TY - JOUR A1 - Dawson, Mark A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - Accountability in the EU's para-regulatory state: The case of the Economic and Monetary Union JF - Regulation & Governance N2 - This article revisits Majone's famous argument about accountability in the regulatory state in reference to the European Union's (EU) Economic and Monetary Union. We show that the EU has entered the stage of a “para-regulatory state” marked by increasing EU regulation in areas linked to core state powers. Despite the redistributive and politicized nature of these policy areas, the EU's “para-regulatory state” has continued to rely on its regulatory model of accountability, focused on decisionmaking processes, and interest mediation. In line with Majone, we describe the model as procedural and contrast it to substantive accountability – which is necessary when regulation has clear redistributive implications. Using two case studies from fiscal policy and monetary affairs, we illustrate the predominance of procedural accountability as exercised by the European Parliament and EU Courts. We complement the empirical analysis with a normative discussion of how substantive accountability could potentially be rendered in both fields. Y1 - 2021 UR - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-42704 SP - 1 EP - 16 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Maricut‐Akbik, Adina T1 - Q&A in legislative oversight: A framework for analysis JF - European Journal of Political Research N2 - Abstract Parliamentary questions are an essential tool of legislative oversight. However, the extent to which they are effective in controlling the executive remains underspecified both theoretically and methodologically. This article advances a systematic framework for evaluating the effectiveness of parliamentary questions drawing on principal–agent theory, the public administration literature on accountability and communication research. The framework is called the ‘Q&A approach to legislative oversight’ based on the premise that the study of parliamentary questions (Q) needs to be linked to their respective answers (A) and examined together (Q&A) at the micro‐level as an exchange of claims between legislative and executive actors. Methodologically, the Q&A approach to legislative oversight offers a step‐by‐step guide for qualitative content analysis of Q&A that can be applied to different legislative oversight contexts at different levels of governance. It is argued that the effectiveness of Q&A depends on the strength of the questions asked and the responsiveness of answers provided, which are correspondingly operationalised. To illustrate the merits of the approach, the article includes a systematic case study on the relationship between the European Parliament and the European Central Bank in banking supervision (2013–2018), showing the connection between specific institutional settings and the effectiveness of parliamentary questions. KW - - KW - legislative oversight KW - parliamentary questions KW - principal–agent problems KW - European Parliament KW - European Central Bank Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12411 SP - n/a EP - n/a ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Dawson, Mark A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - Procedural vs substantive accountability in EMU governance: between payoffs and trade-offs JF - Journal of European Public Policy N2 - his article introduces a new normative framework for analysing accountability in the European Union’s Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). The framework is anchored in four normative ‘goods’ that accountability is supposed to ensure: openness, non-arbitrariness, effectiveness, and publicness. All of these can be achieved in a procedural or substantive way, depending on whether actors are held accountable for the quality of their decision-making processes or for the actual merit of their decisions. Transposed to EMU, this conceptualisation shows both the payoffs and trade-offs of prioritising procedural accountability. Using different examples across EMU governance, the article illustrates how current mechanisms of political, legal, and administrative accountability predominantly evaluate the procedures followed by EU institutions when performing their tasks. While such an approach can bring clarity, predictability, and autonomy for the actors involved, it distracts attention from the substantive assessment of EMU decisions. The article contributes to the EMU accountability literature by going beyond principal-agent expectations of democratic control rooted in the nation-state or legal debates about principles for accountable behaviour found in EU Treaties. The EMU, and the EU more broadly, need a different perspective on accountability focused on generally-applicable standards for holding power to account. Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2020.1797145 SP - 1 EP - 20 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Freudlsperger, Christian A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina A1 - Migliorati, Marta T1 - Opening Pandora’s Box? Joint Sovereignty and the Rise of EU Agencies with Operational Tasks JF - Comparitive Political Studies N2 - This article problematises the proliferation of European Union (EU) agencies with operational tasks as a new phenomenon capturing the exercise of joint sovereignty in European integration. While joint decision-making has been a feature of EU politics for decades, joint sovereignty is a broader category that additionally involves the creation of EU bodies able to intervene ‘on the ground’ alongside national public actors. We argue that the choice for joint sovereignty opens a Pandora’s box of implementation deficiencies which undermine the ability of both national and supranational actors to conduct operational activities effectively. We subsequently identify two frequent dysfunctions in policy implementation and connect them to ambiguity and conflict at the decision-making stage. Empirically, we illustrate the systemic link between decision-making and implementation problems in the functioning of two agencies with operational tasks active in the fields of border management (Frontex) and police cooperation (Europol). Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140211066223 VL - 55 IS - 12 SP - 1983 EP - 2014 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - Contesting the European Central Bank in Banking Supervision:Accountability in Practice at the European Parliament JF - JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies N2 - The establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) raised expectations regarding theability of the European Parliament (EP) to hold the European Central Bank (ECB) accountable forits decisions. This article examines the accountability interactions between the two institutions inthefirst years of the functioning of the SSM (2013–18). The focus is on the extent to which the EPcontests ECB supervisory decisions in practice through letters and public hearings. The analysisshows a frequently-used infrastructure of political accountability that is however limited in ensur-ing the contestation of ECB conduct in banking supervision. The study identifies problems withthe performance of the EP as an accountability forum and with the tight confidentiality rules ofthe SSM, which allow the ECB to silence contestation on many politically salient issues. Thefind-ings are based on an innovative analytical framework on the study of accountability interactions. KW - European Central Bank; European Parliament; accountability; single supervisory mecha-nism; political contestation Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13024 VL - 58 IS - 5 SP - 1199 EP - 1214 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - Speaking on Europe’s behalf: EU discourses of representation during the refugee crisis JF - Journal of European Integration N2 - This article aims to understand the lack of consensus at the European Union (EU) level during the refugee crisis based on the discursive polarization of the main governmental and institutional actors involved in decision-making. Drawing on de Wilde’s representative claims analysis, the goal is to trace competing claims of representation made on ‘Europe’s behalf’ by multiple actors claiming to defend EU values or the interests of citizens. The analysis covers Politico Europe articles published during 2015–16, capturing the height of the crisis. The findings illustrate the self-understandings of actors on a humanitarian-communitarian axis that became intertwined with concerns for internal EU solidarity and the survival of the Schengen Area. The analysis contributes to the literature on EU politicization and discursive framing during the refugee crisis, showing how the actors involved in EU decision-making had very different conceptions of what was at stake in the episode. KW - refugee crisis, European Union, discourse, institution, politicization Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2020.1855157 VL - 43 IS - 7 SP - 781 EP - 798 ER - TY - BOOK A1 - Akbik, Adina T1 - The European Parliament as an Accountability Forum: Overseeing the Economic and Monetary Union N2 - This book provides the first in-depth empirical study of the European Parliament’s powers of scrutiny of the executive in the European Union (EU), focusing on the politically salient field of the Economic and Monetary Union. The expansion of executive decision-making during the euro crisis was accompanied by an empowerment of the European Parliament through legislative oversight. This book examines how the European Parliament exercises that oversight on a day-to-day basis and thus contributes to political accountability at the EU level. Building on an innovative analytical framework for the study of parliamentary questions and answers, Adina Akbik sheds light on the European Parliament’s possibilities and limitations to hold EU executive bodies accountable more generally. Case studies cover the period 2012–2019 and include the European Central Bank in banking supervision, the European Commission, the Eurogroup, and the Economic and Financial Affairs Council. Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108886611 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - EU politicization beyond the Euro crisis: immigration crises and the politicization of free movement of people JF - Comparative European Politics N2 - This article explores the applicability of democratic functionalism as a theoretical framework explaining mechanisms of European Union (EU) politicization during immigration crises. Since most existing studies on the politicization of EU crisis situations focus on the Euro crisis, it is unclear if and how the politicization of EU immigration crises differs. Drawing on a 2011 crisis with legislative implications for the free movement of people in the Schengen Area, the article illustrates that immigration crises are politicized along exclusionary identities rather than along pro-/anti-European lines—as expected by democratic functionalism. Moreover, unlike in the Euro crisis, the 2011 case illustrates how the media can be instrumentalized by governments during immigration crises, with little political mobilization from the public. This case is relevant given the widespread politicization of the 2015 refugee crisis, which conversely attracted close media attention and caused serious public concern. As it stands, democratic functionalism is shown to lack a conceptualization of how much and for how long an issue needs to be contested in the European public sphere for the mechanisms of EU politicization described by the theory to hold. Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-018-0113-6 SN - 1472-4790 (print), 1740-388X (electronic) VL - 17 SP - 380 EP - 396 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - The dynamics of institutional behaviour in EU justice and home affairs: roles, representative claims, and varying policy positions JF - Journal of European Integration N2 - This article investigates the reasons behind varying institutional positions in the European Union’s (EU) area of justice and home affairs (JHA). It argues that such instances of institutional behaviour cannot be fully understood without examining how each institution seeks to legitimize its role in the EU political system. A novel theoretical framework on institutional behaviour is advanced, connecting individual policy positions and governance choices to (1) institutional roles developed within different types of organizational structure, and (2) the representative claims made by officials involved in decision-making. The framework draws on insights from organizational theory regarding institutional role expectations and a constructivist approach to representation borrowed from the work of Michael Saward. Using three cases of JHA legislation from the post-Lisbon period, it is shown that the framework can explain varying patterns of institutional behaviour by exploring lines of justification present in the institutional discourse. Y1 - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2017.1415334 SN - Print: 0703-6337 Online: 1477-2280 VL - 40 IS - 2 SP - 161 EP - 176 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Akbik, Adina ED - Dawson, Mark T1 - The Economic Dialogues with the Eurogroup: Substantive Accountability Claimed, but Unmet T2 - Substantive Accountability in Europe’s New Economic Governance N2 - As the most powerful executive actor in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), the Eurogroup has faced continuous demands to improve its accountability record since the euro crisis. One reform introduced to meet these demands were the Economic Dialogue – a regular exchange of views between the European Parliament and the President of the Eurogroup designed to ‘ensure greater transparency and accountability’ in the EMU. This chapter investigates the practical functioning of the Economic Dialogues with the Eurogroup between 2013 and the 2019 European Parliament elections. Applying the theoretical framework of the introduction, the purpose is to examine the extent to which the Parliament focuses on procedural or substantive accountability when questioning the Eurogroup President. Moreover, the chapter investigates the reasoning of parliamentary questions in line with the four accountability goods identified at the outset (openness, non-arbitrariness, effectiveness, and publicness). The findings show that Members of the European Parliament are eager to question the extent to which Eurogroup decisions are substantively open and effective, and to a lesser extent whether they are arbitrary or protect EU interests more generally. The analysis is based on fourteen transcripts of Economic Dialogues with the Eurogroup President, which took place between 2013 and 2019. KW - Accountability; Eurogroup; European Parliament; Council of the EU; Economic Dialogue; European Semester; ESM Y1 - 2023 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009228800.010 SP - 154 EP - 176 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Akbik, Adina A1 - Dawson, Mark ED - Dawson, Mark T1 - From Procedural to Substantive Accountability in EMU Governance T2 - Substantive Accountability in Europe’s New Economic Governance N2 - This chapter provides the volumes general conceptual framework. It begins by addressing why new approaches to accountability are needed, arguing that accountability literature has reached a stalemate as a result of an impasse between deductive and inductive approaches to accountability in the EU. It then argues that overcoming the stalemate requires developing a generalised framework of what accountability is for, deriving four accountability goods to be used in subsequent chapters. The chapter argues that each of the goods can be delivered in procedural or substantive ways, focusing either on the process by which decisions are made or the substantive worth of decisions themselves. The chapter concludes by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of both varieties of accountability before mapping out how the concepts will be applied across policy fields and institutions in subsequent chapters. Y1 - 2023 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009228800.003 SP - 19 EP - 44 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Dawson, Mark A1 - Bobić, Ana A1 - Maricut-Akbik, Adina T1 - Reconciling Independence and accountability at the European Central Bank: The false promise of Proceduralism JF - European Law Journal N2 - This article revisits the balancing act between independence and accountability at the European Central Bank (ECB). It contrasts procedural and substantive concepts of accountability, and challenges the mainstream idea that independence and accountability can be reconciled through narrow mandates, the indiscriminate increase of transparency, the creation of multiple channels of accountability, and the active use of judicial review. These assumptions form the pillars of a procedural type of accountability that promises to resolve the independence/accountability dilemma but fails to do so in practice. The article brings evidence to show how ECB accountability has become a complex administrative exercise that focuses on the procedural steps leading up to monetary and supervisory decisions while simultaneously limiting substantive accountability. The failure to acknowledge the trade‐off between independence and accountability (said to be ‘two sides of the same coin’) has resulted in a tendency to privilege the former over the latter. Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12305 SN - 1468-0386 VL - 25 IS - 1 SP - 75 EP - 93 ER -