Ulrika Mörth

Competing frames in the European Commission - the case of the defence industry and equipment issue

It is argued that frame competition plays an important part in EU policymaking, especially within the European Commission. The case of a cross-pillar issue, the issue of defence industry and equipment, shows how two frames – market and defence – compete on the legal and political approaches to this issue. Frame competition is something more than just conflicts of interests. It also functions as an important identity-building and sense-making process in multi-organizations, which are typified more by ambiguity and inconsistency than by clarity and consistency. By approaching the European Commission from a multi-organizational perspective, the frame competition process is regarded as an essential component in the cohesion process. The empirical analysis shows that framing is not static, but that frames can change and result in a reframing. By reframing the defence industry and equipment issue, the Commission has managed the conflict between the market and defence frames.It is argued that frame competition plays an important part in EU policymaking, especially within the European Commission. The case of a cross-pillar issue, the issue of defence industry and equipment, shows how two frames – market and defence – compete on the legal and political approaches to this issue. Frame competition is something more than just conflicts of interests. It also functions as an important identity-building and sense-making process in multi-organizations, which are typified more by ambiguity and inconsistency than by clarity and consistency. By approaching the European Commission from a multi-organizational perspective, the frame competition process is regarded as an essential component in the cohesion process. The empirical analysis shows that framing is not static, but that frames can change and result in a reframing. By reframing the defence industry and equipment issue, the Commission has managed the conflict between the market and defence frames.

Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance

There has been a rapid proliferation of public–private partnerships in the areas of human rights, environmental protection and global governance. Consequently, private actors such as non-government ...

Public and Private Partnerships as dilemmas between efficiency and democratic accountability : The case of Galileo

Abstract This article analyses public–private partnerships (PPPs), which are characterized by shared public authority between public and private actors. The question asked is how well the officials handle the vertical and contractual relationship with the private actors, given the requirement of democratic accountability according to the hierarchical, liberal model of representative democracy. The case study is Galileo, Europe’s satellite radio navigation system that can be regarded as a fairly technical and traditional European partnership in the infrastructure sector. The main conclusion is, however, that Galileo is highly complex in both political and economic terms. In spite of this complexity, or precisely because of it, officials are left with very little political guidance and directives. It is also surprising that the market actors seem to be given so much room for manoeuvre in the programme. It can be argued that the power of the officials in designing Galileo is problematic from a democratic perspective. There are basically two reasons for this. The first is that the general political goals for the partnership are too general and have little impact on and contact with the day‐to‐day activities. It is the officials rather than the politicians that have influence over the PPPs. The second reason is that the private actors do not only run the programme in an overall sense, they will also make important decisions in its daily management. The private actors thus have influence within important public infrastructure but are not democratically accountable for their decisions. Hence, the case of Galileo shows that a fairly simple task — the offering of satellite navigation signals — is highly complex. The conclusions from this study therefore suggest that PPPs in even more complex policy areas need to be analysed carefully before any decisions on a partnership are reached.

Policy diffusion in research and technological development: No government is an island

The article explores the question of how the EC and several European governments almost simultaneously launched research and technological development (RTD) programmes during the 1980s. It is suggested that RTD policy processes within the EC and individual states were linked to each other in a European policy process, and that the convergence of such policies was a function of policy diffusion. An analytical approach of policy diffusion is outlined in order to study the linkages between national and EU policy processes. A policy diffusion perspective, which entails how policies are formed in a communication between various national political-administrative systems, can be seen as an important contribution to the study of the dynamics behind the European integration process. It is suggested that the OECD, with its informal and non-hierarchical cooperation structure, is an important condition for policy diffusion, and that this type of cooperation can also be found within the EU. The EU, which can be characterized as a type of multilevel governance, enhances communication between national political-administrative systems and thus the processes of policy diffusion.

Introduction: Partnerships, Democracy, and Governance

The fragmentation of political authority in the global arena brings about challenges for the legitimacy of global governance, but can also result in innovative institutional arrangements. In recent years, transnational actors, such as nongovernmental organizations and large companies, have gained increased authority in areas of public policy and regulation that traditionally belonged to the state and the public sector. The proliferation of transnational partnerships spanning the public-private divide in such areas as human rights, environmental protection, and development is one example of this. The most well known (and well researched) partnership is the United Nations Global Compact, containing principles on human rights, labor rights, the environment, and anticorruption, and involving a broad spectrum of participating actors (cf. Ruggie, 2002; Sahlin-Andersson, 2004). The partnerships for sustainable development, established as a result of the Johannesburg Summit in 2002, have also been an important subject of research (e.g., Ivanova, 2003; Backstrand, 2006).

Involuntary Public Policy‐Making by For‐Profit Professionals: European Lawyers on Anti‐Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing

EU directives on AML (anti‐money laundering)/CTF (counter‐terrorism financing) entail involuntary public policy‐making by for‐profit professionals on politically sensitive issues. This raises fundamental questions on the role of private actors in public policy‐making apart from their roles as lobbyists and contractors. From a democratic perspective, the involuntary public policy‐making by European lawyers is particularly problematic as it involves guardians of the rule of law who, we argue, are simultaneously forced to act as agents of the state. In the case of AML/CTF, lawyers are within the political system rather than outside it. We show that expectations concerning how lawyers are to work closely with the state in the United Kingdom and Sweden differ, and that the policy‐making styles lawyers apply in practice were either ‘pragmatic’ (UK) or ‘evasive’ (Sweden). Our findings provide a first step in understanding the new role of for‐profit professionals as involuntary public policy‐makers, and its possible effects.

Organizational Legitimation in the Age of Governing by Numbers: The Case of Regulatory Partnerships on ESG Issues and Financial Decisions

Abstract The article analyses the legitimation processes of two transnational regulatory partnerships—the Equator Principles (EP) and the Principles for Responsible Investments (PRI)—providing guidelines for global financial institutions to take societal responsibility in their financial decisions. By using the theoretical concept of organizational legitimation it is argued that partnerships seek legitimacy from their audiences by constructing their boundaries (identity), coordinating activities (hierarchy), and producing goals (rationality). The empirical analysis shows that the EP and the PRI follow classical strategies of organizational legitimation. They reflect the norm of being societally responsible and create an agency that can be accountable for conformity with standards on environmental, social, and governance issues. The article pinpoints, however, two dilemmas for the EP and the PRI that stem from the global trend of governing by numbers, resulting in an expectations gap between the signatories and external NGOs. Those dilemmas could instead lead to a delegitimation of the partnerships.

Review section : Nordic Political Science and the Study of European Integration

The authors evaluate the impact of Nordic Political Science to the study of European integration and identify six areas of notable strength

Dealing with a High Technology Vulnerability Trap: The USA, Sweden and Industry

This article reviews the Swedish responses to the security policy challenge presented by the reactivated American high technology export control offensive of the early 1980s. This issue became a major problem for the Swedish social democratic government and was also of great concern to Swedish industrialists. The Swedish handling of its high technology vulnerability trap is discussed as an illustration of the use of different security-enhancing strategies by a small industrial state in a setting of adversarial interdependence. The case shows the persistent weight of interstate conflict within interdependence and highlights the webs of transnational relations which intrude upon the governing capacity of states. The tension between the logic of transnational society and intergovernmental relations becomes apparent. The Swedish handling of the high technology control issue in the 1980s can in part be explained in terms of a traditional small-state national adjustment strategy. By using the webs of transnationalism Sweden was also able to manoeuver to shape the necessary adjustment policies in ways acceptable from an international neutrality perspective and from a domestic politics perspective. A (trans)national mobilization strategy was exploited in this case. This case also suggests that the so-called second and third faces of power can help us to understand better the national security implications of transnational activities by states and societies.

Conclusions: The Political Role of Corporations

This volume has addressed the complex and classic questions on the roles of states and markets by analysing how this long-standing debate is manifested in corporate citizenship. Drawing on a range of disciplines, including political science, organization and management, sociology, and accounting, the authors in this volume make use of the notion of corporate citizenship as a device for delineating and analysing the political role of the corporation in the public domain.