The Multi-Level Governance

Multi-Level Governance enables the EU to define goals and achieve them. This paper sets out to address the usefulness of Multi-Level Governance (MLG) in enabling the EU to define goals and achieve them. It begins by firstly defining the concept of MLG and describing features of the concept through the use of the available literature on the subject matter. It reviews the historical development of MLG over time and attempts to justify its growing influence within political science culminating in normative legislative recognition as a policy instrument in 2013. Secondly, it discusses the process of Europeanisation as it pertains to the everyday workings of member states of the EU, various institutions within the EU, and subnational actors and institutions of member states. Subnational actors may be created, influenced or altered by the process of Europeanisation (Tommel, 2016). This paper reviews how MLG has been utilised by the relevant EU actors and institutions to achieve their goals by assessing MLG through the sphere of EU Cohesion and Environmental Policy. Said to be born out of Cohesion Policy (Tommel, 2016) This paper also discusses some criticisms of MLG as it relates to it effectiveness of defining policy outcomes and achieving those outcomes. This paper draws of various political scientific perspectives to gauge the effectiveness of MLG in helping the EU achieve its aims. The outcomes of MLG in practice in some EU states will also form part of the analysis of MLG at the subnational level to assess whether MLG is a useful tool for the EU and its associative stakeholders in achieving policy aims. In summary, this paper is divided into three parts; analysis of the concept of MLG, the process of MLG and Europeanisation as it relates to achieving policy outcomes, potential drawbacks to MLG in achieving said outcomes and a theoretical perspective on the normative evolution of MLG. Multi-level Governance: An Historical Overview This paper sets out by first defining the concept of Multi-Level Governance as: " a diverse set of arrangements, a panoply of systems of coordination and negotiation, among formally

Eurobarometer surveys regularly confirm that in a number of policy fields, citizens consider the European Union to be the appropriate level for political action. Even a brief look into the Maastricht Treaty shows that the European Union has very broad political competencies. In the EU, collectively perceived problems are dealt with by means of targeted public policy with the aim of collectively binding decisions. This corresponds to a general notion of governance . However, the notion of governance is commonly used with reference to the state and cannot be easily applied to the institutional system of the European Union. On the other hand, the political integration of Western Europe has led to a qualitative change both in the conditions under which governments act and in their ability to govern in the interests of their citizens. At the same time, the European Union -and more precisely its supranational community component -has been transformed into a political order with an action capacity of its own. The transfer of political competencies to the European level proceeds in small steps in the daily practice of governance and of adjudication. In large intervals, the results of these processes are codified in treaty form by intergovernmental conferences. In the light of these briefly sketched features and developments, it seems fruitful to have a closer look at "governance in a dynamic multi-level system". The first part of this paper recalls the political and legal controversy about the nature of the political order of the Union with the aim of justifying the use of the term "governance" with reference to the EU. More or less isolated from the discussion on the nature of the EU and its possible or desirable future development, scholars increasingly deal with the effects of the integration process on responsible and effective governance within the member states. This debate is linked to a broader concern about the problems and prospects of governance under the conditions of increasing internationalization which finds its expression in the transnational expansion of functional subsystems of society, increasing interdependence and the globalization of problems. Policy analysis has started to deal with the changes in institutional structures and political processes caused by the Europeanization of policies. These questions are discussed in the second part which draws on the contributions to a forthcoming book edited by the authors (Jachtenfuchs/Kohler-Koch 1995). The third part focuses the meaning and the possibility of legitimate and efficient governance beyond the state framework. The fourth part discusses different institutional models for dealing with the problems of governance in a dynamic multi-level system resulting from the integration process. In the light of the perspective developed in this paper, the final part puts forward some general empirical, theoretical and normative questions for further research.

Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2014

In this contribution, an attempt will be made to draw lines between the concepts of (cooperative) federalism, multi-level governance (MLG) and the European directive as a multi-tiered instrument. Can directives be regarded as federal by nature? And if so, what normative conclusions might one draw therefrom in terms of their conceptual shape? Although the concept of federalism has the downside of being less inclusive than MLG (for example, non-state actors and civil society), the argument will be made that the ' federal label' is not the fi nal destination, but rather a possible bridge or 'missing link' between the EU directive and its potential for MLG. Stronger guarantees for more political decision-taking on at least two levels of government could strengthen the directive's function as a 'hub' for a constitutionally more 'adult' MLG. Th ese stronger guarantees could be forged through a more galvanized application of the principle of proportionality of which the EU directives would ideally be an embodiment. Achieving that will however not be an easy exercise, as one can learn from the experiences in Germany with the Rahmengesetz, an instrument designed to embody proportionality 'German style'.

Aл. Maльій, Дж. Keмпбелл, M.O'Нейлл: "Инститyты Европейскоґо Союза," Арxaнґельск 2002 (A. Malyi, J. Campbell and M. O'Neill: "Institutes of the European Union", Arkhangelsk 2002)., 2002

The European Union, since the Treaty of European Union 1992 comprises a three pillar structure, with some provisions resting with the roof of the temple structure, being EU matters which do not fall tidily into any of the three pillars. The first pillar, the EC, the original legal entity set up as the EEC under the Treaty of Rome 1958 (the EC Treaty), pillar 2, the Common Foreign and Security policy, and pillar 3, which started out its existence at the Justice and Home Affairs pillar, and which is now known as Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters (PJCCM), with some of the original Justice and Home Affairs matters having been transferred from pillar 3 into pillar 1 by the Treaty of Amsterdam. The most developed of these pillars is the first pillar, the European Community, and it is with that pillar that this paper concerns itself.

EUI Working Paper, LAW Series, 2002

German Law Journal, 2004

By Stephan Bitter * In March 2001, the second Speyerer Europa-Forum took place at the German University of Administrative Sciences, Speyer. High ranking members of the European administration as well as their counterparts from the German federal (Bund) and state (Länder) level met with scholars in order to discuss the implications of recent developments in European integration on the different administrative levels. The book comprises most of the presentations given at the forum. Although the scope of the symposium in Speyer seems to have been confined to a relatively narrow topicadministration and governance in the multilevel system of the European Union-, all the papers as well as the following discussions, which are also documented, make abundantly clear that a valuable debate on those issues is closely connected with the seminal question of the finality of the European Union, i.e. the question to which end the EU is further integrating. The discussion of this topic has gained new impetus after the German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer, had given his now famous Humboldt-speech in May 2000. 1 This speech led to an enormous amount of responses both from the political and the academic community. 2 After the Treaty * Member of the academic staff of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg. The author would like to thank Jürgen Bast and Markus Wagner for valuable comments.

Applied Research in Administrative Sciences, 2023

This paper explores the environment of European bureaucracy starting from the research question regarding the role and place of consultative institutions (the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of the Regions) in the European institutional system. The purpose of our investigation is to explain the nature and functionality of the institutions mentioned in the multilevel governance architecture of the European Union (EU). To achieve the proposed objective, we analyse the condition of advisory institutions as actors/agents of the European structure through the prism of the rationalist current and then we argue, through the grid of social constructivism, that the institutions in question serve, through their consultative attribute, also a role of legitimising supranational legislation with subnational applicability in the EU, against the background of the precariousness of legislative powers at regional and local level. Our research identifies the way in which the consultative institutions of the EU legitimise the community legislative process, a context in which the results obtained show the existence of a significant discordance between the need for legislation at the regional level and the much undersized legislative attribute at this level as a result of the constitutional limitations of the member states. The specified phenomenon feeds an imperfect subsidiarity and a deficient proximity within the EU, for the remedy of which the feasible solution consists in improving the administrative-legal cohesion in the EU through a potential reconsolidation of the Union treaties, which would generate a more homogeneous distribution of the administrative-territorial devolution.

In the past years there are an increasing number of attitudes and events that suggest a chronic need for a better communication between European Union and its citizens. One of the main issues concerns the perception, among citizens, of a lack of legitimacy and transparency of EU and its institutions. In order to identify and analyze some of the causes, we suggest that an important variable that should be considered is the communication strategy of the EU. In this article we explore some interpretations of legitimacy that can be associated to the perception of EU's institutions among the European citizens and the main points expressed by the European Commission with regard on the Communication Strategy. right to command its subordinates, as well as emphasizes the subordinates' right to disobey a particular authority. 6 The issue of legitimacy in the European Union arises in relation to new types of political formation, new centers of power and new policies, which represents both a united and divided society. Also, the EU represents both an intergovernmental organization and a supranational entity. The only certainty is that the EU is a continuously emerging supranational entity whose success in the future became more and more dependent on the citizens' support.

The Romanian Review of European Governance …

Ex mis etebatrum res? Ceridest viridepsena omaximil 19 Ex mis etebatrum res? Ceridest viridepsena omaximil

An arena in which the implications of increased subnational authority are particularly important is the European Union. In addition to the decentralization process experienced throughout Europe, the EU states also are undergoing the simultaneous process of supranational institution-building. We see increasing interest in regions and other subnational govemments and groups on the part of the EU, such as the long-standing importance placed on regional/structural policy and the recent creation of the Committee of the Regions in an advisory capacity. In turn, the emergence of subnational entities with increased political and economic power has potentially important consequences for European integration. The current paper first critiques the disparate literature that studies the transfer of governmental authority to a lower level within the nation-state. It then argues that an altemative conceptualization, "redistribution of authority", based on the institutional capacities, fu...