Committee Governance after the Enlargement of the EU: the Institutionalisation of Cooperation within the Social Protection Committee
Specialised committees form an important part of the policy-making process in the European Union. After the 2004 enlargement of the EU, the institutional setup of these committees and the practice of Ôcommittee governanceÕ have been considerably challenged. The Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC) is a mode of governance in which the work of expert committees is essential. Open and consensus-oriented discussions in committee meetings are regarded as a precondition of the success of the OMC and as a basis of its legitimacy. However, with ten new member states joining OMC committees, the institutional conditions of discussions change. This article provides a discursive conceptual framework for analysing the undergoing changes, and applies it to the case of the Social Protection Committee.
Volume (Year): 6 (2007)
Issue (Month): March ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://eper.htw-berlin.de/|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Risse, Thomas, 2000. "“Let's Argue!”: Communicative Action in World Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(01), pages 1-39, December.
- Scharpf, Fritz W., 2002. "The European Social Model: Coping with the challenges of diversity," MPIfG Working Paper 02/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
- Kröger, Sandra, 2006. "When learning hits politics or: Social policy coordination left to the administrations and the NGOs?," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 10, 05.
- James S. Mosher & David M. Trubek, 2003. "Alternative Approaches to Governance in the EU: EU Social Policy and the European Employment Strategy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 63-88, 03.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:epe:journl:v:6:y:2007:i:march:p:53-73. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Prof.Dr.Sebastian Dullien)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.