Comparative Summary and Empirical Results

Abstract

On the basis of a most similar case comparison, five policies that were formulated and implemented in the Copenhagen framework have been analyzed in order to identify the conditions under which policy making generates institutionalization processes. Regarding the necessary condition, in all cases under perspective, strong functional pressure was generated by the creation and use of new steering instruments in the Copenhagen framework. The formulation and implementation of policies—notwithstanding their restriction to external states before entering the Union—did not lead to the automatic termination of the policies as the design of the Copenhagen framework foresaw. Member state governments had to respond either by tolerating extended supranational capacities or by actively preempting them. Regarding the sufficient condition, the expected potential for political spillover proved decisive. Accordingly, if new supranational action capacity is limited to nonhierarchical steering instruments, spill-in occurs because it grants member state actors the politically dominant role. However, policies matter beyond the mode of governance because different arenas of power entail different political relationships and modes of conflict resolution. The EU’s bias for regulatory and distributive policies is also reflected in the case studies.