Suchergebnisse

Defence date: 6 November 2000 ; Examining Board: Prof. Adrienne Héritier, European University Institute (Supervisor); Prof. Giandomenico Majone, Emeritus, European University Institute; Prof. Daniel Verdier, European University Institute; Prof. Michael Tsinisizelis, National University of Athens ; First made available online on 2 March 2018 ; This dissertation attempts to explain how the Commission o f the European Union became such an active player in the policy-making o f the Union the last twenty years. In doing so, it provides a micro-founded theoretical framework o f involvement o f the Commission as an institution carrying out public policies. The basic premise is to understand the policy-making process as an interaction o f the top-officials o f the Commission with other purposeful societal actors at the micro-level. This interaction constitutes a multi-level game where top-officials as policy-makers contend with their own policy preferences over the policy outcomes that could be obtained, and try to maximize their utility function subject to what other players in the game pursue. Departing from corporatist and elite theories, it is argued that policy innovation can be a purposeful output pursued by bureaucrats in their attempt to reshape their policy competence (bureaucratic politics). This attempt takes part within the pattern of interaction between the various involved administrative departments and their policy clients and external suppliers. Then, in order to understand the dynamics o f the innovative activity of the administration, in our case the Commission, it is needed to see how this activity is influenced by the development o f the structure o f interaction. Which are the strategies followed by the administrative departments and which are their possibilities o f success for policy innovators under a well developed structure and an underdeveloped structure o f interaction. For this reason, the capability o f topofficials for policy innovation is tested under the case o f maritime industries (a well developed structure) and the case o f tourism (underdeveloped structure).

After the defeat of Poland in September 1939 the Polish leaders were determined to fight the two enemies. A government-in-exile was formed in Paris with the aim of creating military units that would fight with Poland's allies & establish Poland's right to have a say in matters relating to the war & post-war decisions. General Sikorski's position as Prime Minister of the government-in-exile, though supported by the French, was never secure & he & his policies were subject to constant criticism. Two dilemmas preoccupied the Polish leadership. The first focused on the trustworthiness of France & Britain to defend Polish interests. The second concerned the Polish units. Were they to be used to liberate Poland or to build up a debt of gratitude? Germany's attack on France cut short these debates & effectively reduced the Polish government's political choices to that of dependence on Churchill's decisions. [Copyright 2001 Sage Publications Ltd.]