Bettina Lange

Policy learning and governance of education policy in the EU

Open methods for coordinating (OMC) education policies in the EU rely on a number of techniques, one of which is policy learning. This article examines how policy learning and governance transform each other. More specifically, policy‐learning in the education OMC becomes differentiated into four distinct learning styles: mutual, competitive, surface and imperialistic learning. While they overlap with some forms of policy learning discussed in the literature, they are also different by focusing upon interactions and political dynamics between the European Commission and the member states. In seeking to understand how governing through learning occurs, we argue that any ‘impact’ of EU‐level policy‐learning is co‐constructed by both the European Commission and the member states. The analysis of this article is grounded in a discourse analytical and institutionalist perspective. It draws on qualitative data derived from semi‐structured interviews with officials from the Directorate General for Education and Culture in the European Commission and on EU documents generated during policy‐learning activities.

Trust-based environmental regulation.

Within this paper, we examine the contribution that trust-based relationships can make to achieving better-and particularly more effective, efficient and equitable-environmental regulation. While levels of trust in regulators, regulatory processes and outcomes are often discussed, the influence of trust on different actors and on different measures of regulatory performance is poorly understood. Within this paper, we define trust-based environmental regulation as a specific regulatory style that involves openness and cooperation in interaction between regulated, regulators and third-party stakeholders in order to achieve environmental protection objectives. We then discuss the pros and cons of trust relationships between regulators, regulated businesses and citizens for achieving behavioural change towards greater environmental protection. To illustrate the significance of these issues, we then examine three forms of contractual regulatory style where trust relationships are critically important: responsive regulation, self-regulation and environmental agreements. Based on this analysis, we highlight the importance of trust-based relationships, and we argue that one of the greatest contributions of trust-based environmental regulation is to challenge how we think about regulation. Trust is often understood as enabling existing regulatory relationships or in the case of self-regulation as a complement to regulation. However, we argue that the real potential of trust is to open up new ways for participants in regulatory regimes to engage in collective action, to go beyond a perception of regulation as driven by the competing interests of individual actors, and thus, to open up new channels of influence for behavioural change towards greater environmental protection. Our analysis therefore has great relevance for future research and for on-going debates on the future of regulation.

The Emotional Dimension in Legal Regulation

This article argues that the study of legal regulation can be further developed through an analysis of emotions because it can bring into sharper focus the social nature of regulation. The article illustrates this point by discussing the notion of regulatory law as an emotional process. It then suggests various ways in which an analysis of emotions can promote understanding of a key issue in legal regulation, the role of structure and agency. The article concludes with a brief discussion of how existing social science research methods can be adapted to the study of emotions.

Education Policy Convergence through the Open Method of Coordination: Theoretical Reflections and Implementation in ‘old’ and ‘new’ National Contexts

This article addresses two key questions about the convergence of education policies in the European Union (EU). How does the open method of coordination (OMC), a new governance instrument for the Europeanisation of education policies, change existing national education policy making and how can the OMC and national responses to it be researched? The authors argue that the OMC brings to national policy making a particular set of ideas about education, such as an emphasis on the contribution of education to building competitive economies and a new public management approach. The authors further suggest that the significance of such policy ideas in national education policy making can be best analysed through a combination of sociological institutionalism and discourse analysis. Hence, ‘implementation’ of EU education measures — which have been developed through policy learning — should be understood as a combination of a ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ policy-making process that links EU and national levels. Finally, the article suggests — on the basis of a preliminary exploration of the implementation of education OMC measures in the United Kingdom and Slovenia — that education OMC policy ideas resonate to varying degrees in ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states.

Regulatory Spaces and Interactions: An Introduction

This special issue draws together four contributions to debates about legal regulation.1They focus on space and interactions as key constituents of regulatory dynamics. The articles advance analysis of legal regulation also on the basis of new empirical data. Two contributions discuss novel forms of regulation, such as meta-regulation and the reform of health and safety regulation in Thailand. Two further articles examine the challenges faced by traditional state regulation through new tasks of systemic risk management, such as facilitating law and science interactions and ensuring animal disease control. The authors share a commitment to a range of fundamental values informing regulation, such as respect for animal welfare, the protection of the health and safety of workers, visions of justice which involve redistributive values and a concern with context-sensitive, proceduralized law which operates with a reflexive awareness of its own limitations. The first part of this introduction outlines space and interactions as key themes in the literature on legal regulation while the second part highlights the contribution of the articles in this area.

Deflecting European Union Influence on National Education Policy-Making: The Case of the United Kingdom

Abstract This article examines how education policies developed in the European Union (EU) through the open method of co-ordination (OMC) are received at the member state level of the United Kingdom (UK). We argue that the UK’s response to the education OMC can be understood mainly in terms of deflecting EU influence on the process and content of national education policy-making. We focus on three manifestations of deflecting EU influence on national education policies. On a level of institutional structures, first, few organizational resources are made available for responding to the education OMC. Second, there is limited communication between domestic policy teams and UK civil servants involved in international work. Third, on a level of discourse UK education policy-makers have retained a commitment to the continued sovereignty of the UK over education policy and its role as a potential leader of education policy agendas in the EU. Deflecting the education OMC involves here constructing images of ‘fit’ between UK and EU OMC education policies.

Europeanizing the National Education Space? Adjusting to the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the UK

This article examines the reception of the education Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the UK as an aspect of Europeanization of national administrations. It addresses relationships between political and administrative actors in the process of responding to the education OMC. We argue that despite progress with institutionalization of the education OMC at the EU level, there is limited institutionalization of the education OMC at the national level. Against the backdrop of UK skepticism about engaging with the EU integration project, the interesting finding is the administrative strategies employed for deflecting EU influence on the national education space.

From Boundary Drawing to Transitions: the Creation of Normativity under the EU Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control

This article aims to make a contribution to debates about how to conceptualise normativity. It argues that normativity can not be just understood through defining it and in particular through identifying conceptual boundaries around the normative and the non‐normative. Instead the article suggests that it is important to explore how transitions between the non‐normative and the normative occur in practice. This argument is developed through a critical examination of literature on legal pluralism and an analysis of qualitative empirical data on the drafting of technical guidance documents under the European Union Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (96/61/EC).

The EU Directive on Industrial Emissions: Squaring the Circle of Integrated, Harmonised and Ambitious Technology Standards?

The EU Directive on Industrial Emissions1 reforms the twice amended, consolidated EU Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control.2 This legislation note critiques key provisions of the new Directive, and comments on whether its main purposes – including the ensuring of greater integration, harmonisation and effectiveness of pollution controls – are likely to be achieved. It suggests that, while some progress has been made, various opportunities to legislate for more integrated, harmonised and ambitious technology standards were missed in the reform of the EU regime of integrated pollution prevention and control.

From Polanyi to discourse theory

Abstract This article starts from the assumption that economic sociology, including Karl Polanyi’s work, can contribute fresh perspectives to regulation debates because it opens up new understandings of the nature of economic activity, a key target of legal regulation. In particular this article examines Polanyi’s idea that society drives regulation. For Polanyi the “regulatory counter-movement” is society’s response to the disembedding – in particular through the proliferation of markets – of economic out of social relationships. Section One of the article identifies three key challenges that arise from this Polanyian take on regulation for contemporary regulation researchers. First, Polanyi focuses on social norms restraining business behavior, but neglects social norms embedded in law as also shaping regulation. Second, he seems to imply a clear-cut conceptual distinction between “economy” and “society.” Third, his analysis sidelines the role of interest politics in the development of regulation. Addressing the first of these three key challenges, Section Two of this article therefore argues that a Polanyian vision of “socialized” legal regulation should build on contemporary accounts of responsive law and regulation, which focus attention on social norms informing legal regulation. Section Three of this article tackles the second key challenge raised by Polanyi’s work for contemporary regulation researchers, that is, how to transcend a modernist perspective of “economy” and “society” as clearly demarcated, distinct fields of social action. It argues that discourse theory is an important alternative theoretical resource. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe, the article suggests that understanding “economy” and “society” as performed by open and relationally constructed discourses helps to capture interconnections between “economy” and “society” that become particularly visible when we analyze how specific regulatory regimes work at a medium- and small-scale level. These points are further brought to life in Section Four through a discussion of the European Union (EU) regulatory regime for trade in risky, transgenic agricultural products, and in particular the current reform debates about the consideration of the “socioeconomic impacts” of such products.