Advertisement

Customizing Europe: Four Member States Compared

  • Eva Thomann
Chapter
Part of the International Series on Public Policy book series (ISPP)

Abstract

By focusing on legal compliance, EU policy implementation research has neglected more fine-grained differences in transposition. The top-down focus on compliance might not necessarily explain why member states transcend the EU’s requirements to facilitate context-sensitive problem solving. Can prominent compliance theories account for customization? Moving beyond compliance, this chapter scrutinizes the conditions under which four European Union (EU) member states customize EU food safety policies. Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and formal theory evaluation, I assess how policy and country-level factors interact. Results reveal that different customization styles simultaneously reflect the interplay between domestic politics and institutions, and the “fit” of EU regulatory modes with domestic sectoral interventionist styles. Compliance approaches cannot fully explain these fine-grained patterns of Europeanization.

Keywords

Compliance Customization Europeanization Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis 

Supplementary material

432312_1_En_4_MOESM1_ESM.csv (3 kb)
Thomann_2018_chapter 4_fuzzy (CSV 2 kb)
432312_1_En_4_MOESM2_ESM.csv (2 kb)
Thomann_2018_chapter 4_raw (CSV 2 kb)
432312_1_En_4_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (604 kb)
Thomann 2018_United in diversity_supplementary online appendix (PDF 604 kb)

References

  1. Angelova, M., Dannwolf, T., & König, T. (2012). How robust are compliance findings? A research synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 19, 1269–1291 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.705051
  2. Armingeon, K., Careja, R., Weisstanner, D., Engler, S., Potolidis, P., & Gerber, M. (2012). Comparative political data set III 1990–2011. Institute of Political Science, University of Berne.Google Scholar
  3. Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2003). Conceptualizing the domestic impact of Europe. In K. Featherstone & C. M. Radaelli (Eds.), The politics of Europeanization (pp. 57–82). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2012). From Europeanisation to diffusion: Introduction. West European Politics, 35(1), 1–19 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2012.631310
  5. Bugdahn, S. (2006). Of Europeanization and Domestication: The implementation of the environmental information directive in Ireland, Great Britain and Germany. Journal of European Public Policy, 12, 177–199 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000311961
  6. Di Lucia, L., & Kronsell, A. (2010). The willing, the unwilling and the unable: Explaining implementation of the EU Biofuels Directive. Journal of European Public Policy, 17, 545–563 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501761003673559
  7. Duşa, A. (2018). QCA with R. A comprehensive resource. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  8. Falkner, G., Treib, O., Hartlapp, M., & Leiber, S. (2005). Complying with Europe: EU harmonisation and soft law in the member states (Themes in European governance). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hartlapp, M., & Falkner, G. (2009). Problems of operationalization and data in EU compliance research. European Union Politics, 10, 281–304 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116509103370
  10. Haverland, M. (2000). National adaptation to European integration: The importance of institutional veto points. Journal of Public Policy, 20(1), 83–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Knill, C. (2015). Implementation. In J. Richardson & S. Mazey (Eds.), European Union: Power and policy-making (371–397). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Knill, C., & Lenschow, A. (1998). Coping with Europe: The impact of British and German administrations on the implementation of EU environmental policy. Journal of Public Policy, 5, 595–614 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501769880000041
  13. Knill, C., & Lenschow, A. (2003). Modes of regulation in the governance of the European Union: Towards a comprehensive framework. European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 7(1).Google Scholar
  14. Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2012). Governance institutions and policy implementation in the European Union. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Constructing a policy-making state? Policy dynamics in the EU (1st ed., pp. 309–333). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1996). Institutional perspectives on political institutions. Governance, 9(3), 247–264 (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.1996.tb00242.x
  16. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1998). The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52, 943–969 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550699
  17. Mastenbroek, E. (2005). EU compliance: Still a ‘black hole’? Journal of Public Policy, 12, 1103–1120 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500270869
  18. Mastenbroek, E., & Kaeding, M. (2006). Europeanization beyond the goodness of fit: Domestic politics in the forefront. Comparative European Politics, 4, 331–354 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110078
  19. Perkins, R., & Neumayer, E. (2007). Implementing multilateral environmental agreements: An analysis of EU directives: An analysis of EU directives. Global Environmental Politics, 7, 13–41 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2007.7.3.13
  20. Pülzl, H., & Treib, O. (2006). Implementing public policy. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 89–107, Vol. 125). Boca Raton: crc Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ragin, C. C. (2009). Qualitative comparative analysis using fuzzy sets (fsQCA). In B. Rihoux & C. C. Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques (pp. 87–121, Applied social research methods series, Vol. 51). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  24. Sager, F. (2009). Governance and coercion. Political Studies, 57(3), 537–558 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00743.x
  25. Sager, F., Thomann, E., Zollinger, C., & Mavrot, C. (2011). Tierarzneimittelregulierung in Europa. Study mandated by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. Bern, Center of Competence for Public Management.Google Scholar
  26. Sager, F., Thomann, E., Zollinger, C., & Mavrot, C. (2014). Confronting theories of European integration: A comparative congruence analysis of veterinary drug regulations in five countries. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 16, 457–474 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2014.960244
  27. Schmidt, S. K. (2008). Beyond compliance: The Europeanization of member states through negative integration and legal uncertainty. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 10, 299–308 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980802231016
  28. Schneider, C. Q., & Rohlfing, I. (2013). Combining QCA and process tracing in set-theoretic multi-method research. Sociological Methods & Research, 42, 559–597 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113481341
  29. Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-Theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Siaroff, A. (1999). Corporatism in 24 industrial democracies: Meaning and measurement. European Journal of Political Research, 36(2), 175–205 (1999).  https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00467
  31. Spendzharova, A., & Versluis, E. (2013). Issue salience in the European Policy Process: What impact on transposition? Journal of European Public Policy, 20, 1499–1516 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.781802
  32. Steunenberg, B. (2007). A policy solution to the European Union’s transposition puzzle: Interaction of interests in different domestic arenas. West European Politics, 30(1), 23–49 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380601019639
  33. Steunenberg, B., & Toshkov, D. (2009). Comparing transposition in the 27 member states of the EU: The impact of discretion and legal fit. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(7), 951–970 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760903226625
  34. Toshkov, D. (2010). Taking stock: a review of quantitative studies of transposition and implementation of EU law. Institute for European Integration Research, Working paper No. 01/2010.Google Scholar
  35. Thomann, E. (2018). Food safety policy: Transnational, hybrid, wicked. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.  https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.540
  36. Töller, A. E. (2010). Measuring and comparing the Europeanization of national legislation: A research note. Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(2), 417–444 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2009.02058.xGoogle Scholar
  37. Treib, O. (2014). Implementing and complying with EU governance outputs. Living Reviews in European Governance.  https://doi.org/10.12942/lreg-2014-1
  38. Treib, O., Bähr, H., & Falkner, G. (2007). Modes of governance: Towards a conceptual clarification. Journal of European Public Policy, 14, 1–20 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1080/135017606061071406
  39. Tsebelis, G. (1995). Decision making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science, 25(3), 289–325 (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007225
  40. Vedung, E. (1998). Policy instruments: Typologies and theories. In M.-L. Bemelmans-Videc, R. C. Rist, & E. Vedung (Eds.), Carrots, sticks and sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation (pp. 21–58, Vol. 4). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  41. Versluis, E. (2003). Enforcement matters: Enforcement and compliance of European directives in four member states. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
  42. Versluis, E. (2007). Even rules, uneven practices: Opening the ‘black box’ of EU law in action. West European Politics, 30, 50–67 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380601019647

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Thomann
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations