Abstract
Soft law instruments such as recommendations, guidelines or communications do not entail jurisdictional control, but produce important legal and practical effects. The literature on soft law frequently praises these instruments for enhancing governance efficiency through flexible problem solving. On the other hand critiques stress a lack of legitimacy as soft law is typically adopted outside the legislative arena. Yet, relatively little is known about concrete effects it takes at the national level. On the basis of case study evidence from Germany, this chapter shows that despite being non-binding, EU soft law is frequently implemented. Comparing implementation of nine soft law instruments in financial market regulation, social and environmental policy the chapter highlights that actors implement soft EU instruments either in the form of soft or hard law. Efficiency gains are frequently a main driver of implementation, while legitimacy and accountability become a concern where responsibilities are blurred during implementation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
To assure anonymity they are referred to as interviews D1, D2 etc.
- 2.
This section is based on the SoLaR country report “The use of EU soft law by national courts and administration in the field of EU financial market regulation law” by Miriam Hartlapp and Angela Schwerdtfeger.
- 3.
Adjustment of Reports Regulation on Short Selling (Leerverkaufs-Anzeigeverordnung) and of Remuneration Ordinance for Institutions (Institutsvergütungsverordnung) & German Banking Act (Kreditwesengesetz).
- 4.
Higher Regional Court Frankfurt WpÜG 1/08, WpÜG 3/08 (22 January 2009), Federal Administrative Court, judgment 7 C 6/10 (24 May 2011) and Federal Court of Justice 5 StR 532/16 (10 Januray 2017).
- 5.
The national instrument is more outspoken on addressing remuneration (in relation to collective agreements and statutory minimum wage), a possible effect of the CJEU Rüffert ruling (C-346/06).
- 6.
This section is based on the SoLaR country report “The use of EU soft law by national courts and administration in the field of EU environmental law” by Andreas Hofmann.
- 7.
BVerwG 9. Senat, 9 A 20/05 on a bypass near the town of Halle (17 January 2007), BVerwG 4. Senat, 4 C 12/07 on the extension of a runway at the airport of Münster/Osnabrück (9 July 2009) and BVerwG 9. Senat, 9 C 6/12 on the construction of a bridge crossing the river Elbe near Dresden (Waldschlösschenbrücke, 6 March 2014).
- 8.
BVerwG 7. Senat 7 A 2/15 on Elbe dredging to allow larger freighters to reach the port of Hamburg (2 October 2014 and 9 February 2017), BVerwG 9. Senat, 9 A 18/15 and 19/15 (joint decision) on an Elbe tunnel north of Hamburg (10 November 2016) and BVerwG 7. Senat, 7 CN 1/14, on abolishment of a drinking water protected area (26 November 2015).
References
Becker, T. (2014). ESMA Leitlinien “Vergütungsgrundsätze und - verfahren (MiFID)” und BT 8 der MaComp - neue Vergütungsvorgaben für Wertpapierdienstleistungsunternehmen. Zeitschrift Für Bank Und Kapitalmarktrecht, 151–158.
Bekker, S. (2014). EU Coordination of Welfare States After the Crisis: Further Interconnecting Soft and Hard Law. International Review of Public Administration, 19(3), 296–307.
Benz, A. (2007). Accountable Multilevel Governance by the Open Method of Coordination? European Law Journal, 13(4), 505–522.
Benz, A., & Dose, N. (Eds.). (2010). Governance - Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Dawson, M. (2011). New Governance and the Transformation of European Law: Coordinating EU Social Law and Policy: Cambridge Studies in European Law and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Falkner, G., Treib, O., Hartlapp, M., & Leiber, S. (2005). Complying with Europe: EU Minimum Harmonisation and Soft Law in the Member States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Knauff, M. (2015). Öffentliches Wirtschaftsrecht. Einführung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Korkea-aho, E. (2015). Adjudicating New Governance: Deliberative Democracy in the European Union. Oxon: Routledge.
Möllers, T. M. J. (2010). Sources of Law in European Securities Regulation—Effective Regulation, Soft Law and Legal Taxonomy from Lamfalussy to de Larosière. European Business Organization Law Review, 11(3), 379–407.
Morano-Foadi, S., & Andreadakis, S. (2011). Reflections on the Architecture of the EU After the Treaty of Lisbon: The European Judicial Approach to Fundamental Rights. European Law Journal, 17(5), 595–610.
Pauwelyn, J., Wessel, R. A., & Wouters, J. (2014). When Structures Become Shackles: Stagnation and Dynamics in International Lawmaking. European Journal of International Law, 25(3), 733–763.
Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J. (2008). Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the EU. European Law Journal, 14(3), 271–327.
Senden, L. A. J. (2004). Soft Law in European Community Law. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing.
Senden, L. A. J., & Prechal, S. (2001). Differentiation in and Through Community Soft Law. In B. de Witte, D. Hanf, & E. Vos (Eds.), The Many Faces of Differentiation in EU Law (pp. 181–198). Antwerpen: Intersentia.
Shaffer, G. C., & Pollack, M. A. (2010). Hard v. Soft Law: Alternatives, Complements, and Antagonists in International Governance. Minnesota Law Review, 94(3), 706–799.
Terpan, F. (2015). Soft Law in the European Union—The Changing Nature of EU Law. European Law Journal, 21(1), 68–96.
von Bogdandy, A., Arndt, F., & Bast, J. (2004). Legal Instruments in European Union Law and Their Reform: A Systematic Approach on an Empirical Basis. Yearbook of European Law, 23(1), 91–136.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Jörg Broschek, Andreas Hofmann and Michèle Knodt for exchange and comments, Tobias Hübler for excellent research assistance and the interviewees for freely sharing their time and expertise with me.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hartlapp, M. (2019). Soft Law Implementation in the EU Multilevel System: Legitimacy and Governance Efficiency Revisited. In: Behnke, N., Broschek, J., Sonnicksen, J. (eds) Configurations, Dynamics and Mechanisms of Multilevel Governance. Comparative Territorial Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05511-0_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05511-0_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05510-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05511-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)