Abstract
Public administration has a central role in the preparation and implementation of public policies, and in regulating what kinds of actor have access to processes of policy-making. In complex political-administrative orders, public administration has a compound role that extends across most stages of the policy process. Its influence lies in taking initiative, shaping the policy agenda and the policy alternatives, and drafting policy texts before formal decisions are made. Public administrative bodies also exert the influence in the process of putting formal political decisions into practice, interpreting the effects of policy and channelling feedback on how policies work back to the political-administrative system. This policy-making complexity is also recognizable in the EU. The overall development of the EU shows signs of an emerging executive system upheld by a political-administrative order that sets it apart from other international organizations and implies a profound transformation of executive politics within the EU (Egeberg, 2006b). The European Commission harbours an organized capacity for policy-making at the supranational level and carries most of the organizational and behavioural characteristics of ‘normal’ executive bodies at the national level (Egeberg, 2006b).
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
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Afdal, H. W. (2012) ‘Constructing knowledge for the teaching profession. A comparative analysis of policy making, cunicula content, and novice teachers’ knowledge relations in the cases of Finland and Norway’, PhD dissertation, Oslo: University of Oslo.
Barnett, M. N. and Finnemore, M. (2004) Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics, Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Beyers, J. (2005) ‘Multiple embeddedness and socialization in Europe: The case of council officials’ International Organization, 59(04), 899–936.
Bouwen, P. (2002) ‘Corporate lobbying in the European Union: The logic of access’ Journal of European Public Policy, 9(3), 365–390.
Bouwen, P. (2004) “The logic of access to the European Parliament: Business lobbying in the committee on economic and monetary affairs” Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(3), 473–496.
Chalmers, D. (2003) ‘The reconstitution of European public spheres’ European Law Journal, 9(2), 127–189.
Checker, J. T. (2003) ‘“Going native” in Europe? Theorizing social interaction in European institutions’ Comparative Political Studies, 36(1-2), 209–231.
Christiansen, P. M. and Rommetvedt, H. (1999) ‘From corporatism to lob-byism? Parliaments, executives, and organized interests in Denmark and Norway’ Scandinavian Political Studies, 22(3), 195–220.
Coen, D. and Thatcher, M. (2008) ‘Network governance and multi-level delegation: European networks of regulatory agencies’ Journal of Public Policy, 28(01), 49–71.
Corbett, A. (2003) ‘Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneurs: Towards a new history of higher education in the European Community’ European Journal of Education, 38(3), 315–330.
Corbett, A. (2005) Universities and the Europe of knowledge: Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneur ship in European Union higher education policy, 1955–2005, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Curtin, D. and Egeberg, M. (2008) ‘Tradition and innovation: Europe’s accumulated executive order’ West European Politics, 31(4), 639–661.
Egeberg, M. (2006a) ‘Balancing autonomy and accountability: Enduring tensions in the European Commission’s development’, in M. Egeberg (ed), Multilevel union administration. The transformation of executive politics in Europe, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 31–50.
Egeberg, M. (2006b) ‘Europe’s executive centre in the melting pot: An overview’, in M. Egeberg (ed), Multilevel union administration, Houndmills: Palgrave, 1–16.
Egeberg, M., (ed) (2006c) Multilevel union administration. The transformation of executive politics in Europe, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Egeberg, M. (2012) ‘How bureaucratic structure matters: An organizational perspective’, in B. G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds), The sage handbook of public administration, 2nd edition, London: Sage, 157–168.
Egeberg, M., Schaefer, G. F., and Trondal, J. (2003) ‘The many faces of EU committee governance’ West European politics, 26(3), 19–40.
ETUC (2013) ‘ETUC position on the European commission communication on rethinking education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes’ ETUC the European trade Union confederation: Adopted at the executive committee meeting of 5–6 March 2013, http://www.etuc.org/documents/etuc-position-european-commission-communication-rethinking-education-investing-skills#.VBv0kaM4WUk
European Commission (2012) ‘Rethinking Education investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes’, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions’ Strasbourg, 20.11.2012, COM(2012) 669 final.
Gornitzka, Å. (2006) ‘The open method of coordination as practice — A watershed in European education policy?’, Arena Working Papers 16/06, Arena centre for European studies, Oslo.
Gornitzka, Å. (2007) “The Lisbon Process: A supranational policy perspective”, in P. Maassen and J. P. Olsen (eds), University dynamics and European integration, Dordrecht: Springer, 155–178.
Gornitzka, Å. (2010) ‘Bologna in context: A horizontal perspective on the dynamics of governance sites for a Europe of knowledge’ European Journal of Education, 45(4), 535–548.
Gornitzka, Å. and Sverdrup, U. (2008) ‘Who consults? The configuration of expert groups in the European Union’ West European Politics, 31(4), 725–750.
Gornitzka, Å. and Sverdrup, U. (2010) ‘Enlightened decision making? The role of scientists in EU governance’ Politique Europénne, 32(3), 125–149.
Gornitzka, Å. and Sverdrup, U. (2011) ‘Access of experts: Information and EU decision-making’ West European politics, 34(1), 48–70.
Greenwood, J. (2003) Interest representation in the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Greenwood, J. (2007) ‘Organized civil society and democratic legitimacy in the European Union’ British Journal of Political Science, 37(2), 333–357.
Haas, E. B. (1990) When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international organizations, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Héritier, A. (1999) Policy-making and diversity in Europe. Escape from deadlock, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jasanoff, S. (2005) Designs on nature — Science and democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Johansson, J. (1992) Det statliga kommittéväsendet: Kunskap, kontroll, konsensus, Stockholm: J. Johansson.
Kassim, H. and Menon, A. (2004) ‘European integration since the 1990s: Member states and the European Commission’, Arena Working Paper 06/04.
Kassim, H., Peterson, J., Bauer, M. W., Connolly, S. J., Dehousse, R., Hooghe, L. and Thompson, A. (2013) The European Commission of the twenty-first century, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kohler-Koch, B. (2009) “The three worlds of European civil society — What role for civil society for what kind of Europe?” Policy and Society, 28, 47–57.
Laffan, B. and Shaw, C. (2005) ‘Classifying and mapping OMC in different policy areas’, NEWGOV reference number 02/D09.
Lequesne, C. (2000) “The European Commission: A balancing act between autonomy and dependence”, in K. Neunreither and A. Wiener (eds), European integration after Amsterdam: Institutional dynamics and prospects for democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 36–51.
Lowi, T.J. (1972) ‘Four systems of policy, politics, and choice’ Public Administration Review, 32(4), 298–310.
Martin, L. L. and Simmons, B. A. (1998) ‘Theories and empirical studies of international institutions’, International Organization, 52(4), 729–757.
Mazey S. and Richardson, J. (2001) ‘Institutionalizing promiscuity: Commission-interest group relations in the European Union’, in A. Stone Sweet, W. Sandholtz and N. Higstein (eds), The institutionalization of Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 71–93.
Metz, J. (2013) ‘Expert groups in the European Union: A sui generis phenomenon?’ Policy and Society, 32(3), 267–278.
Parsons, W. (2002) ‘From muddling through to muddling up — evidence based policy making and the modernisation of British government’ Public Policy and Administration, 17(3), 43–60.
Pepin, L. (2007) ‘The history of EU cooperation in the field of education and training: How lifelong learning became a strategic objective’ European Journal of Education, 42(1), 121–132.
Peters, B. G. (1995) The politics of bureaucracy, New York: Longman Publishers USA.
Radaelli, C.M. (1999) ‘The public policy of the European Union: Whither politics of expertise?’ Journal of European Public Policy, 6(5), 757–774.
Radaelli, C. M. (2003) The open method of coordination: A new governance architecture for the European Union? 1, Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies: Stockholm.
Rhinard, M. (2002) “The democratic legitimacy of the European Union committee system” Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 15(2), 185–210.
Rich, R. R (1991) ‘Knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilization: Perspectives of the founding editor of knowledge’ Science Communication, 12(3), 319–337.
Richardson, J. (2000) ‘Government, interest groups and policy change’, Political Studies, 48(5), 1006–1025.
Rokkan, S. (1966) ‘Norway: Numerical democracy and corporate pluralism’, in R. A. Dahl (ed), Political oppositions in Western democracies, New Haven: Yale University Press, 70–115.
Rothstein, B. (2012) ‘Political legitimacy for public administration’, in B. G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds), The Sage handbook of public administration, 2nd edition, London: Sage Publications, 407–419.
Scharpf, F. W. (2002) ‘Legitimate diversity: The new challenge of European integration’ Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po, Centre d’études européennes at Sciences Po, Paris.
Schmitter, P. C. (1977) ‘Modes of interest intermediation and models of societal change in Western Europe’ Comparative Political Studies, 10(1), 7–38.
Simon, H. A. (1976[1945]) Administrative behavior: A study of decision-Making processes in administrative organization, 3rd edition, New York: Free Press.
Skogen, M. (2010) ‘Business as usual? Interest groups in the European Union’ Oslo: Master’s thesis, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo.
Smismans, S. (2008) ‘New modes of governance and the participatory myth’ West European Politics, 31(5), 874–895.
Streeck, W. and Schmitter, P. C. (1991) ‘From national corporatism to transnational pluralism: Organized interests in the Single European Market’ Politics and Society, 19(2), 133–164.
Trondal, J. (2010) An emergent European executive order, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weber, M. (1971) Makt og byråkrati: Essays om politikk og klasse, samfunnsforskning og verdier, Oslo: Gyldendal.
Zetilin, J. (2005) ‘The open method of coordination in action: Theoretical promise, empirical realities, reform strategy’, in J. Zeitlin, P. Pochet and W. L. Magnusson (eds), The open method of coordination in action: The European employment and social inclusion strategies, Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang, 447–503.
Zito, A. R. (2001) ‘Epistemic communities, European Union governance and the public voice’ Science and Public Policy, 28(6), 465–476.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Åse Gornitzka
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gornitzka, Å. (2015). ‘All in’? Patterns of Participation in EU Education Policy. In: Souto-Otero, M. (eds) Evaluating European Education Policy-Making. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137287984_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137287984_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-44989-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28798-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Education CollectionEducation (R0)