Search results

AbstractIn its evaluation cycle, the European Commission emphasises the importance of good data and the systematic involvement of a plurality of policy stakeholders, including citizens. Findings from European Union policy evaluation should inform further law-making, encourage learning and provide accountability. Transparent and inclusive formal procedures and tools are seen as essential for securing citizen participation in risk regulation; however, the Commission faces numerous challenges in securing engagement, particularly concerning the complexity of policy issues and the formal procedures for institutionalised consultations. Considering the Commission's work from a proceduralist perspective, the article engages with Vivien Schmidt's notion of "throughput legitimacy" to explore recent procedural innovations emerging since the Better Regulation agenda that have sought to enhance accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and openness, ensuring fairer and more balanced input on EU policy performance. The article argues in favour of greater throughput legitimacy in ex post policy evaluation but recognises challenges to the promotion of evaluation tools and their use by citizens.

In the last twenty years, the European Court of Auditors has placed increasing importance on the production of "special reports" examining the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of EU spending (the three "E"s). This institutional focus on performance audit, alongside traditional financial and compliance audit, has occurred at a time when the European Union is increasingly evaluating its own policies and programmes, under political pressure to demonstrate their added value. With performance audit, the EU's external auditors make value judgements on what was achieved through the EU budget, arguably bringing a greater political dimension to the Court as it works to deliver conclusions and recommendations meant to assist the legislature (European Parliament) in carrying out its scrutiny role and the executive (European Commission) in shaping better future policy. This raises questions about how financial accountability is interpreted, and whether it depends on the quality of audit reports or on the forums to which they are delivered, and subsequently, how they act upon them. This article analyses the factors that explain the increased use of special reports by the Court, questioning if they resemble evaluation studies. It examines their focus and impact, as well as the institutional challenges implicit in performance audit.

<p>Partiendo del actual debate en el Parlamento Europeo sobre el futuro rol del Tribunal de Cuentas Europeo y el impacto que el procedimiento de designación de sus miembros puede tener en las relaciones interinstitucionales y la credibilidad de esta institución europea, este artículo analiza el contexto y desafíos de la reforma del Tribunal desde la perspectiva de su naturaleza colegial y la necesaria competencia profesional de sus miembros. Seguidamente, se examina la colegialidad en perspectiva histórica como un aspecto crucial de la estructura organizativa del Tribunal y como un valor/norma, abordando los debates sobre la forma de designación de los auditores europeos. En tercer lugar, se ofrece una panorámica de los desarrollos recientes en favor de una reforma. En cuarto lugar, toma en consideración las alternativas para futuros acuerdos de gobernanza, reconociendo que la gestión eficaz y eficiente es crucial para la legitimidad del Tribunal de Cuentas dentro del marco institucional europeo, pero también esencial para asegurar el control financiero del presupuesto de la Unión Europea.</p><p><strong>Recibido</strong>: 10.04.2014<br /> <strong>Aceptado</strong>: 10.06.2014</p>

In two decades since the Maastricht Treaty, multi-level governance (MLG) has developed as a conceptual framework for profiling the 'arrangement' of policy-making activity performed within and across politico-administrative institutions located at different territorial levels. This contribution examines the ways in which the MLG literature has been employed, effectively taking stock of applied research to date. It identifies five main uses of MLG and the different focus of emerging research over time. Considering the most recent scholarship, the contribution explores possible new directions for research, in light of global governance, culminating in a 'bird's eye view' of MLG over 20 years.

In two decades since the Maastricht Treaty, multi-level governance (MLG) has developed as a conceptual framework for profiling the 'arrangement' of policy-making activity performed within and across politico-administrative institutions located at different territorial levels. This contribution examines the ways in which the MLG literature has been employed, effectively taking stock of applied research to date. It identifies five main uses of MLG and the different focus of emerging research over time. Considering the most recent scholarship, the contribution explores possible new directions for research, in light of global governance, culminating in a 'bird's eye view' of MLG over 20 years.