IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/315591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Have Your Say’ in practice: assessing citizens’ use of the EU’s public consultation platform

Author

Listed:
  • Neumann, Rico
  • Lang, Sabine
  • Meng, Phillip

Abstract

Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that the Commission shall consult citizens and civil society. The breadth, frequency, and user-friendliness of consultations have increased considerably since the Lisbon Treaty of 2007 and Better Regulation Agenda of 2015. This study examines the extent to which individual citizens in member states use the consultation process; the policy areas in which they are predominantly active; and the degree to which individual citizen engagement correlates with organizational engagement, including different organizational types. To better understand the conditions that help produce stronger or weaker citizen vis-à-vis organizational responses, we compiled a corpus of more than 850 open public consultations (OPCs) that closed between 2014 and 2021, and randomly selected a subset of nearly 400 OPCs of which approximately 200 reported response data. We find rather low and inconsistent participation rates of citizens, even for consultations in policy areas generally known to rank higher on issue salience as well as substantial dominance of for-profit vis-à-vis individual citizen input. More concentrated citizen activity in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries might indicate stronger individual commitment in new member states to ‘have their say’ in specific policy areas. Implications for the EU’s engagement architecture and democratic model are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Neumann, Rico & Lang, Sabine & Meng, Phillip, 2025. "‘Have Your Say’ in practice: assessing citizens’ use of the EU’s public consultation platform," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-21.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:315591
    DOI: 10.1080/23745118.2025.2471877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/315591/1/Full-text-article-Neumann-et-al-Have-your-say.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23745118.2025.2471877?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vivien A. Schmidt, 2013. "Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(1), pages 2-22, March.
    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. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    2. Isuru Koswatte & Chandrika Fernando, 2022. "Policy Development for Crisis Management in the Context of Sri Lanka," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 20(3 (Fall)), pages 295-327.
    3. John R. Moodie & Viktor Salenius & Michael Kull, 2022. "From impact assessments towards proactive citizen engagement in EU cohesion policy," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 1113-1132, October.
    4. Onna Malou van den Broek, 2024. "How Political Actors Co‐Construct CSR and its Effect on Firms' Political Access: A Discursive Institutionalist View," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 595-626, March.
    5. Christoph Klika, 2015. "The Implementation of the REACH Authorisation Procedure on Chemical Substances of Concern: What Kind of Legitimacy?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 128-138.
    6. Vincent Caby & Lise Frehen, 2021. "How to Produce and Measure Throughput Legitimacy? Lessons from a Systematic Literature Review," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 226-236.
    7. Lechler, Marie, 2019. "Employment shocks and anti-EU sentiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 266-295.
    8. Sébastien Chailleux, 2020. "Making the subsurface political: How enhanced oil recovery techniques reshaped the energy transition," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(4), pages 733-750, June.
    9. Gumbrell McCormick, Rebecca & Hyman, Richard, 2018. "Democracy in trade unions, democracy through trade unions?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 89230, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Hottegindre, Géraldine & Loison, Marie-Claire & Belze, Loïc, 2024. "Dynamics of influence within the audit regulatory space: Role-playing and the rise of cynicism," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    11. Albin Olausson, 2020. "Legitimacy of uncertain policy work: Exploring values in local economic development projects," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 35(5), pages 440-459, August.
    12. Begg, Iain & Bongardt, Annette & Nicolaïdis, Kalypso & Torres, Francisco, 2015. "EMU and sustainable integration," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65243, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Yilmaz, Ahmet & Bi̇li̇m, Nazım Serdar, 2024. "The role of land values in land policies: The case of Turkish land readjustment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    14. Weldon, Isaac & Parkhurst, Justin, 2022. "Governing evidence use in the nutrition policy process: evidence and lessons from the 2020 Canada food guide," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112430, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Lechler, Marie, 2018. "Employment Shocks and anti-EU Sentiment," Discussion Papers in Economics 49414, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    16. Anne Bach Nielsen & Marielle Papin, 2021. "The hybrid governance of environmental transnational municipal networks: Lessons from 100 Resilient Cities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(4), pages 667-685, June.
    17. Nicolò Fraccaroli & Alessandro Giovannini & Jean-François Jamet & Eric Persson, 2023. "Central Banks in Parliaments: A Text Analysis of the Parliamentary Hearings of the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and the Federal Reserve," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 19(2), pages 543-600, June.
    18. Dina Sebastião, 2021. "Covid-19: A Different Economic Crisis but the Same Paradigm of Democratic Deficit in the EU," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 252-264.
    19. Jan Beyers & Sarah Arras, 2021. "Stakeholder consultations and the legitimacy of regulatory decision‐making: A survey experiment in Belgium," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 877-893, July.
    20. Baer, Moritz & Campiglio, Emanuele & Deyris, Jérôme, 2021. "It takes two to dance: Institutional dynamics and climate-related financial policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).

    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:zbw:espost:315591. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.