TY - JOUR
T1 - Building European Union capacity to manage transboundary crises
T2 - Network or lead-agency model?
AU - Boin, A.
AU - Busuioc, M.
AU - Groenleer, M.
PY - 2014/12/1
Y1 - 2014/12/1
N2 - © 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.In recent years, the European continent has witnessed a substantial number of "transboundary crises" - crises that cross geographical borders and affect multiple policy domains. Nation states find it hard to deal with such crises by themselves. International cooperation, thus, becomes increasingly important, but it is not clear what shape or form that cooperation should take. This article explores the growing role of the European Union (EU) in managing transboundary crises. More specifically, it reflects on the different ways in which the expanding contours of the EU's emerging crisis capacity can be organized. Using three "performative dimensions" - sense-making, coordination, and legitimacy - the article discusses the possible advantages and disadvantages of a decentralized, network model and compares it with a more centralized, lead-agency model. It concludes that the current network model is a logical outcome of the punctuated and fragmentary process through which EU crisis management capacities have been created. It also notes that the shortcomings of this model may necessitate elements of a lead-agency model. Such "agencification" of networks for transboundary crisis management may well lead to a hybrid model that is uniquely suited for the peculiar organizational and political creature that the EU is.
AB - © 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.In recent years, the European continent has witnessed a substantial number of "transboundary crises" - crises that cross geographical borders and affect multiple policy domains. Nation states find it hard to deal with such crises by themselves. International cooperation, thus, becomes increasingly important, but it is not clear what shape or form that cooperation should take. This article explores the growing role of the European Union (EU) in managing transboundary crises. More specifically, it reflects on the different ways in which the expanding contours of the EU's emerging crisis capacity can be organized. Using three "performative dimensions" - sense-making, coordination, and legitimacy - the article discusses the possible advantages and disadvantages of a decentralized, network model and compares it with a more centralized, lead-agency model. It concludes that the current network model is a logical outcome of the punctuated and fragmentary process through which EU crisis management capacities have been created. It also notes that the shortcomings of this model may necessitate elements of a lead-agency model. Such "agencification" of networks for transboundary crisis management may well lead to a hybrid model that is uniquely suited for the peculiar organizational and political creature that the EU is.
UR - https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/7cc1ad0e-69bf-4e6b-9e7f-344d45436962
U2 - 10.1111/rego.12035
DO - 10.1111/rego.12035
M3 - Article
SN - 1748-5983
VL - 8
SP - 418
EP - 436
JO - Regulation and Governance
JF - Regulation and Governance
IS - 4
ER -