Advertisement

Soft Law Implementation in the EU Multilevel System: Legitimacy and Governance Efficiency Revisited

  • Miriam HartlappEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Comparative Territorial Politics book series (COMPTPOL)

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.

Keywords

Accountability European union Implementation Legitimacy Soft law 

Notes

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.

References

  1. 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.Google Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benz, A. (2007). Accountable Multilevel Governance by the Open Method of Coordination? European Law Journal, 13(4), 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benz, A., & Dose, N. (Eds.). (2010). Governance - Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  5. 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.Google Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Knauff, M. (2015). Öffentliches Wirtschaftsrecht. Einführung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  8. Korkea-aho, E. (2015). Adjudicating New Governance: Deliberative Democracy in the European Union. Oxon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Senden, L. A. J. (2004). Soft Law in European Community Law. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. 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.Google Scholar
  15. 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.Google Scholar
  16. Terpan, F. (2015). Soft Law in the European Union—The Changing Nature of EU Law. European Law Journal, 21(1), 68–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations