No. 2 No. 2 June 2011 June 2011 A little discourse on method(s) Antonio Missiroli making - seen as either a desirable trend or an inevitable drift. Especially after the entry into force and subsequent implementation of In particular, the speech given by German the Lisbon Treaty, the traditional Chancellor Angela Merkel on 2 November distinction (and opposition) 2010 at the College of Europe in Bruges - between the so-called 'community' where equally seminal interventions were and 'inter-governmental' methods made in the past, starting with Margaret in EU policy-making is less and Thatcher's in 1988 - put forward the notion less relevant. Most common of a "Union method" (UM) as being more in policies entail a 'mix' between line with the current state of affairs and them and different degrees of policy development in the EU, with special mutual contamination. Even the emphasis on the role of the Member States. 'Union method' recently proposed She defined it just as “coordinated action in a by Chancellor Angela Merkel raises spirit of solidarity” - and gave energy policy more questions than it solves – as a good case in point1. although it may trigger a Nomina sunt consequentia rerum, names are a constructive debate on how best to consequence of things, one is tempted to say address today's policy challenges. following Thomas Aquinas. Speculations now abound in the international media on In the recent public debate over the direction whether Germany - for decades the key of the European integration process - defender of an "ever closer" Union and of following the entry into force of the Lisbon the role of common institutions and rules- Treaty and the onset of the euro zone crisis - based order - has turned its back on the arguments have somewhat polarised between Brussels executive and put all its money (not the defenders and guardians of the only metaphorically) on the European "Community method", on the one hand, and, on the other, the advocates of a more intergovernmental approach to EU policy- 1 _http://www.coleurope.eu/template.asp?pagename=s peeches EGMONT Royal Institute for International Relations Parliament and especially the Council - let that currently wrap the public debate in and alone the European Central Bank2. on the EU. One is also tempted to say, however, that Ex uno plures? such polarisation and characterisations are largely instrumental, aimed as they often are What's in a name?, Shakespeare's Juliet at pulling the cover in one or the other famously said to her Romeo. Indeed, a direction at a time when crucial decisions are stringent definition and agreed description of being taken at EU level. the "Community method" (CM) is hard to find. In fact, neither "method" fully corresponds to the realities of power and policy-making in A few years ago Helen Wallace framed what today's European Union - which are, alas, she called the "traditional" CM – based on much more complex than that, and certainly the precedent created by the early Common difficult to encapsulate in a single, all- Agricultural Policy (CAP) – as follows: encompassing formula. Indeed the US motto, a strong role delegated to the Commission e pluribus unum, is hardly applicable here. in the design/brokering/execution of policy as well as in the management of its Even in the past, and especially over the last external ramifications; two decades, the so-called 'communitarian' an empowering role for the Council and the 'intergovernmental' approaches often through strategic bargaining and package constituted rather "ideal-types" à la Max deals; Weber than concrete methods or models - a locking-in of stakeholders (the sectoral and they rarely operated in a 'pure', interests) though a highly rewarding co- unadulterated form. Still, they have long option into the European process; monopolised (and often polarised) both academic research and public discourse. an engagement of national agencies as the subordinated operating arms of the agreed Maybe, therefore, it can be useful to resort to common regime; other methods and philosophers – starting a limitation of the influence of national with Descartes, with his drive to 'deconstruct' MPs and of the opportunities for the the acquis left by Aquinas, yet combined to European Parliament (EP) to impinge; 3 some empirical evidence à la Hume - in an occasional (but defining) intrusion by order to clear the fog and unveil the myths the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to reinforce the legal authority of the Community regime; 2 It is not only a matter of „shares‟, be they counted in collective resourcing of the policy as an terms of MEPs, (re-)weighted votes in the Council, or Bundesbank clout: a German national is Secretary- expression of sustained European General of the European Parliament (Klaus Welle) 'solidarity'. and another one is about to become Secretary-General of the Council (Uwe Corsepius, a close aide to This template came to epitomise a form of Chancellor Merkel), succeeding Pierre de Boissieu. 3 René Descartes' Discours de la méthode (1637) is 'supranational' policy-making in which universally considered the turning point in the history powers were transferred from the national of modern philosophy, marking the beginning of rationalism. David Hume's A Treatise of Human Nature level to the EC/EU. How far it actually fits (1739) balanced that off with a strong plea for with reality is a moot point, even in the case empiricism. EGMONT Royal Institute for International Relations 2 of agriculture - and already the fisheries and evenly, backed by national courts for regime, that was meant to imitate the CAP, local application; has turned out to be different. Nonetheless, the EP as one of several means for this particular version of the CM shaped its considering also non-economic factors, 'image' among both practitioners and with increasing legislative powers but little commentators for quite a while4. leverage on implementation. Helen Wallace highlighted also the fact that, In addition, over the years the EU policy since the mid-1980s, the EC/EU started process has been increasingly caught in operating through at least two additional negotiations and controversies over the "methods". distributional impact of integration. In this on- going process - that indirectly involved also To begin with, as the competition regime the CAP - the introduction of "cohesion" took root and the Single Market developed, policies marked a shift towards programmes the call for and drive towards regulation aimed at tackling economic and social became ever stronger. The strength of the divergence and supporting the more European legal process, the machinery for backward regions and/or societal groups. promoting technical cooperation, and the relative distance from parliamentary In addition, various other spending interference were all factors that encouraged instruments were introduced in fields such as this trend further. Indeed, the EC/EU was research, with programmatic rather than re- particularly well equipped for generating an distributional aims. overarching regulatory framework that could combine cross-border standards with country All in all, such distributional "method" differences. comprised: the Commission as the deviser of The main features of this regulatory programmes, in partnership with sub- "method" included: national authorities and/or sectoral the Commission as the architect and stakeholders and agencies; defender (in a quasi-judicial capacity) of national governments in the Council regulatory objectives and rules, often in agreeing (under the pressure of various connection with stakeholders and experts; authorities and stakeholders) to a budget the Council as a forum for agreeing with some distributive elements; minimum standards and the direction of a Parliament in which MEPs often harmonisation, complemented by mutual constitute an additional source of pressure recognition of preferences and controls; from territorial politics in their the ECJ as the main means of ensuring constituencies; that the rules are applied reasonably fairly local and regional authorities benefiting from engaging in the EU arena and relying (since 1993) on their own institution, the 4 H.Wallace, An Institutional Anatomy and Five Policy Committee of the Regions (CoR). Modes, in H.Wallace, W.Wallace, M.A.Pollack (eds.), Policy-Making in the European Union, 5th edition, Incidentally, it was this opening for direct Oxford University Press, 2005, 49-90. Now see also contacts between the European and the sub- R.Dehousse (ed.), The 'Community Method': Obstinate or Obsolete?, Palgrave-Macmillan, 2011. national levels of government that prompted EGMONT Royal Institute for International Relations 3 the coinage of the term "multi-level governance" involvement in policy formulation, to characterise the EU process more execution and control; generally. the adoption of special arrangements for managing cooperation (in particular the More of the same? Council Secretariat); Finally, it is arguable that - over the past the relative opaqueness of the process, decade in particular - the spectrum has notably to national parliaments and widened further by including the so-called citizens; "open method of coordination" (OMC), the capacity, on some occasions, to deliver usually associated with the 2000 Lisbon substantive joint policy in areas where Strategy on Growth and Jobs. nothing existed previously. It involved 'soft' policy incentives to shape Yet again, even the IM presents a number of behaviour at national level though significant variations – especially if one takes 'benchmarking' and systematic policy into account such diverse areas as foreign and comparison, but without concrete security policy (CFSP/ESDP) and justice and enforcement and implementation tools. home affairs (JHA) – which, according to the Maastricht Treaty, coincided with the second Employment policy at EU level is another case and the third 'pillar', respectively, of the EU in point - albeit with some nuances. construction. As such, the OMC can be considered as the In both cases the assets and competences of closest thing to - or just a variation on - the the Member States were (and still are) "Intergovernmental method" (IM), but from predominant.