The Real World of EU Accountability reports the findings of a major empirical study into patterns and practices of accountability in European governance. The product of a 4-year, path-breaking project, this book assesses to what extent and how the people that populate the key arenas where European public policy is made or implemented are held accountable. Using a systematic analytical framework, it examines not just the formal accountability arrangements but also documents and compares how these operate in practice. In doing so, it provides a unique, empirically grounded contribution to the pivotal but often remarkably fact-free debate about democracy and accountability in European governance. With four empirical chapters covering the Commission and its agencies, the European Council, and Comitology committees, it shows that a web of formal accountability arrangements has been woven around most of them, but that the extent to which the relevant accountability forums actually use the oversight possibilities offered to them varies markedly: some forums lack the institutional resources, others the willingness. But in those cases where both are on the increase, as in the European Parliament's efforts vis a vis the European Commission, fundamentally healthy accountability relationships are developing. Although ex-post accountability is only part of the larger equation determining the democratic quality of European governance, this study suggests that at least in this area, the EU is slowly but surely reducing its 'democratic deficit'.

The Real World of EU Accountability examines how the European Union operates in practice and how and where its various institutions are held to account for the decisions they take and the power they wield.

This book examines accountability in the EU from different perspectives and considers whether EU citizens have real opportunities for holding decision-makers accountable. This book critically analyses five arguments which claim there are sufficient means for holding decision-makers to account in the Union. The main conclusion is that the current institutional set-up and practice of decision-making in the EU is one that merely creates an illusion of accountability. Using a strict framework focusing on the difference between formal mechanisms and actual opportunities for accountability, this highly coherent volume will be of interest to students and scholars of European politics, especially those interested in the democratic foundations of the European political system. Chapter 1 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/tandfbis/rt-files/docs/Open+Access+Chapters/9780415480994_oachapter1.pdf

This book investigates the role of law in confronting major societal transformations embodied by the emergence of nanotechnologies. Taking the case of the European Union, it explores who the key decision-makers in the regulation of nanotechnologies are and how they take decisions. The questions are explored through two distinct case studies: the food and chemicals sectors. The book charts an incremental retreat of the European Union to its executive powers, including 'soft law' measures such as agencies' guidelines or implementing measures. This, the author argues, results in the Union's fundamental democratic control mechanisms, the EU legislature and the Court of Justice of the EU, being circumvented. The book recommends several immediate proposals to reform EU risk regulation, advocating a greater reliance on the European Parliament and outlining measures to increase the transparency of guidance drafting by EU agencies. This important work provides a timely examination of how emerging technologies pose both regulatory and democratic challenges.

A framework for the exploration of accountability deficits (gaps) and overloads (overlaps) in the context of public governance regimes.

Currently, some 2,500 civilian experts work across Europe, Africa, and Asia in ten ongoing civilian missions launched under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Mandates cover a broad range of multidimensional tasks, such as rule of law support, law enforcement capacity building, or security sector reform. Numerous (recent) incidents from the field underscore that there are serious institutional as well as procedural weaknesses and irregularities tied to accountability in these EU peacebuilding missions. This title offers a comprehensive legal analysis and empirical study of accountability concerning the Union's peacebuilding endeavours, also referred to as civilian crisis management. Along with examining the governance credentials of EU peacebuilding, the monograph thoroughly scrutinizes de jure and de facto accountability arrangements of political, legal, and administrative nature existing in the domestic sphere, at EU level, and across levels. With a view to providing for a nuanced picture, the assessment further distinguishes between different accountability finalities and evaluates the appropriateness of existing accountability arrangements in civilian crisis management based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative criteria.

This book analyses the implementation of global pharmaceutical impact standards in the European risk regulation framework for pharmaceuticals and questions its legitimacy. Global standards increasingly shape the risk regulation law and policy in the European Union and the area of pharmaceuticals is no exception to this tendency. As this book shows, global pharmaceutical standards set by the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for the Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), after they are adopted through the European Medicines Agency (EMA), are an important feature of the regulatory framework for pharmaceuticals in the EU. In addition to analysing the influence of these global standards in the EU legal and policy framework, the book questions the legitimacy of the Union's reliance on global standards in terms of core administrative law principles of participation, transparency and independence of expertise. It also critically examines the accountability of the European Commission and the European Medicines Agency as participants in the global standard-setting and main implementation gateway of the global pharmaceutical standards into the European Union.