IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erp/eiopxx/p0110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The European Union benchmarking experience. From euphoria to fatigue?

Author

Listed:
  • Zängle, Michael

Abstract

Even if one may agree with the possible criticism of the Lisbon process as being too vague in com-mitment or as lacking appropriate statistical techniques and indicators, the benchmarking system pro-vided by EUROSTAT seems to be sufficiently effective in warning against imminent failure. The Lisbon objectives are very demanding. This holds true even if each of the objectives is looked at in isolation. But 'Lisbon' is more demanding than that, requiring a combination of several objectives to be achieved simultaneously (GDP growth, labour productivity, job-content of growth, higher quality of jobs and greater social cohesion). Even to countries like Ireland, showing exceptionally high performance in GDP growth and employment promotion during the period under investigation, achieving potentially conflicting objectives simultaneously seems to be beyond feasibility. The European Union benchmark-ing exercise is embedded in the context of the Open Method(s) of Co-ordination (OMC). This context makes the benchmarking approach part and parcel of an overarching philosophy, which relates the benchmarking indicators to each other and assigns to them their role in corroborating the increasingly dominating project of the 'embedded neo-liberalism'. Against this background, the present paper is focussed on the following point. With the EU bench-marking system being effective enough to make the imminent under-achievement visible, there is a danger of disillusionment and 'benchmarking fatigue', which may provoke an ideological crisis. The dominant project being so deeply rooted, however, chances are high that this crisis will be solved im-manently in terms of embedded neo-liberalism by strengthening the neo-liberal branch of the Euro-pean project. Confining itself to the Europe of Fifteen, the analysis draws on EUROSTAT's database of Structural Indicators. ...

Suggested Citation

  • Zängle, Michael, 2004. "The European Union benchmarking experience. From euphoria to fatigue?," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 8, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-005a.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-005.htm
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2004-005.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eberlein, Burkard & Kerwer, Dieter, 2002. "Theorising the New Modes of European Union Governance," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 6, April.
    2. Dermot Hodson & Imelda Maher, 2001. "The Open Method as a New Mode of Governance: The Case of Soft Economic Policy Co‐ordination," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 719-746, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schäfer, Armin, 2004. "A new form of governance? Comparing the open method of coordination to multilateral surveillance by the IMF and the OECD," MPIfG Working Paper 04/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Smismans, Stijn, 2006. "New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth," European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) 1, CONNEX and EUROGOV networks.
    3. Kaiser, Robert & Prange, Heiko, 2002. "A new concept of deepening European integration? The European Research Area and the emerging role of policy coordination in a multi-level governance system," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 6, October.
    4. Tanja Börzel, 2010. "European Governance: Negotiation and Competition in the Shadow of Hierarchy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 191-219, March.
    5. Gonzalo Escribano, 2006. "Europeanisation without Europe? The Mediterranean and the Neighbourhood Policy," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 19, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    6. Jakob de Haan & Helge Berger & David-Jan Jansen & Jakob de Haan, 2003. "The End of the Stability and Growth Pact?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1093, CESifo.
    7. Vassilis Monastiriotis & Sotirios Zartaloudis, 2010. "Beyond the crisis: EMU and labour market reform pressures in good and bad times," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 23, European Institute, LSE.
    8. Ioannou, Demosthenes & Ferdinandusse, Marien & Lo Duca, Marco & Coussens, Wouter, 2008. "Benchmarking the Lisbon Strategy," Occasional Paper Series 85, European Central Bank.
    9. Annamaria Artner, 2005. "New modes of governance and EU structural and cohesion policy in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania," IWE Working Papers 165, Institute for World Economics - Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    10. Citi, Manuele & Rhodes, Martin, 2007. "New Modes of Governance in the EU: Common Objectives versus National Preferences," European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) 1, CONNEX and EUROGOV networks.
    11. Tanja A. Börzel, 2016. "From EU Governance of Crisis to Crisis of EU Governance: Regulatory Failure, Redistributive Conflict and Eurosceptic Publics," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54, pages 8-31, September.
    12. Schmähl, Winfried, 2005. "Nationale Rentenreformen und die Europäische Union: Entwicklungslinien und Einflusskanäle," Working papers of the ZeS 03/2005, University of Bremen, Centre for Social Policy Research (ZeS).
    13. Pülzl, Helga & Lazdinis, Marius, 2011. "May the Open Method of Coordination be a new instrument for forest policy deliberations in the European Union?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 411-418, July.
    14. repec:aia:aiaswp:wp10 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Ute Behning, 2003. "Implementing the ‘new open method of coordination’ in the field of social," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 9(4), pages 737-742, November.
    16. Dermot Hodson, 2003. "The Exchange Rate as an Adjustment Mechanism - A Structural VAR Approach to the Case of Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 34(2), pages 151-172.
    17. Behning, Ute, 2003. "Die 'neue Methode der offenen Koordinierung': Versuche der integrationstheoretischen Klassifizierung einer neuen Form des sozialpolitischen Regierens in der Europäischen Union," Working papers of the ZeS 12/2003, University of Bremen, Centre for Social Policy Research (ZeS).
    18. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:46:y:2008:i::p:827-848 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Christopher J. Bickerton & Dermot Hodson & Uwe Puetter, 2015. "The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post-Maastricht Era," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 703-722, July.
    20. Matti Viren, 2011. "Fiscal policy coordination in the EMU: A problem with asymmetry and aggregation," Discussion Papers 70, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    21. Chalmers, Damian & Lodge, Martin, 2003. "The open method of co-ordination and the European welfare state," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35993, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    22. Stephen McBride, 2016. "Constitutionalizing Austerity: Taking the Public out of Public Policy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7(1), pages 5-14, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Assistant The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Editorial Assistant to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.