Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the European Commission’s decision-making: The case of Glyphosate. Bazzan, G. & Migliorati, M. International Review of Public Policy, 2(1):68–89, International Public Policy Association, April, 2020. Number: 1![Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the European Commission’s decision-making: The case of Glyphosate. [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex With the growing politicisation of European Union (EU) integration, the European Commission is increasingly facing a tension between technocratic and responsive decision-making. How does this tension play out in the process of supranational implementation under comitology rules? We argue that the tension between the Commission´s role as a technocrat and as a responsive bureaucrat takes place during the implementation process when the issue at stake becomes politicised. We test our argument through the analysis of the Glyphosate renewal procedure (2015-2017). We process-trace the case by means of semi-structured interviews, media and document analysis. We find that with the increase of issue visibility and subsequent politicisation, the Commission progressively abandons a purely technocratic behaviour. First, it puts in place political strategies such as delays and blame-shifting to release itself from the burden of unpopular decisions. Secondly, it seeks to respond to concerns expressed by consumers by proposing compromise-based measures closer to public interest. Ultimately, we show how the outcome of the policy process is mediated by politicisation and characterised by a shift from technocratic to responsive decision making.
@article{bazzanExpertisePoliticsPublic2020,
title = {Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the {European} {Commission}’s decision-making: {The} case of {Glyphosate}.},
volume = {2},
copyright = {https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/},
issn = {2679-3873},
shorttitle = {Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the {European} {Commission}’s decision-making},
url = {https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/849},
doi = {10.4000/irpp.849},
abstract = {With the growing politicisation of European Union (EU) integration, the European Commission is increasingly facing a tension between technocratic and responsive decision-making. How does this tension play out in the process of supranational implementation under comitology rules? We argue that the tension between the Commission´s role as a technocrat and as a responsive bureaucrat takes place during the implementation process when the issue at stake becomes politicised. We test our argument through the analysis of the Glyphosate renewal procedure (2015-2017). We process-trace the case by means of semi-structured interviews, media and document analysis. We find that with the increase of issue visibility and subsequent politicisation, the Commission progressively abandons a purely technocratic behaviour. First, it puts in place political strategies such as delays and blame-shifting to release itself from the burden of unpopular decisions. Secondly, it seeks to respond to concerns expressed by consumers by proposing compromise-based measures closer to public interest. Ultimately, we show how the outcome of the policy process is mediated by politicisation and characterised by a shift from technocratic to responsive decision making.},
language = {en},
number = {1},
urldate = {2024-05-30},
journal = {International Review of Public Policy},
publisher = {International Public Policy Association},
author = {Bazzan, Giulia and Migliorati, Marta},
month = apr,
year = {2020},
note = {Number: 1},
keywords = {EU Commission, comitology, consumer protection, decision-making, politicization, public opinion, responsiveness},
pages = {68--89},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"4EQHyZBgny7hthgZb","bibbaseid":"bazzan-migliorati-expertisepoliticsandpublicopinionatthecrossroadsoftheeuropeancommissionsdecisionmakingthecaseofglyphosate-2020","author_short":["Bazzan, G.","Migliorati, M."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the European Commission’s decision-making: The case of Glyphosate.","volume":"2","copyright":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","issn":"2679-3873","shorttitle":"Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the European Commission’s decision-making","url":"https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/849","doi":"10.4000/irpp.849","abstract":"With the growing politicisation of European Union (EU) integration, the European Commission is increasingly facing a tension between technocratic and responsive decision-making. How does this tension play out in the process of supranational implementation under comitology rules? We argue that the tension between the Commission´s role as a technocrat and as a responsive bureaucrat takes place during the implementation process when the issue at stake becomes politicised. We test our argument through the analysis of the Glyphosate renewal procedure (2015-2017). We process-trace the case by means of semi-structured interviews, media and document analysis. We find that with the increase of issue visibility and subsequent politicisation, the Commission progressively abandons a purely technocratic behaviour. First, it puts in place political strategies such as delays and blame-shifting to release itself from the burden of unpopular decisions. Secondly, it seeks to respond to concerns expressed by consumers by proposing compromise-based measures closer to public interest. Ultimately, we show how the outcome of the policy process is mediated by politicisation and characterised by a shift from technocratic to responsive decision making.","language":"en","number":"1","urldate":"2024-05-30","journal":"International Review of Public Policy","publisher":"International Public Policy Association","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bazzan"],"firstnames":["Giulia"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Migliorati"],"firstnames":["Marta"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"April","year":"2020","note":"Number: 1","keywords":"EU Commission, comitology, consumer protection, decision-making, politicization, public opinion, responsiveness","pages":"68–89","bibtex":"@article{bazzanExpertisePoliticsPublic2020,\n\ttitle = {Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the {European} {Commission}’s decision-making: {The} case of {Glyphosate}.},\n\tvolume = {2},\n\tcopyright = {https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/},\n\tissn = {2679-3873},\n\tshorttitle = {Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the {European} {Commission}’s decision-making},\n\turl = {https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/849},\n\tdoi = {10.4000/irpp.849},\n\tabstract = {With the growing politicisation of European Union (EU) integration, the European Commission is increasingly facing a tension between technocratic and responsive decision-making. How does this tension play out in the process of supranational implementation under comitology rules? We argue that the tension between the Commission´s role as a technocrat and as a responsive bureaucrat takes place during the implementation process when the issue at stake becomes politicised. We test our argument through the analysis of the Glyphosate renewal procedure (2015-2017). We process-trace the case by means of semi-structured interviews, media and document analysis. We find that with the increase of issue visibility and subsequent politicisation, the Commission progressively abandons a purely technocratic behaviour. First, it puts in place political strategies such as delays and blame-shifting to release itself from the burden of unpopular decisions. Secondly, it seeks to respond to concerns expressed by consumers by proposing compromise-based measures closer to public interest. Ultimately, we show how the outcome of the policy process is mediated by politicisation and characterised by a shift from technocratic to responsive decision making.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\turldate = {2024-05-30},\n\tjournal = {International Review of Public Policy},\n\tpublisher = {International Public Policy Association},\n\tauthor = {Bazzan, Giulia and Migliorati, Marta},\n\tmonth = apr,\n\tyear = {2020},\n\tnote = {Number: 1},\n\tkeywords = {EU Commission, comitology, consumer protection, decision-making, politicization, public opinion, responsiveness},\n\tpages = {68--89},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Bazzan, G.","Migliorati, M."],"key":"bazzanExpertisePoliticsPublic2020","id":"bazzanExpertisePoliticsPublic2020","bibbaseid":"bazzan-migliorati-expertisepoliticsandpublicopinionatthecrossroadsoftheeuropeancommissionsdecisionmakingthecaseofglyphosate-2020","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://journals.openedition.org/irpp/849"},"keyword":["EU Commission","comitology","consumer protection","decision-making","politicization","public opinion","responsiveness"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero-group/lisageorge/5712602","dataSources":["wyomW5pZBH3FGfJW9"],"keywords":["eu commission","comitology","consumer protection","decision-making","politicization","public opinion","responsiveness"],"search_terms":["expertise","politics","public","opinion","crossroads","european","commission","decision","making","case","glyphosate","bazzan","migliorati"],"title":"Expertise, politics and public opinion at the crossroads of the European Commission’s decision-making: The case of Glyphosate.","year":2020}