Search

Administrative traditions have become a central concept in public policy and public administration research. Despite substantial insights gained, it is still unclear how administrative traditions affect the effectiveness of public policies. This paper addresses this shortcoming. It analyzes whether the effectiveness of a specific type of public policy, namely direct regulation, varies by a country's administrative tradition. Empirically, the focus is on regulations in the area of environmental protection. By analyzing the changes in air pollutant emissions of 14 OECD countries over a period of 25 years, the article finds that the effectiveness of environmental regulations is higher in countries with a managerial administrative tradition. While both managerial and legalistic bureaucracies can successfully implement minor policy reforms, it is primarily managerial systems that can effectively handle more ambitious regulations. Overall, it thus seems that a major benefit of managerial systems is the more flexible approach towards policy implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we explore the determinants of reforms intending to integrate policies and coordinate administrative units by focusing on necessary conditions. Firstly, we elaborate theoretical expectations about potential necessary conditions for cross-sectoral reforms. Secondly, we conduct a condition-oriented fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to examine our expectations, based on an original data set comparing policy integration and administrative coordination reforms, in environmental and unemployment policy, across 13 countries over 29 years. Our results indicate three necessary conditions for high reform intensity: external problem pressure is necessary for policy integration and administrative coordination in employment policy; either the strength or weakness of the reference party can take the role of necessary conditions depending on the policy field; low politicization of bureaucracy is necessary, especially for administrative coordination in environmental policy. These findings contribute to the development of a systematic theory of cross-sectoral policy and administrative change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on the termination or reduction of policies under the header of policy dismantling is becoming increasingly relevant within public policy analysis. To foster the understanding of dismantling this paper proposes to analyse post-legislative measures defining the setting of policy instruments and to look closely into how this phase provides room and opportunities for dismantling attempts. We investigate dismantling in EU sustainable consumption policy and concentrate on measures implementing the two major instruments in this area: the command-and-control ecodesign policy aiming at producers and the soft information instrument ecolabel aiming at consumers. While the legislative development of the two policies shows no sign of dismantling along the dimensions of policy intensity and density, investigating the respective implementation measures in three crucial product groups of electronic equipment the analysis points to a change in the instrument setting. Thus, the cases studied suggest that the dismantling research benefits from in-depth policy research uncover dismantling strategies that easily remain hidden from political attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We asked two members of the Editorial Board, Erik Jones and Martin Lodge, to act as jury and select what they considered to be the best article published in JEPP in 2020 (excluding those published as part of a "Special Issue"). The winner of 2020 JEPP Best Paper Prize is: Burns, Charlotte, Eckersley, Peter & Tobin, Paul (2020). Jury statement I " i We were very impressed by the articles that we read, but we had a shared enthusiasm for the originality of the paper by Charlotte Burns, Peter Eckersley and Paul Tobin. [Extracted from the article]

The European Union (EU) is widely assumed to be a global environmental leader, especially in addressing climate change, though this reputation suffered greatly when European leaders were sidelined during the 2009 United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen. Subsequently, however, the EU has made significant progress in extending its Emission Trading System to the aviation sector, one of the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gas emissions, and did so not only regionally, but also managed to get it onto the global policy agenda. This contribution investigates the EU's role in shaping the 2013 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) resolution committing 191 government signatories to developing a global market-based measure to cap international aviation's carbon pollution. While not exactly setting new environmental standards or achieving definitive regulatory success, the case illustrates the agenda-setting capacity of the EU through leveraging its market power and adopting an explicitly extra-territorial rule to induce potential regulatory co-operation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union's (EU's) regulations affect how business is conducted and consumers and the environment protected in parts of the world far beyond its borders. Moreover, the external impact of its regulations informs understandings of the EU as a global actor. This contribution makes three main arguments. First, the EU's regulatory influence varies systematically across different forms of regulatory interaction: regulatory competition and different forms of regulatory co-operation. The form of regulatory interaction, therefore, is a critical intervening variable between the EU's regulatory power resources and its influence. Second, within the different forms of regulatory co-operation the EU's influence varies in line with expectations derived from the literature. But, third, the magnitude of the EU's influence seems to be considerably less in regulatory co-operation than suggested by the literature on regulatory competition; a finding that reinforces the first argument. The contribution also introduces the rest of the special issue, identifying three overarching conclusions: the utility of the EU's regulatory power resources is context specific; debates about what kind of power the EU is, at least as previously conceived, are unproductive; and that the EU's engagement in the world is better explained through general theories of international political economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union (EU) is usually described as a promoter of global environmental governance, committed to sustainability and the precautionary principle. Regarding international fisheries management, however, the EU has repeatedly deviated from these principles. This article analyses the EU's policy in two Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs): the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). The EU's deviation from its environmental principles is explained by the weakness of the pro-environmental advocacy coalition in the EU's fisheries policy subsystem and the overcapacity of the EU's fleet, which first arose when European fishing nations were excluded from traditional fishing grounds during the creation of Exclusive Economic Zones in the 1970s. At the same time the article finds evidence of a trend towards sustainability and precaution in the EU's external fisheries policy since the mid-2000s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This contribution explores the European Union's (EU) efforts to 'globalize' EU environmental regulation. EU leadership on global environmental governance emerged as a result of the combined effects of domestic politics and international regulatory competition. The growing power of environmental interests in Europe from the late 1980s, coupled with dynamics of EU policy-making, led the EU to commit to ambitious environmental policies. Given this commitment, it was in the EU's international competitive interests to support international agreements that would pressure other jurisdictions to adopt similar environmental regulations. Promoting treaties that spread EU environmental norms internationally also served to legitimize EU rules and to shield them from legal challenges before world trade bodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ‘wider Europe’ initiative opens the possibility for a far-reaching association of the EU's eastern and southern European neighbours which, by offering ‘everything but institutions’ (Prodi), proposes an alternative to membership. This article presents this initiative as part of an ambitious external governance agenda by the enlarged Union with the aim to manage its new interdependence in an altered geopolitical context. Focusing on the conception of interdependence and the institutional configuration of EU relations with its near abroad, external governance is defined and examined in three prominent 'soft security' issues: justice and home affairs, environmental and energy policy. It is argued that external governance seeks to expand the 'legal boundary of the Union with only limited openings of its ‘institutional boundary’, thereby oscillating between an inclusionary and exclusionary approach towards its near abroad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]