Content area
Full Text
The study of European Union (EU) governance, how it operates and who contributes to it, is essential to our understanding of the functioning of this political system. This is particularly true in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, which deeply challenged existing forms of decision-making and redistribution mechanisms (Streeck and Schäfer, 2013). Possibly, the EU has never been so effective in imposing decisions on member states and societies. In this critical context, the long-term structuring impact of the policy tools and modes of governance that had been introduced in order to define a new approach to governance were made visible. By exploring this initial assumption both theoretically and empirically, this special issue sheds new light on current debates regarding the impact of the 2008 financial crisis on EU governance. Following the 2001 White Paper on European Governance , a series of new modes of governance and policy tools have been designed and implemented across EU policy domains in order to address simultaneously the problem-solving capacity of EU institutions and the need to strengthen the participation of civil society (Héritier and Rhodes, 2011). Managerial reforms within the EU Commission and policies justified the need for softer modes of governance such as regulatory networks, benchmarking and tools through which policy and state performance could be measured and compared. By providing more participative and negotiated ways of decision-making, these softer modes of governance increased the political and administrative governability of the EU (Coletti and Radaelli, 2013); yet, which actors and organizations benefited most from this new governance approach as well as its contribution to increasing the system's political accountability and democratic legitimacy remains a contested issue (Bellamy, 2011). The supposed superiority of new modes of governance - in terms of both inclusiveness and effectiveness - has been hotly debated in the EU literature. Following the changes brought since the 2008 crisis to the socio-economic and the fiscal governance regimes, these softer modes of governance have developed into harder, more coercive forms of decision-making, thus justifying the need to re-examine the 'softening narrative', which dominated academic and practitioners' debates about EU governance over the past 15 years.
Far from reopening classic debates on EU modes of governance, this special issue uses the governance notion as an organizing concept...