In the absence of an international migration regime, the rising salience of migration issues and the limits of unilateral policies led the European Union to seek appropriate venues for co-operation with the sending and transit countries of migrants. Many of the newer relevant multilateral or regional venues are soft law frameworks. Conversely, trade agreements provide a formal, hard law instrument for inserting migration clauses. Based on a quantitative analysis of EU trade agreements and expert interviews, this article investigates how far the EU is engaging in strategic issue-linkage when including migration clauses in its trade agreements. Testing hypotheses derived from ration- alist and institutionalist approaches, it thereby provides an empirical test of its acclaimed identity as ‘trade power’ or ‘market power’.
This contribution proposes a decentred conceptualization of Euro- pean Union (EU) international influence based on the external ramifications of its internal policies. It views the EU’s international role less as that of an emerging unitary actor than as conglomerate of loosely coupled sectoral regimes expanding their prescriptive scope towards third countries in differentiated ways. Combining conceptual approaches to (EU) power with empirical – analytical research on external governance and policy diffusion, the contribution defines the mechanisms of regu- latory extension, specifies their scope conditions, and highlights the role of transgo- vernmental networks, often involving international organizations, in ‘co-opting’ third country regulators into EU policies.
In a ‘demoi-cracy’, separate statespeoples enter into a political arrangement and jointly exercise political authority. Its proper domain is a polity of democratic states with hierarchical, majoritarian features of policy-making, especially in value-laden redistributive and coercive policy areas, but without a unified political community (demos). In its vertical dimension, demoi-cracy is based on the equality and interaction of citizens’ and statespeoples’ representatives in the making of common policies. Horizontally, it seeks to balance equal transnational rights of citizens with national policy-making autonomy. The EU belongs to the domain of demoi-cracy and has established many of its features. We argue that both vertical and horizontal demoi-cratization have been triggered by processes of supranational integration in the EU. They differ, however, in the origins and the outcomes. Vertical demoi-cratization has initially been a reaction of parliamentary institutional actors to majoritarian decision-making in regulatory policy-areas, resulting in the empowerment of the EP and the strengthening of parliamentary oversight at the national level. By contrast, horizontal demoi-cratization has been promoted by governments as an alternative to majoritarian and legally binding policy-making in core areas of statehood as well as coercive and redistributive policy-areas; it has resulted in soft, coordinative forms of policy-making, seeking to protect national autonomy. The extent to which these developments actually meet the normative standards of demoi-cracy in practice, however, is mixed.
The independence of International Civil Servants (ICSs) from their country of origin is often presumed but rarely accounted for empirically. In order to address this gap, we investigate whether ICSs face conflicts between national and international interests and which conditions are more conducive to the manifestation of this conflict in International Organizations. We adopt a mixed-methods design, including a survey with 1400 respondents working in two United Nations humanitarian organizations, followed by semi-structured interviews to a purposive sample of respondents. The findings show that such conflicts matter for ICSs, hierarchical grade has stronger explanatory power than the other factors, and the higher the level in the International Organization, the less frequently ICSs face conflict. The qualitative analysis explains this result by pointing to the effects of socialization among ICSs but also by shedding light on a related effect: dilution of national identity, as well as on the implications of locally recruiting lower-level staff.
Ce chapitre s’articule entre trois temps. Nous rappelons brièvement en quoi consistent les capacités évaluatives, les stratégies de développement de celles-ci et le rôle qu’y tient la recherche scientifique. Nous présentons ensuite un très bref résumé du développement des capacités évaluatives en Suisse, en mettant la focale sur la contribution de la recherche académique à la pérennisation de cette pratique. Nous concluons en soulignant que le rôle du secteur académique et, plus encore, de plusieurs personnalités à cheval entre le milieu universitaire, les bureaux d’évaluation privés et le secteur administratif, a été non négligeable dans le cheminement institutionnel de l’évaluation en Suisse.
Le projet de la modernisation de l’État entraîne de nombreux défis qui demandent une réflexion en profondeur sur la légitimité des actions publiques. Pour pouvoir juger de leur pertinence, de leur efficacité et de leur efficience par rapport à une situation sociale jugée politiquement problématique et inacceptable, un modèle d’analyse des politiques publiques est nécessaire. Il s’agit de distinguer une logique d’action, de discuter de sa cohérence et de -considérer sa mise en œuvre. Cet ouvrage présente, après une rapide revue de la littérature, les clés de l’analyse de politiques publiques, fondées sur le jeu des acteurs impliqués, les ressources que ceux-ci parviennent à mobiliser et les contraintes et les possibilités amenées par les règles institutionnelles. Tenant compte des processus liés à la mise à l’agenda des problèmes publics, à la programmation des actions publiques, à la mise en œuvre de ces actions et à l’évaluation des politiques publiques, un modèle d’analyse est ensuite proposé et illustré par des exemples français, suisses et canadiens. Ce modèle permet non seulement d’analyser les politiques publiques d’un point de vue scientifique afin de comprendre leur évolution, mais aussi d’accompagner des réformes d’institutions administratives ou de piloter de nouvelles politiques publiques. Les praticiens responsables des politiques publiques pourront en effet s’en servir pour mettre en évidence certaines régularités empiriques propres au fonctionnement des collectivités et des politiques publiques pour évaluer les chances de réussite et les effets attendus des projets de modernisation de l’État.
