Reconciling credibility and accountability: how expert bodies achieve credibility through accountability processes.

Arguments about the legitimate role of expert bodies in Europe often centre on the following question: Does their independence help to make policies credible or should they be made democratically accountable to principals and stakeholders? This article claims this is a false dichotomy. It does so by arguing theoretically that credibility can be achieved through accountability processes. Then, drawing on exemplary case studies, this article identifies distinctive accountability processes for ensuring credibility: revisable competencies, deliberation over institutional design, and engagement in public justification. Credibility and accountability are thus not conflicting, but coconstitutive aims of delegation to expert bodies. The analysis provides European policy makers and others with a guide for thinking beyond the contrast between 'democratic accountability' and 'independent credibility'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]