000: 16). T q l Rl R

ll f zl w . W l y w

l l f q, zl y, yy w

f (D 2005: 80). Y, f acquis zl ,

C l l l . I f


16/31


l EU l , EU l xl .

C w Support for Improvement in Governance and Management (SIGMA) ,

OECD Public Management Service (PUMA) y EU f -

accession program Phare, l f f y

. T w -ll SIGMA l

l l f y zl y ,

w l f y y f (Vj

2000: 17). T SIGMA l l f zl

f . T w l w - l acquis

w l fl f l w

C w ly w. T, D Gl (DG) El C

x f w (w ly l D Gl

f A!) f EU , f -EU , OECD SIGMA (l

DG El, w x S 2007). Al f z l l, f ly lz w

w l ll w l z f SIGMA

l EU (D 2002: 182). T, l

w f xl l de facto , EAS

f l llly l zl

l l .

I , f E , C ll l

lw l w . S w l f zl

y ly w l f EU f

EU. B y ly, EU w w

f l l l

flly EU w ll fw f l

EU acquis ly. W EU, fll fl y

l ly y f l l l l

f . By , ECJ lw l l. T f

l f l y fy ll f l

y ll f ly

ll f w ly EU lw.

3.2 Supranaonal Targets and Naonal Brokers

R w EU w, ly

l x wl . G EU

l f , ly - qly f -

ly z l z

f f w fl f f . T

f EU z , , ,


17/31


f ll f w- y, European Public Administrave Network

(EUPAN). O , w l f ,

f Common Assessment Framework(CAF), lf- l

ll ll f z ly . I wll y EUPAN

CAF ll w wy w EU

. M, w- -ll w f , ly

the White Paper on Governance (C f E C 2001) w

the Lisbon process wll Beer Regulaon agenda (Cl f E U 2006),

l l lf w C ly w

. I w f w f , EU xlz

l ly y

q w (Bzl 2009; S 2007). Y, ly f w l

y l f l .

EUPAN lf fl w l f x f w, x

f, qly f E l l

w l f L y y l

z f l , y w ( , ,

qly, -) w y

E l .6 EUPAN w f lf f 1970. S 1991,

l l ll f l l w

l f l . O l ll, EUPAN w

w : (1) HRWG Human Resources Management Group w 1987

l lly ll f l l f l f

f , - f HRWG NCP Naonal Contact Points that are to help the

f CAF l; (2) IPSG Innovave Public Services Group qly

f l l f l f w l

, ly, CAF IPSG; (3) E-GOV e-Government Working Group

x f w, x , lly

l f -. T , l w EU C

EU-ll. F, DISPA Group of Directors of Schools and Instutes of Public

Administraons w EUPAN ll, wll DBRR Working Group of Directors

and Experts for Beer Regulaons w j () fl x f

x j w ly , () f f

U beer regulaon l w

EU Ml Cl. T l DBR fl , l ly

y Py .

I l w ll- w flz z,

z ll l wl fl f

6 S EUPAN w ://www../3/70/ (l 25 M 2009). F f wl EUPAN H, y F EU Py 2006 y -

q P Py 2007, l f.


18/31


E Pl A Nw (EUPAN) (E Cl 2008). S fl

f fl ll f EUPAN l l w

lz f E U. M ly, EU Py T

( w S) l f l f EUPAN

l y EU y . M, E C

28 f fl w l l. F y--y

w, w, C European Instute for Public Administraon (EIPA)

EUPAN w , l l . EUPAN f lly l

f EU ly- f fl l. T ll

f l x l f EUPAN f f

f l l . A EUPAN lf, ll l w,

l w f w, wll l f w f

l f M S fy. T w

f ll f l [...] f wl y ly f EUPAN w y

f l (EUPAN 2008: 4).

A f, Common Assessment Framework(CAF) w EUPAN. CAF

lf-l l ll z f ll f l ly

. T fw

is a Total Quality Management (TQM) tool inspired by the Excellence Model of the European

Foundaon Quality Management (EFQM) and the model of the German University of Administrave

Sciences in Speyer. It is based on the premise that excellent results in organisaonal performance,

cizens/customers, people and society are achieved through leadership driving strategy and

planning, people, partnerships, and resources and processes. It looks at the organisaon from

dierent angles at the same me, the holisc approach of organisaon performance analysis

(E I f Pl A 2006: 2).7

A l 2000, w l w f CAF Resource Centre

EIPA, fllw 2006. A 900 w y E

f 2000 2005. T l l f CAF y j

l xly 1000 f ll f z

/x/, y/l, /, l/ll ,

l /y. Exl f Pl Tx O A Sy G Ay,

S Ny Sl, Sw M A Sl, E Al R C,

Il Mly f Fz B B Cl O (Bzl

2006). By f l , f CAF ly f Cz

Rl (l ll), Sl (l ll) R. I jy f

y l , w A, E, Fl,

Il, Ily, L, Nl, Pl, UK lly ly. T w

f CAF f w l w f

7 EFQM l l l CAF, l x f ISO 9000.


19/31


z (S/Tj 2005: 43f). M, lf-l

ly f f f, w f l l

f l f z .

T f l wly ly w f w f ly l Cy (C/

R 2007). O l l f C EUPAN

CAF. Y w w f -, w l lz l

ll ll f l (S/J 2008). Dly w l

is the Regulatory Impact Assessment(RIA), w EU Beer Regulaon Iniave

y NPM . I ly f f RIA Rll (2005) Pll

(2001) l l f l l .

To sum up then, the language of RIA has produced a community of discourse for policy-makers and

has smulated the introducon of some instruments which are labelled impact assessment but

which in some cases exist only on paper and in other cases disguise dierent pracce under the

same label. Diusion at the level of talk has not yielded convergence in acons and results to

use the classic terms suggested by Brunsson (1989) and, more recently, Polli (2001). (Rll

2005: 930)

M flly ll, I Kl (2006) l

w f , y w ,

l f y f

. F , f w f y l xl wy w- l l y - y w l

f l w (Bzl 2009), l w l,

l ll.

I , ly l , EU l fl

w l

. T j l ll l f U f

L Sy f f z y

w wlf . T

w w l l l . T

w w ly l f EU w xl z

j z ly fl ly f w l

l . M lly, f l

Cy , w l w l l .

T ql f x l x

w, f w f y, w l w l

l .


20/31


3.3 Supranaonal Prescripons for Naonal Execung Bodies

Aly Ty f R w C w f w l direct

administraon l f E ,

l (B 2004: 4). D l ly ly l l

l l l ll. I , w

EU xl w l l . Ex l l

U l ; , l . D

l f C l , l

C l f l. T xl

, ,

l l fly y l y. H,

Community law is clearly making its way into naonal administrave systems. In some cases the

impact is a direct one, having a direct eect on how public administraons funcon: the instuon of

new bodies; spulaon of the composion of such bodies; imposion of clearly dened procedures

(for example for public procurement); redenion of the very concept of public administraon in

order to apply certain Community provisions.(Nzz 2001: 7)

D f w f EU l,

ly- ly l Cy w ll l

w fl f l EU ll l ll f l

l ly f.

O z f , w

f f w, w l Cy l public

procurements and compeon law C l

(Zll 1998: 140). A f Communitys

nancial interests wll newer EU policies l lly x

l f l l f w C

l (F 1998: 113).8 Al ly l

f w Cy l (.. ) zl l (.. -

), f

8 T l l l f f l f (l,

) ( l, , y ); -

l f ; ly f l; l w

x; l f y l l l

CAP; ; l f l fy w l ;

l f ; ; l f

j, x y f f f lw,

l l l jl -; ; l l, l

f f f Cy f. I , C l w l xl l f

l l . (F 1998: 114)


21/31


an asymmetry between the regulaon of market-related administrave proceedings and other types

of administrave proceedings has developed. Signicant dierences have emerged, depending on

the area of law applicable, dierences which demand common general principles, able to serve a

unifying funcon and ensure systemac coherence and uniformity(F 2004: 196).

T yy y fServices of General (Economic) Interest(SGEI/SGI) w

w ly Ty f R. A f SGEI/SGI w Ty f

A (Al 16, EC) l fl f l

( l C f E C 2001). A f l

qlly wll- y y f f l w

l y E Cy (M 2005: 4). Oly, y w

fll l y f SGEI Cy lw l f l

l f l l w , l

y ly ( f l ), l y ( f l). F C, SGI lly l l l (C f E

C 2006). I , l f l SGEI/SGI y C ECJ

ly f l y f

x l f l l . T C z

flll l l f EC T

, l, y l l ly l lly f

l (C f E C 2004). T w,

f f l w SGEI/SGI EC f l f

- , l l f f l l

.

T l l fcommon administraon, w C l

f, l l lz . T

f l f y l

l: (1) joined administraon (l l ly j/y l

ll), (2) decentralized administraon (lll, -xl ll w w ll/

l y y), (3) regulatory concert(l z f l

l ) (C 2004: 22). I l f j y ly

l l ll. Aly, ly w y f

x l w C 27 (1), w fllw y

w l l l y f ll (2 3). I , l l

agencicaiton opens up for new partnerships and autonomous contracts between execuve bodies

and the EU level (parcularly the Commission) and semi-detached (from ministerial departments)

regulatory authories at the naonal level. Thus naonal agencies become, as regards their policy

formulaon and implementaon acvies, to some extent parts of two administraons; on the one

hand their respecve naonal governments, on the other hand an emerging Union administraon

(E 2007: 2).


22/31


Nly, l l w

U lly f x l l . I y f

l f w- E . A C E (2008:

655) , l l l f E x lly

jy. O , C l x

, , l ly f l f

l l w w l ll.

A y l l x w f w

wl ly w acquis, w l l

SIGMA w l (My-Sl/Gz 2009: 6). Tf,

[t]he main requirements associated with the bureaucracy criterion emerged as sectoral capacity

to implement sectoral acquis; the development of European integraon co-ordinaon structures;

horizontal reform of the administraons including civil service laws and a strategy for comprehensive

public administraon reform; and, nally, ability to implement(D 2002: 179).

I w, y f ly ly l. I w

x y C, l

w , f y l w ly l

ly w C l yl (B/

D 2004: 142f; S/K 2004). T f C

All Sl ly, SAPARD ISPA lz . Nly,

f w f f f. Iq, l f - l l SAPARD w ly

ly f y w y.

I ll, w x f U , w lly

l l , l

f l , l . D

EU w l l f l

f. Sl f l l f l ly

w fl EU ll l f l l ll. I

l x, l y l w l l

y l . T l l w y

EU l f ll . I

y ll l l

l. T l fl

l l l, w ly lly f

w w y f EU .


23/31


3.4 Naonal Responses of Independent Implemenng Agencies

T l l l l EC

ly l l . A l

f l . T , , w,

, f l l

lly ly w E

(Tl/E 2007: 293). I l l f ll w

focuses on Europeanizaon ly f . Ay f

l l l

f fly f ll . Cqly,

f f l l ly- . I

w f Kll:

[t]he level of administrave adaptaon cannot be directly deduced from the respecve policy (where

one regulaon facilitates the naonal adaptaon more than another) nor do systemac dierences

exist in the countries regarding their capability to adapt. In other words, domesc change and

persistence follow no simple country-based or policy-based logic. As a consequence, we not only

observe administrave convergence, but also (and to a similar extend) divergence or persistence

of administrave dierences across member states(2001: 5).

W w ly w EU ly j y q l

w ly y. I wll f ly f

y f w f .T fllw l l l f E

.

D f EU-ll (Ol 2002), f l ,

w l f ly l y indirect administraon. T

f ly l f f EU . I w l

l.

The rst principle is the autonomy of naonal administrave systems, and thus structural

subsidiarity. Day to day management of Community law its concrete applicaon is conveniently

entrusted to the appropriate naonal administrave laws and relevant authories, which become

the outer branches of the Communitys administraon.(Nzz 2001: 5)

T l l y q l,

i.e. ecient, eecve and uniform enforcement of Community provisions. Domesc administraons,

by virtue of a duty of loyal co-operaon under the Treaty (arcle 10), are required to take all

necessary steps to ensure full implementaon of these provisions. Eecve implementaon of EC

Law (the principle of eecveness) is an obligaon imposed to Member States by the Treaes and

its fullment is veried by the European Court of Jusce on a case-by-case basis.(Nzz 2001: 5f)


24/31


T l Cy . I ll

f f l . Aly,

in the rst thirty years aer the Treaty of Rome, the common wisdom was that European

administrave law did not exist. [...] Implementaon of direcves, regulaons, and other formsof Community legislaon was the responsibility of naonal administraons subject to their unique

tradions of constuonal and administrave law, in what is know as indirect administraon

(B 2004: 3f; l C 2004).

I f l per se. O y,

. T wy ly l

lx ly l f y / l.

Taking a closer look, then, at the enforcement of Community law, there is no convergence on the

means of applicaon [...]; what counts is to ensure that applicaon meets certain standards of

eecveness. That this is both a radial approach and an eecve one hardly needs emphasis.

(Nzz 2001: 6)

I l f ll l ly w l

ll wll - yl Ez, wl ll l

l.

[A] main nding (although with many nuances) is that there has been no revoluonary change in

any of the naonal systems and no signicant convergence towards a common instuonal model,

homogenizing the domesc structures of the European states.(Ol 2001)

Sl l f l l f l l l

lly

compable with the maintenance of disnct naonal instuonal arrangements and there is even

reconrmaon and restoraon of established naonal structures and pracces. In sum, structural

diversity persists among the core domesc structures of governance in spite of increasing contact

and compeon between naonal models. Established naonal paerns are resistant but also

exible enough to cope with changes at the European level(Ol 2001).

Ul lwy C SAPARD ISPA, l f

l y l w l w l

lly l l f y l f

l. T Twinning w l l ll. Al

f EU l, f w y

f l f EU

l lz (Tl/Tl 2007). A ly w, ly,

l (lly f w ) l

lwy l . Tf, l f f w w

l q l ,


25/31


absence of a clear EU preference, coupled with the fragmented and diverse manner in which

the EU has chosen to police administrave reform in central and eastern Europe, reinforces

the signicance of domesc factors mediang the Europeanizaon of the accession applicants

(P/P 2004: 536).

I , f EU l l f ly- l

ly y f ly .

Tf, w lzl x

f - x. Sll, l y

ly l w l . T y l

lz w l f w

l . C y y f f ; lz

y f f l fl l

f l EU l f l . Il l l y f- f l f f

EU l-ll . El w w

x w l l l lz, w

f l l, w, f f.

4 C: M E E A S

T : wy l x f E wl l ll EU

l ? T q w E

l x ll E ly w

xl f l . N ql l ly

f l ll (Kll 2001: 36). T w f

EU ly, ll w EU w. G

l lxy f j , I wy fw

fy l y f w l l

w. Bl yly, l wy w EU w l

f w y l ll. I l,

w EU l ll , ly l

, l l y f

l f l l EU

ly l. T l f l w

y ll ll f ly .

I EU l l , endin itself through standards

ly means ly l, fw

l l Ez , w f ly l.


26/31


E f l ly , f w

l w l x ll .

Oly f l l f l f ql

, y, w Cy

w l. Tf, lly w l lly x f

dierenated coherence w .

T ly w ly l f l ly

l w E l. F w l , ly

l f l f l w l l,

EU l l. I q, E l f

l f w

ly w f zl

. T ql l ly w, w, jf , f, l f l, fl l .

T C l y l l EU l

xlly . I ll- f E

w . T EAS w l

l f M S y, l, lw l f

l y y f EU

M (C 1999: 6). O l l x, E

f l w

f l .

Oly, f q f y ,

l f lyl fw w l

l . T l z

f l y l f w y

w w l l q.


27/31


L

Beckmann, Andreas/Dissing, Henrik2004: EU El Sl Rl Dl Cl E E, : C, JA/D, Sy D. (E.): EU El E: Il C El Ply Cl E E,

L.

Benz, Arthur 2006: Ey G Vwl, : Bl, J/J, W/Nll, F (E.): PVS S 37, W, 29-49.

Bignami, Francesca 2004: Fw, : Lw Cy Pl 68: 1, 1-17.

Brzel, Tanja A. 2001: N-Cl E U. Ply Sl Af?, :Jl f E Pl Ply 8: 5, 803-824.

Brzel, Tanja A. 2002: S R E U: Il A Gy S, C.

Brzel, Tanja A. 2003: Hw E U I w M S, : Bl, S J./Lq, C (E.): M S f E U, Oxf, 4576.

Brzel, Tanja A. 2009: Nw M f G A EU: T Px f DlW, : Bzl, Tj A. (E.): C w A E U. Nw Mf El G, Hll l.

Brzel, Tanja A./Risse, Thomas 2000: W E H H: Ez D C, :EIP 4: 15, ://..//x/2000-015.; 15 Jy 2003.

Brzel, Tanja A./Risse, Thomas 2009: T Tf Pw f E: T E U D f I, : KFG W P N. 1, Al 2009, F Uy Bl.

Bossaert, Danielle/Demmke, Christoph/Nomden, Koen/Polet, Robert/Auer, Astrid 2001: Cl S E f F: T Nw Dl, M.

Brunsson, Nils 1989: T Oz f Hyy: Tl, D A O,C.

Bundeskanzleramt sterreich 2006: CAF W: B S f Cz y CAF, EIPA CCAF/2006/01.

Cardona, Francisco 1999: E Pl f Pl A, : SIGMA P N. 27, CCNM/SIGMA/PUMA(99)44/REV1.

Cassese, Sabino 2004: E A P, : Lw Cy Pl 68: 1,21-36.

Chi, Edoardo 2004: A P Il E A, : Lw CyPl 68: 1, 219-236.

Ci, Manuele/Rhodes, Marn 2007: Nw M f G EU: C Oj Nl Pf, : EUROGOV N. N-07-01.

Commission of the European Communies 2001: E G, : A W P Bl, 25.Jly 2001: COM(2001) 428 l.

Commission of the European Communies 2001: S f Gl I E: Cf C, : Ol Jl f E C C 17/4: 19, Jy.

Commission of the European Communies 2004: W P f l :C f C E Pl, Cl, EE Sl C C f R, Bl, 12. My 2004:COM(2004) 374 l

Commission of the European Communies 2006: C f C: Il

Cy L : Sl f l E U, :COM(2006) 177 l, Bl, 26. Al 2006: SEC(2006)516.


28/31


Conzelmann, Thomas 1998: E f Rl Dl Pl? L Ml-LlG A w T f Ply L Ply C, : EIP 2: 4, ://..//x/1998-004.; 5 S 2009.

Council of the European Union 2006: B Rl: Hl f I A, : COMPETDS150/06, Bl, Gl S f Cl, 1 M 2006.

Curn, Deirdre/Egeberg, Morten 2008: T I: E Al Ex O,: W E Pl 31: 4, 639-661.

Dimitrova, Antoaneta 2002: El, I-Bl EU A CyRq, : W E Pl 25: 4, 171190.

Dimitrova, Antoaneta 2005: Ez Cl S Rf Cl E E,I/L.

Egeberg, Morten 2007: I, : E, M (E.): Il Dy Tf f Ex Pl E, M, 1-5.

Elbasani, Arolda 2009: EU A Cly D Dwl: T L f

Ez Cll Cx, : KFG W P N. 2, Jly 2009, F UyBl.

EUPAN 2008: Fl R f T F F f EUPAN, : F Py f ECl, 30 N 2008.

European Council 2008: 50 M f D-Gl Rl f Pl A:Cl F f EUPAN, : Sl Py, B, 28-29 My 2008.

European Instute of Public Administraon 2006: CAF 2006, : EIPA R C, ://www../l/Fl/CAF/B2006/El_2006.f; 14 M 2006.

Falkner, Gerda/Hartlapp, Miriam/Treib, Oliver2005: Wl f Cl: Wy L A EU Il A Oly S-T T, : P ECPR JS, G, 14-19 Al.

Fournier, Jacques 1998: A Rf C O C Af Cl E E C E U, : SIGMA P N. 23,110-118.

Fournier, Jacques 1998: G E I - Rll Pl A, : SIGMAP N. 23, 119-126.

Franchini, Claudio 2004: E Pl G Nl A P, : Lw Cy Pl 68: 1, 183-196.

Goetz, Klaus H. 2001: E I Nl Ex: A C S f E?, :Gz, Kl H./Hx, S (E.): E Pl? E I NlSy, L, 211-231.

Goetz, Klaus H. 2006: E l Vwl Vwl?, :Bl, J/J, W/Nll, F (E.): PVS-S 37: Pl Vwl,472-490.

Green Cowles, Maria/Caporaso, James/Risse, Thomas (E.) 2001: Tf E: E D C, I.

Hrier, Adrienne/Klewer, Christoph/Knill, Christoph/Lehmkuhl, Dirk/Teutsch, Michael/Douillet, Anne-Ccile (E.) 2001: Dl E: T E U I Nl Ply M,L.

Hofmann, Herwig C. H. 2008: M E A S, : W E Pl 31:4, 662-676.

Idema, Timo/Kelemen, Daniel R. 2006: Nw M f G, O M f C- O Fl R H, : P E Pl Sy 7: 1, 108-123.


29/31


Jordan, Andrew2007: Ply C: A P F Nw I F E US?, : Hlz, K/J, Hl/Kll, C (E.): PFS S 38 -Tf, D Kz Pl, W, 944-953.

Knill, Christoph 2001: T E f Nl A: P f Il C P, C.

Knill, Christoph/Lehmkuhl, Dirk1999: Hw E M. D M f Ez, :EIP, 3: 7, ://..//x/1999-007.; 20 M 2001.

Knill, Christoph/Lehmkuhl, Dirk2002: T Nl I f EU Rly Ply: T EzM, : E Jl f Pll R 41: 2, 255-280.

Knill, Christoph/Lenschow, Andreas 2001: S y ll !: L D P fIl C, : C Pll S 34: 2, 187-215.

Lenschow, Andrea/Lieerink, Duncan/Veenman, Sietske 2005: W B S: A Fw fAly D F Ply C, : Jl f E Pl Ply 12:5, 797-816.

Mangenot, Michel (E.) 2005: Pl A S f Gl I: W K fE?, M.

Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik2009: Sly f Cl S Rf Cl E E FY EU A, : SIGMA P N. 44, GOV/SIGMA: (2009)1.

Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik/Goetz, Klaus H. 2009: T EU T: F N R A, :Jl f Pl Ply 16: 2, 325-336.

Nizzo, Carlo 2001: Nl Pl A E I, : SIGMA, ://1..///l///007286.f; 14 M 2009.

Olsen, Johan 2001: T My F f Ez, : ARENA W P 01: 2.

Olsen, Johan 2002: T My F f Ez, : Jl f C M S 40: 5, 921-

952.Olsen, Johan 2003: Tw E A S?, : Jl f E Pl Ply 10:

4, 506-531.

Papadimitriou, Dimitris/Phinnemore, David2004: Ez, Cly D C:T Tw Ex A Rf R, : Jl f C MS 42: 3, 619-639.

Polli, Christopher2002: Clfy C: S Sl Dl D PlM Rf, : Pl M Rw 4: 1, 471-492.

Radaelli, Claudio M. 2005: D w C: Hw Pll Cx A fRly I A, : Jl f E Pl Ply 12: 5, 924-943.

Schmidt, Michael/Knopp, Lothar (E.) 2004: Rf CEE-C w R EEl: I Bl Pl A Rf El S,Bl / Hl.

Schout, Adriaan/Jordan, Andrew2008: T E U G A AC, : Jl f E Pl Ply 15: 7, 957 - 974.

Sf, H/S, B 2003: T E A S f GA S P, : Il Rw f A S 89: 1,9-28.

Sissenich, Beate 2007: Bl S W Sy: E U El Tf fEU Sl Ply Pl Hy, L, MD.

Staes, Patrick/Thijs, Nick2005: R S f A f C A Fw(CAF) F Y, : EIPASCOPE 2005: 3, 41-49.


30/31


Tomolov, Eliska/Tulmets, Elsa 2007: Tw Pj: Aly Ex f l EU M S El B f Tw f w EU M S : E, M(E.): Il Dy Tf f Ex Pl E, M,379-428.

Trondal, Jarle/Egeberg, Morten 2007: Nl A E A S: G, C f w?, : E, M (E.): Il Dy Tf f Ex Pl E, M, 291-311.

Verheijen, A.J.G.2000: A Cy Dl: A R T?, : S Clf G Ply (T H), W 107; 22 N 2007.

Ziller, Jacques 1998: EU I Cl S Rf, : SIGMA P N. 23, 136-144.


31/31

T K-F - E A Ex

I R

T Kll-F (KFG) w f l- y G R F 2008. I - f KFG lly l

w l w y w ll f j .

T Kll-F T Tf Pw f E E Bl-B- lz w - . I x l f EU - f , lyz f l xl :

Iy Pl S

Cl, Cly By

C Rl E Exl Rl

structuring the european administrative space. channels of eu penetration and mechanisms of national...

Documents