Multilevel governance and public accountability in Europe:
Which institutions, which practices, which deficit?

Led by: prof. dr. mr. Mark Bovens, prof. dr. Deirdre Curtin, prof. dr. Paul 't Hart
Participants: drs. Gijs Jan Brandsma, Madalina Busuioc MA, dr. Marianne van de Steeg

This research is fully funded by NWO, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, under the Shifts in governance programme (project number 450-04-319).

The European Union has assumed a growing number of competences that previously were located within the national realm. There is a concern that the transfer of competences is not matched with a simultaneous development of arrangements with which European decision-makers are being held to account. The European Union is, for example, blamed of not being democratic, because it takes decisions behind closed doors. The bottom line of the debate on the democratic deficit is that the development of the European Union has come to a point that it needs some procedures that ensure fair outcomes. It needs a system in which decision-makers explain and justify their conduct, and face consequences if necessary. In short: it requires accountability.

This research project focuses on the issue of accountability in the EU. In order to cover several significant parts of EU affairs, the research is organized in three research projects:

• European Agencies by Madalina Busuioc ( m.busuioc@uva.nl) The number of European agencies is growing rapidly. Agencies are ‘independent’ bodies assigned with informational, executive, regulatory or operational tasks. But who controls these independent agencies? What is the purpose of accountability in this context? What do accountability arrangements look like and are the ones in place appropriate?
• European Comitology Committees by Gijs Jan Brandsma (g.j.brandsma@uu.nl)
  Comitology committees are in charge of the implementation of European policies. Several hundreds of these committees exist, and their competences range from juridical aspects of cableways to preventing animal diseases. The Comitology committees are mainly composed of national representatives, but stakeholders are also involved in their decision-making. Technical and political expertise plays a prominent role. What does accountability look like in expert arenas like these, and to what extent are the current arrangements appropriate?
• European Council by Marianne van de Steeg (m.w.vandesteeg@uu.nl)
  Parliament is the main locus for democratic accountability. The task of the elected representatives is to check that decision-makers do not abuse the power bestowed on them and act in accordance with the citizens’ wishes. Decision-makers in the European Council have two hats on: they are both European and national leaders. As European leaders, they are being held to account by the European Parliament. As national leaders, they report back to the various parliaments of the member states. In the name of the European citizens, who holds these decision-makers to account? To what extent do these two venues for accountability on European political decision-making cover the need for democratic accountability? Or, does democratic accountability fall between two stools?

These research projects were all completed in 2009. In 2010, the project will be concluded by the publication of 'The Real World of EU Accountability' by Oxford University Press: a volume in which the findings of alle research projects are integrated.

We participate in Connex, research group 2 on 'Democratic governance and multilevel accountability'.