The methods of community in EU decision-making and administrative rivalry in the council's infrastructure
By: LEWIS, Jeffrey
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: London : Routledge, June 2000Journal of European Public Policy 7, 2, p. 261-289Abstract: Decision-making in the European Union (EU) takes place in a rich normative environment and context of interaction where compromise is part of the organizational culture. A prominent example is the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) which has evolved a distinct style of making decisions. The main features include: diffuse reciprocity, thick trust, mutual responsiveness, a consensus-reflex, and a culture of compromise. These features, or 'methods of community,' suggest a need to refine theories of EU decision-making to take into account the sociality and normative environment in which interests are defined and defended. This article also diagnoses a robust level of administrative rivalty among EU preparatory committees operating within the Council's infrastructure, which can have deleterious effects and unintended consequences for the decision-making process. The rivalry is especially pronounced over the competencies for pillars two (Common Foreign and Security Policy) and three (Justice and Home Affairs).
Decision-making in the European Union (EU) takes place in a rich normative environment and context of interaction where compromise is part of the organizational culture. A prominent example is the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) which has evolved a distinct style of making decisions. The main features include: diffuse reciprocity, thick trust, mutual responsiveness, a consensus-reflex, and a culture of compromise. These features, or 'methods of community,' suggest a need to refine theories of EU decision-making to take into account the sociality and normative environment in which interests are defined and defended. This article also diagnoses a robust level of administrative rivalty among EU preparatory committees operating within the Council's infrastructure, which can have deleterious effects and unintended consequences for the decision-making process. The rivalry is especially pronounced over the competencies for pillars two (Common Foreign and Security Policy) and three (Justice and Home Affairs).
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer
There are no comments for this item.