Suchergebnisse

This book provides insights on regulatory effectiveness in the field of food safety, by focusing on the variety of institutional factors affecting regulatory outcomes. Drawing upon the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, it investigates differences in effectiveness of food safety regulation and explains them by differences in domestic governance designs, by applying Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The empirical focus of the book is the food safety governance designs of 15 EU Member States, which are investigated through the collection of an original dataset inclusive of measures of independence and accountability of the domestic food safety agencies, of policy capacity and of food safety delivered. The results show the prominent role of the institutional dimension of policy capacity in producing regulatory effectiveness, in conjunction with an integrated model of distribution of the regulatory tasks. As to ineffective governance, the conjunction of low independence or low accountability with low institutional capacity produce ineffective responses. Giulia Bazzan is a researcher at the Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

COVID-19 emerged as a cross-cutting problem across governance sectors and levels, urging the creation of a European Health Union. There are already a number of integrated European governance strategies – such as the European Energy Union (2015) and the European Green Deal (2019) – adopted for overcoming problems of governance fragmentation and inadequacy of fragmented policy responses to cross-cutting policy challenges. Past studies focused on the interaction between crisis and policy change and investigated the activation of different mechanisms to enhance integration. This article contributes to the debate over the creation of a European Health Union by unpacking the acknowledged dimensions of policy integration – policy frame, subsystem involvement, policy goals and policy instruments – in order to assess their manifestations in the new EU4Health policy and to establish what contextual conditions triggered the activation of the integration-enabling mechanisms that led to a more integrated European Health Union. In so doing, it offers an analytical illustration and discusses implications for decision-making.

AbstractThis article seeks to make a contribution to the food safety regulation literature, and to the broader framework of risk regulation, in the attempt to establish both theoretically and empirically what can be intended as effective governance of food safety regulation. The aim is to review existing measures of effectiveness of food safety governance, and to give a preliminary definition of effectiveness, together with a theoretical perspective on how to operationalise it, eventually proposing an empirical measurement. Effectiveness of food safety governance can be measured – on the one hand – as the capacity of consumers' protection, and thus, as the minimisation of risk related to food, and – on the other hand – as the capacity of protection of producers' interests, in order to ensure competitiveness within the market. Distinguishing food safety delivered from food safety perceived, the article seeks to analyse dimensions of effectiveness related to both the protection of consumers and producers, and to the minimisation of risk, drawing upon Elinor Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development Framework (IAD) and, particularly, her conceptualisation of opportunistic behaviour.

AbstractRules lie at the core of many disciplines beneath regulatory studies. Such a broad interest inevitably comes with fragmented understandings and technical choices that hinder knowledge cumulation and learning. This introduction tackles these limitations through an encompassing analytical blueprint from measurement theory. First, it addresses ambiguities to establish formal rules as a distinct research object. Then, it builds on legal, institutional analytic, and computational linguistic frameworks to pinpoint their constituting elements. Last, it revises strategies for assigning meaningful numbers to objects and outlines how the contributions to this Special Issue foster different aspects of the blueprint.

AbstractThis article departs from the assumption that the challenge of putting the Farm to Fork Strategy (F2F) into action stems from the broader challenge of attaining cross‐sectoral policy integration. Policy integration has been part of the EU's policy approach for a long time and has predominantly been achieved in the form of environmental policy integration (EPI). However, the scope of the F2F extends beyond EPI, as it includes the integration of climate‐related concerns into sectoral policies, for instance. Consequently, we contend that attaining policy integration in the case of the F2F is particularly challenging and calls for an innovative approach to policymaking.

AbstractAlthough the policy performance field acknowledges the importance of adopting a long‐term decision making perspective to attain more sustainable policy outcomes, it overlooks the way in which sustainable governance conditions and policy performance relate to each other. We address this gap by investigating why some countries succeed in terms of policy performance while others do not. Applying a fuzzy‐set QCA to 41 Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development and European Union countries of the Sustainable Governance Indicators data, we find out that successful economic and social policy performance is mainly driven by executive accountability conditions combined with effective implementation, while the high‐quality of media plays a key role in successful environmental policy performance. Considering the multiple paths that practitioners can follow toward sustainable development benefits, they can also learn how to shift from short‐term to long‐term thinking by identifying "what works and why," formulating good practices and guidelines for better policy performance in the respective national contexts.

Although the policy performance field acknowledges the importance of adopting a long-term decision making perspective to attain more sustainable policy outcomes, it overlooks the way in which sustainable governance conditions and policy performance relate to each other. We address this gap by investigating why some countries succeed in terms of policy performance while others do not. Applying a fuzzy-set QCA to 41 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and European Union countries of the Sustainable Governance Indicators data, we find out that successful economic and social policy performance is mainly driven by executive accountability conditions combined with effective implementation, while the high-quality of media plays a key role in successful environmental policy performance. Considering the multiple paths that practitioners can follow toward sustainable development benefits, they can also learn how to shift from short-term to long-term thinking by identifying "what works and why," formulating good practices and guidelines for better policy performance in the respective national contexts.

AbstractThis paper employs the Institutional Analysis and Development framework across six ecosystem delivery measures in the European Union to develop a configurational explanation of (un)successful outcomes. By undertaking comparative institutional analysis, we systematically examine the effect of variation across rule types and generate insights on how different institutional configurations result in varying degrees of successful implementation of ecosystem delivery measures. We apply explanatory typology methods to identify the institutional features that best explain variation in implementation success across a number of cases. We argue that institutional rules shape outcomes in conjunction rather than in isolation. The findings show that differences in implementation success across cases can be explained by the interplay of differences in knowledge exchange, flexibility in implementation, and participation in the policy design process.