This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Steunenberg, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Turning Swift Policy-making into Deadlock and Delay

National Policy Coordination and the Transposition of EU Directives

Leiden University, The Netherlands

Most member states of the European Union (EU) have some difficulty in transposing EU directives. Despite the obligation to comply with EU law, member states are often slow to adopt national policies implementing directives. In this paper I analyse this problem by focusing on the coordination of transposition in the domestic policy arena. Coordination is approached as a game in which one or more higher-level players decide on policy when lower-level players are unable to make a decision. Based on the model developed in the paper, lower-level players sometimes appear to have discretion in shaping the policy transposing a directive. Furthermore, if a single player coordinates the transposition process, the implementing policy differs from the policy specified by the directive. However, a decisionmaking process with more than one higher-level player can result in deadlock, leading to a literal transposition of a directive. Moreover, deadlock between the deciding players may delay the transposition process. Both mechanisms are illustrated by two cases of decision-making on EU directives in The Netherlands: the cocoa and chocolate products directive and the laying hens directive. The analysis shows that the framework developed in this paper contributes to the understanding of transposition.

Key Words: domestic players • EU policy process • national policy coordination • transposition

European Union Politics, Vol. 7, No. 3, 293-319 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1465116506066258


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Luetgert and T. Dannwolf Mixing Methods: A Nested Analysis of EU Member State Transposition Patterns European Union Politics, September 1, 2009; 10(3): 307 - 334. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Hartlapp and G. Falkner Problems of Operationalization and Data in EU Compliance Research European Union Politics, June 1, 2009; 10(2): 281 - 304. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Zhelyazkova and R. Torenvlied The Time-Dependent Effect of Conflict in the Council on Delays in the Transposition of EU Directives European Union Politics, March 1, 2009; 10(1): 35 - 62. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Toshkov Embracing European Law: Compliance with EU Directives in Central and Eastern Europe European Union Politics, September 1, 2008; 9(3): 379 - 402. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Mastenbroek and T. Veen Last Words on Delegation?: Examining The Powers of the Union European Union Politics, June 1, 2008; 9(2): 295 - 311. [PDF]

				M. Kaeding Lost in Translation or Full Steam Ahead: The Transposition of EU Transport Directives across Member States European Union Politics, March 1, 2008; 9(1): 115 - 143. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Toshkov Transposition of EU social policy in the new member states Journal of European Social Policy, November 1, 2007; 17(4): 335 - 348. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Perkins and E. Neumayer Do Membership Benefits Buy Regulatory Compliance?: An Empirical Analysis of EU Directives 1978--99 European Union Politics, June 1, 2007; 8(2): 180 - 206. [Abstract] [PDF]