Europeanized Solutions to Shared Problems? How Customization Affects Policy Outcomes

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


This chapter explores how customization affects the degree to which European Union (EU) food safety policies are successfully implemented. It empirically assesses the contradictory views of the relevance of discretion for effective problem-solving that prevail in the fields of policy implementation and better regulation. Focusing on the policy “in action”, I conceive of successful implementation as the absence of problems in the delivery of domestic outputs and outcomes. Results of a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of four member states and of Switzerland illustrates how customization serves as a strategy for problem-solving within an overarching framework of successful policy implementation. The evidence relativizes the EU’s “no gold-plating” policy. Depending on the regulatory context, extensive customization frequently contributes to implementation success.


Customization Discretion Implementation success Practical implementation 

Supplementary material

432312_1_En_6_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (269 kb)
FVO report Austria (PDF 268 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (316 kb)
FVO report France (PDF 315 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (237 kb)
FVO report Germany (PDF 237 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (288 kb)
FVO report Switzerland (PDF 287 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (832 kb)
FVO report UK (PDF 832 kb)
Thomann 2018_chapter 6_180308 (R 24 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM7_ESM.csv (4 kb)
Thomann 2018_chapter 6_fuzzy (CSV 4 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM8_ESM.csv (16 kb)
Thomann 2018_chapter 6_raw (CSV 15 kb)
432312_1_En_6_MOESM9_ESM.pdf (604 kb)
Thomann 2018_United in diversity_supplementary online appendix (PDF 604 kb)


  1. Beugelsdijk, M., & Eijffinger, S. C. W. (2005). The effectiveness of structural policy in the European Union: An empirical analysis for the EU-15 in 1995–2001. Journal of Common Market Studies, 43, 37–51 (2005).
  2. Biela, J., Hennl, A., & Kaiser, A. (2012). Combining federalism and decentralization: Comparative case studies on regional development policies in Switzerland, Austria, Denmark, and Ireland. Comparative Political Studies, 45(4), 447–476 (2012).
  3. Bondarouk, E., & Liefferink, D. (2017). Diversity in sub-national EU implementation: The application of the EU Ambient Air Quality directive in 13 municipalities in the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19, 733–753 (2017).
  4. Bondarouk, E., & Mastenbroek, E. (2018). Reconsidering EU Compliance: Implementation performance in the field of environmental policy. Environmental Policy and Governance, 28, 15–27 (2018).
  5. Brodkin, E. Z. (2011). Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 253–277 (2011).
  6. 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).
  7. Bussmann, W., Kloeti, U., & Knoepel, P. (Eds.). (1997). Einführung in die Politikevaluation. Basel: Helbing und Lichtenhahn.Google Scholar
  8. Davidson, N. (2006). Davidson Review: Final report. Accessed 7 February 2018.
  9. Dimitrova, A., & Steunenberg, B. (2013). Living in parallel universes? Implementing European movable cultural heritage policy in Bulgaria. Journal of Common Market Studies, 51(2), 246–263 (2013).
  10. Dörrenbächer, N. (2017). Europe at the frontline: Analysing street-level motivations for the use of European Union migration law. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1328–1347 (2017).
  11. Dörrenbächer, N., & Mastenbroek, E. (2017). Passing the Buck? Analyzing the delegation of discretion after transposition of European Union law. Regulation & Governance.
  12. Elmore, R. F. (1979). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94(4), 601–616 (1979). 10.2307/2149628Google Scholar
  13. Exadaktylos, T., & Zahariadis, N. (2014). Quid pro Quo: Political trust and policy implementation in Greece during the age of austerity. Politics & Policy, 42, 160–183 (2014).
  14. 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
  15. Featherstone, K., & Radaelli, C. M. (Eds.). (2003). The politics of Europeanization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Food and Veterinary Office (FVO). (2009). Final report of a specific audit carried out in the United Kingdom from 16 February to 23 February in order to evaluate the control of residues and contaminants and the use of veterinary medicinal products food producing animals in the context of a general audit: DG(SANCO)/ 2009–8128 – MR – FINAL.Google Scholar
  17. Food and Veterinary Office (FVO). (2011). Final report of a mission carried out in Switzerland from 17 to 21 January 2011 in order to evaluate the monitoring of residues and contaminants in live animals and aninmal products, including controls on veterinary medicinal products: DG(SANCO) 2011–8907 – MR FINAL.Google Scholar
  18. Franchino, F. (2007). The powers of the Union: Delegation in the EU. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gollata, J. A. M., & Newig, J. (2017). Policy implementation through multi-level governance: Analysing practical implementation of EU air quality directives in Germany. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1308–1327 (2017).
  20. Gulbrandsen, C. (2011). The EU and the implementation of international law: The case of ‘sea-level bureaucrats’. Journal of European Public Policy, 18, 1034–1051 (2011).
  21. Hartlapp, M. (2014). Enforcing social Europe through labour inspectorates: Changes in capacity and cooperation across Europe. West European Politics, 37, 805–824 (2014).
  22. Hartlapp, M., & Falkner, G. (2009). Problems of operationalization and data in EU compliance research. European Union Politics, 10, 281–304 (2009).
  23. Héritier, A. (1996). The accommodation of diversity in European policy-making and its outcomes: Regulatory policy as a patchwork. Journal of European Public Policy, 3, 149–167 (1996).
  24. Hinterleitner, M., Sager, F., & Thomann, E. (2016). The politics of external approval: Explaining the IMF’s evaluation of austerity programmes. European Journal of Political Research, 55, 549–567 (2016).
  25. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243 (2003).
  26. Hooghe, L., Marks, G., & Schakel, A. H. (2010). The rise of regional authority: A comparative study of 42 democracies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Howlett, M. (2009). Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42, 73–89 (2009).
  28. Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2007). Design principles for policy mixes: Cohesion and coherence in ‘new governance arrangements’. Policy and Society, 26, 1–18 (2007).
  29. Hupe, P. L. (2013). Dimensions of discretion: Specifying the object of street-level bureaucracy research. Der moderne Staat – dms, 6(2), 425–440.Google Scholar
  30. Ingram, H., & Schneider, A. (1991). The choice of target populations. Administration & Society, 23(3), 333–356 (1991).
  31. Jans, J. H., Squintani, L., Aragão, A., Macrory, R., & Wegener, B. W. (2009). ‘Gold plating’ of European Environmental Measures? Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 6, 417–435 (2009).
  32. Jensen, C. B. (2007). Implementing Europe: A question of oversight. European Union Politics, 8, 451–477 (2007).
  33. Keman, H. (2000). Federalism and policy performance: A conceptual and empirical inquiry. In U. Wachendorfer-Schmidt (Ed.), Federalism and political performance (pp. 196–227, Routledge/ECPR studies in European political science, Vol. 16). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Knill, C. (1998). European policies: The impact of national administrative traditions. Journal of Public Policy, 18(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Knill, C. (2015). Implementation. In J. Richardson & S. Mazey (Eds.), European Union: Power and policy-making (pp. 371–397). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2012a). 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
  37. Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2012b). Public policy: A new introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Knill, C., Schulze, K., & Tosun, J. (2012). Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: Exploring a complex relationship. Regulation & Governance, 6, 427–444 (2012).
  39. Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Varone, F., & Hill, M. (2011). Public policy analysis. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  41. Majone, G. (1999). Regulation in comparative perspective. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 1, 309–324 (1999).
  42. Marsh, D., & McConnell, A. (2010). Towards a framework for establishing policy success. Public Administration, 88, 564–583 (2010).
  43. Matland, R. E. (1995). Synthesizing the implementation literature: The ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5, 145–174 (1995).
  44. McCubbins, M. D., & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28(1), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Morris, R. K. A. (2011). The application of the Habitats Directive in the UK: Compliance or gold plating? Land Use Policy, 28, 361–369 (2011).
  46. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  47. Radaelli, C. M., & Meuwese, A. (2009). Better regulation in Europe: Between public management and regulatory reform. Public Administration, 87, 639–654 (2009).
  48. Radaelli, C. M., & Wagemann, C. (2018). What did I leave out? Omitted variables in regression and qualitative comparative analysis. European Political Science, 15, 69 (2018). Scholar
  49. 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
  50. Rutz, S., Mathew, D., Robben, P., & Bont, A. de. (2017). Enhancing responsiveness and consistency: Comparing the collective use of discretion and discretionary room at inspectorates in England and the Netherlands. Regulation & Governance, 11, 81–94 (2017).
  51. Sabatier, P. A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 21–48 (1986).
  52. Sabatier, P. A., & Mazmanian, D. (1980). The implementation of public policy: A framework of analysis. Policy Studies Journal, 8, 538–560 (1980).
  53. Sager, F., & Rüefli, C. (2005). Die Evaluation öffentlicher Politiken mit föderalistischen Vollzugsarrangements: Eine konzeptionelle Erweiterung des Stufenmodells und eine praktische Anwendung. Swiss Political Science Review, 11, 101–129 (2005).
  54. Sager, F., Ritz, A., & Bussmann, K. (2010). Utilization-focused performance reporting. Public Money & Management, 30(1), 55–62 (2010).
  55. 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
  56. Sager, F., Thomann, E., Zollinger, C., & Mavrot, C. (2014a). 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).
  57. Sager, F., Thomann, E., Zollinger, C., van der Heiden, N., & Mavrot, C. (2014b). Street-level bureaucrats and new modes of governance: How conflicting roles affect the implementation of the Swiss Ordinance on Veterinary Medicinal Products. Public Management Review, 16, 481–502 (2014).
  58. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Introduction: The problem-solving capacity of multi-level governance. Journal of Public Policy, 4, 520–538 (1997).
  59. 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).
  60. Schneider, C. Q., & Rohlfing, I. (2013). Combining QCA and process tracing in set-theoretic multi-method research. Sociological Methods & Research, 42, 559–597 (2013).
  61. 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
  62. Shapiro, M. (1999). Implementation, discretion and rules. In J. A. E. Vervaele & G. Betlem (Eds.), Implementation, discretion and rules (pp. 27–34, European monographs, Vol. 20). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  63. Skjærseth, J. B., & Wettestad, J. (2008). Implementing EU emissions trading: Success or failure? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 8, 275–290 (2008).
  64. 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).
  65. Thomann, E. (2015). Is output performance all about the resources? A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of street-level bureaucrats in Switzerland. Public Administration, 93, 177–194 (2015).
  66. Thomann, E., & Sager, F. (2017a). Hybridity in action: Accountability dilemmas of public and for-profit food safety inspectors in Switzerland. In P. Verbruggen & H. Havinga (Eds.), Hybridization of food governance: Trends, types and results (pp. 100–120). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Thomann, E., & Sager, F. (2017b). Toward a better understanding of implementation performance in the EU multilevel system. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1385–1407 (2017).
  68. Thomann, E., & Zhelyazkova, A. (2017). Moving beyond (non-)compliance: The customization of European Union policies in 27 countries. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1269–1288 (2017).
  69. Thomann, E., van Engen, N., & Tummers, L. (2018). The necessity of discretion: A behavioral evaluation of bottom-up implementation theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.
  70. Thomann, E., Lieberherr, E., & Ingold, K. (2016). Torn between state and market: Private policy implementation and conflicting institutional logics. Policy and Society, 35, 57–69 (2016).
  71. 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
  72. Toshkov, D. (2012). Compliance with EU law in Central and Eastern Europe. L’Europe en Formation, 364, 91–109 (2012).
  73. Toshkov, D., & Haan, L. de. (2013). The Europeanization of asylum policy: An assessment of the EU impact on asylum applications and recognitions rates. Journal of European Public Policy, 20, 661–683 (2013).
  74. Tosun, J. (2012). Environmental monitoring and enforcement in Europe: A review of empirical research. Environmental Policy and Governance, 22, 437–448 (2012).
  75. Treib, O. (2014). Implementing and complying with EU governance outputs. Living Reviews in European Governance.
  76. Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. J. J. M. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527–547 (2014).
  77. Versluis, E. (2003). Enforcement matters: Enforcement and compliance of European directives in four member states. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
  78. Versluis, E. (2007). Even rules, uneven practices: Opening the ‘black box’ of EU law in action. West European Politics, 30, 50–67 (2007).
  79. Voermans, W. (2009). Gold-plating and double banking: an overrated problem? In H. J. Snijders & S. Vogenauer (Eds.), Content and meaning of national law in the context of transnational law (pp. 79–88). München: Sellier.Google Scholar
  80. Whitford, A. B. (2007). Decentralized policy implementation. Political Research Quarterly, 60, 17–30 (2007).
  81. Winter, S. (2003). Implementation perspectives: Status and reconsideration. In B. G. P. J. Pierre (Ed.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 212–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhelyazkova, A., Kaya, C., & Schrama, R. (2016). Decoupling practical and legal compliance: Analysis of member states’ implementation of EU policy. European Journal of Political Research, 55, 827–846 (2016).

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations