Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Public lecture (20)
- Article (19)
- Part of a Book (6)
- Report (2)
- Working Paper (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- English (51) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (51)
Keywords
- Administrative Styles (1)
- European Directives (1)
- Europeanization (1)
- Interessengruppen (1)
- Regulierung (1)
Institute
- Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Stephan Grohs) (51) (remove)
Short presentation of the corresponding conference paper "A soft shell with a powerful core? Soft Europeanisation and social policy: a new understanding of the Open Method of Coordination and its potential to enhance social welfare in Europe", focussing on the theoretical idea and empirical evidence.
Influence of "hard" law on national policies still is a central topic in Europeanisation research. One aspect often overlooked is the impact of "soft" law instruments such as the "Open Method of Coordination" (OMC). Through the OMC all member states agree on common goals and exchange "best practices" to improve policy coordination in a certain area without the obligation (how) to design policies. OMC impacts in individual member states have been studied extensively, yet a comparative perspective explaining their variance is lacking. This study by Niclas Beinborn tries to fill this gap by analysing the different impacts of a recent OMC: the European Youth Strategy 2010 (EUYS). His analysis is twofold: in a first step he applies theory-driven fuzzy-set QCA to a novel dataset depicting the variance of national activities around the EUYS. As causalities remain unclear, in a second step he presents an innovative analysis framework encompassing two dimensions - national motivation and relative openness to implement non-binding EU law - to define ideal types of OMC adaptation. Case studies on the EUYS in Germany and Ireland proof the potential of this framework to explain why and how OMCs work (differently).
Public officials have been shown to discriminate against citizens based on race and gender. We suggest that bureaucrats also discriminate based on political beliefs that citizens reveal to them. We support this argument with evidence from the application of freedom of assembly rights in the context of gay marriage. We confront German city administrations with requests about the organization of a political rally and randomize the underlying political belief and cause: the promotion of or opposition to same-sex marriage. We find that none of these causes receives discriminatory treatment per se. Instead, further explorative, yet theory-guided, analysis indicates that the cultural and political environment within which bureaucracies are embedded determines which of the two requests receives worse and less helpful answers. I.e. the treatment effect seems to be moderated by the local prevalence of Catholicism and the strength of sexually conservative political parties that oppose same-sex marriage.