What Makes the EU Tick? : Understanding the Role of Ideas in the Design of the European Institutions in a Novel Way

(1)

Linköping University | Department of Management and Engineering Master’s thesis, 30 credits| International and European Relations Spring 2021|LIU-IEI-FIL-A--21/03754--SE

What Makes the EU Tick?

- Understanding the Role of Ideas in the Design of the

European Institutions in a Novel Way

Alice Framba

Supervisor: Per Jansson Examiner: Mikael Blomdahl

Linköping University SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden +46 013 28 10 00, www.liu.se

(2)

Abstract

This Research is aimed at becoming a theoretical contribution to the field of European Integration Theory and IR for two reasons. Firstly, this Research proposes the theoretical perspective of Talcott Parsons from sociology and organizational research to scholars within IR Theory. By employing the historical institutionalist and social constructivist IR perspectives and Parsons’s ‘four-function paradigm’ theory, scholars can identify the two effects of a successful institutional design of international political organizations such as the EU: effectiveness and a good public reputation. The Literature Review in Chapter 2 is a theoretical discussion about compatibility of the Parsonians concepts of ‘adaptation’, a ‘holistic approach to policymaking’, ‘success’, and the ‘European institutional design’ with the European Integration Theory and IR fields. The same Chapter stresses the need to consider the ‘ideas’ of political leaders in analysing change of institutional design. The second reason for which this Research is a contribution to IR theory is the presentation of eight specific strategies that are likely to generate an organization’s success. The eight strategies are institutional conditions making up the ‘eight-condition model’ of Charles Edquist. This Research adopts an objective and deductive approach that applies the Parsonians theory and the Edquist’s ‘eight-condition model’ to empirical data about European institutions in a cross-sectional and longitudinal research design in the Analysis Chapters 4, 5, and 6. A ‘holistic innovation policy approach’ to supranational policymaking is employed by the Researcher for the salient circumstances of success to be identified, in order to guide data collection and analysis. The results show that success occurred three times: fully, in the years between 1945 and 1958 and from 1959 to 2002, and partially from 2003 until our days. The concepts of ‘adaptation’, ‘success’, ‘ideas’, the ‘four-function paradigm’ theory of Parsons and the ‘eight-condition model’ of Edquist are discussed and ultimately claimed to be both epistemologically compatible and methodologically valid for studies about the success of European integration in the Discussions and Conclusions Chapter.

The Eight-Condition Model of Charles Edquist

Key Words: European Union Institutions, Organizational Research, European Integration Theory, Adaptation,

Historical Institutionalism, Ideas.

Word Count: 23 477 Excluding front page, abstract, acknowledgements, acronyms and abbreviations, contents, bibliography and appendices

1. First Condition: Epistemic Communities at the Supranational Level.

2. Second Condition: Direct Channels of Influence from the Supranational Agent to the Public. 3. Third Condition: The Foundation of a New Organization.

4. Fourth Condition: Change in Inter-Institutional Relations.

5. Fifth Condition: Decision-Making Power Delegation to the Supranational Organization.

6. Sixth Condition: Administration Support for Innovative Policy-Making at the Supranational Level. 7. Seventh Condition: Commercialization of Knowledge Production at the Supranational Level. 8. Eighth Condition: Consultancy Services Availability to Supranational Decision-Makers.

(3)

Acknowledgements

Graduating at Linköping University is for me a big step, bringing my life towards a professional future, while growing in maturity and confidence. I am immensely grateful to all those who made this path possible for me, by supporting me in all ways: professionally, personally, and financially, during these two years of my life.

Firstly, I thank my supervisor, Per Jansson, who guided me, and is a model of wisdom, determination, professionalism, and tenacity during my study and thesis research years: thank you. Secondly, I thank all people in Linköping University: my classmates, for their enthusiasm and joy inspiring me; all the teaching staff, for the personal and professional teaching that I received; and, finally, the University, because of the administrative and material support that I, as student, could enjoy; thank you all.

Thirdly, I thank my old and new friends who supported me both prior, and during, my studies in Linköping University: my Italian-Swedish family Drakenward and Orsingher; the French family Pajus; the Czech-Swedish family Bauer; my tenant and roommates of Lambohov; my employers and job colleagues in SAAND Service och Omsorg AB and in Leanlink Hjälmsätersgatan Servicehus; my orchestra director and colleagues in Linköpings Akademiska Orkester; my Swedish language teachers and colleagues in Svenska För Invandrare Astar Skola (SFI); for all the attention, the care, and the hospitality that I needed during my life in Sweden; thank you all.

Finally,

My highest gratitude for the achievement of a Master Degree of International and European Relations is for my family Framba and Orsingher,

For my brothers Matteo, Lorenzo, and Davide, and For my parents Sonia and Enrico:

(4)

Acronyms and Abbreviations

CJEU - Court of Justice of the European Union COPAC - Community Patent’s Appeal Court CSDP - Common Security and Defence Policy EC - European Community

ECB - European Central Bank

ECSC - European Coal and Steel Community EEAS - European External Action Service EEC - European Economic Community EU - European Union

Euratom - European Atomic Energy Community FRA - European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights

HR/VP - High Representative/Vice President of the European Commission IGC - Intergovernmental Conference

IR - International Relations

ISIS - Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant MI - Methodological Individualism NIC - National Innovation Council QMV - Qualified Majority Voting R&D - Research & Development SEA - Single European Act

TEU - Treaty on the European Union

TFEU - Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union UK - United Kingdom

UN - United Nations

(5)

Chapter One

Introduction

1.1 Research Contextualization

Theories about European integration are an essential tool for those interested in studying this phenomenon.1 European Integration Theories vary widely because they explain selective aspects of the EU institutional development, following the distinctive approach of each theoretical

perspective.2_{In addition to this, because European integration develops often in ways that the}

academic field does not foresee, theory development is required, in order to adjust contributions correspondingly to change.3 This Research aims for theory development of the field of European Integration by proposing the adoption of concepts from sociology and organizational research. Experts in the IR field claim that theory development can be achieved in two ways. Firstly, by criticizing existing approaches and considering how much each contribution is relevant to a specific circumstance. Secondly, by reformulating the most promising results in a novel way on the new empirical data.4

Studies show that a historical pattern of European integration is characterized by delegation to the supranational level of traditional state powers through accommodation. This tends more to stability, than change, than it was sixty years ago.5 Hence, one can suppose that European institutions have

1_{T. Diez, T. and A. Wiener, ‘Introducing the Mosaic of Integration Theory’, in Wiener, A. et al., European Integration}

Theory, 3rd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019, p. 2.

2_Ibid. 3_{Ibid., p. 3.} 4_Ibid.

5_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, The Political System of the European Union, Macmillan Education, United Kingdom, 2011,}

(8)

reached the ‘constitutional equilibrium’ situation.6_{According to this view, the distribution of both}

power and policy areas among national and supranational institutions within, or outside national policy-making, generates a clear sense of limit against further delegation and institutional change.7 In spite of this, the EU faces currently a legitimation crisis, caused by contrasting opinions on the matter of a European constitutional setting. Since 2003, the ideas of establishing a Constitution for Europe have been questioned by many, on the basis that the document would generate a political integration of national constituencies in the Member States, which not everyone desired.8 On the other hand, governance theory suggests adopting such a document in order to enhance the efficiency of the European institutional setting.9 Because of this, a contrast appears between

arguments preferring European institutions with no direct links with the public, and those in favour of a Constitution that creates political integration on a democratic pan-European base.

This Research proposes a novel perspective to study European integration by focusing on the concept of ‘adaptation’.10 The concept of ‘integration’ presupposes that European societies

converge their economic and political objectives through a promotion of supranational delegation.11 However, it is questioned that delegation will be granted in the next future, because of a broad disenchantment on the project for the Constitution for Europe, ultimately apparent in the dismemberment process of the UK from the EU.12 The focus driving this Research shifts

consequently from ‘integration’ to ‘adaptation’, defined as the quality that political organizations

6_{Ibid., p. 11.} 7_{Ibid., p. 7.}

8_{J. Fiszer, ‘Czy Unia Europejska zagraża państwu i jego interesom narodowym? Aspekty teoretyczne i utylitarne’}

[Does the European Union threaten the state and its national interests? Theoretical and utilitarian aspects], in J. Ruszkowsi, and R. Podgórzańska, Państwo w Unii Europejskiej [State in the European Union], Szczecin, 2017, p. 23.

9_{J. Ruszkowski, ‘From finalité politique to multifinalité. Theoretical basis explaining the turn in the process of defining}

the future of the European Union’, Romanian Journal of European Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 2, December 2020, p. 131.

10_{S. Segre, Talcott Parsons, An Introduction, University Press of America, Inc., Plymouth, 2012, p. 10.} 11_{Ibid., p. 11.}

12_{A. Wiener, A. ‘Taking Stock of Integration Theory’, in Wiener, A. et al., European Integration Theory, 3rd Ed.,}

(9)

have, when their institutional design changes in order to successfully solve external policy problems or crises.13

Experts in the field notice that European institutional development resembles a progress towards a combination between ‘integration’ and ‘non-integration’, as opposed to ‘integration’ or

‘disintegration’, e.g. a loss in public legitimacy.14_{The aforementioned progress is characterized by}

episodes when supranational delegation to the EU is granted by states not totally, but partially, according to a specific policy area and occasion.15 In this context, adopting the concept of

‘adaptation’ is suggested, in order to describe the ability that the EU shows in both being a political organization that receives delegation only in a limited number of policy areas, and in maintaining a sufficient level of legitimation in the functions that it pursues when policy crises occur.16

Scholars have been interested in European institutional characteristics for decades, because the involvement that the organization has had in the making of policies implemented within states has been more significant than in the past.17 People and practitioners alike wonder, however, on the direction and extent to which the supranational decision-making European organization can afford to change social, and jurisdictional, practices on single nations, while holding a good reputation among citizens.18 Institutional design of political organizations is suggested as being a factor for their good reputation, because the ideas founding organizations affect on social practices through institutional norms and legislation.19 The ‘social theory’ of Talcott Parsons from organizational research proposes to adopt the ‘Adaptation’ concept to study the institutional design of institutions,

13_{S. Segre, p. 10.}

14_{T. A. Börzel, T. and T. Risse, ‘Litmus Tests for European Integration Theories: Explaining Crises and Travelling}

beyond Europe’, in Wiener, A. et al., European Integration Theory, 3rd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019, p. 243.

15_Ibid.

16_{S. Segre, p. 10.}

17_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 2.} 18_{Ibid., p. 11.}

(10)

such as the EU, and to understand social change as a consequence of institutional design during periods of policy problems and crises.20 This suggestion is followed in this Research, aiming to propose a sociological perspective to the fields of IR and European Integration Theory, which is based on theoretical contributions from the ‘social theory’ of Parsons in the European institutions case. The European institutional ‘success’ is the theoretical result from the ‘four-function paradigm’ model of political organizations that Parsons presents: when institutions are empirically found to have the same features that the aforementioned ‘four-function paradigm’ model suggests, they are supposed to function effectively in spite of a small number of delegated policy-areas, and to be reputable among the general public.21 The four concepts of the ‘four-function paradigm’ model are ‘adaptation’, ‘success’, ‘ideas’ or ‘Latency’, and ‘institutional design’ or ‘Integration’.22

The Parsonian concepts of his ‘four-function paradigm’ model form the conceptual apparatus of this Research on the EU, and are proposed as a novel way to study European integration.23 Each of the concepts is presented and their validity on the European institutional case evaluated in a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. While political agents at European institutions promoted solutions to policy problems, institutional limits could not be easy to overcome or ignore.24_{Because of this,}

the role of ‘ideas’ in ‘institutional design’ leading to ‘success’ is critically addressed in this Research. Following this, this Research studies the European ‘institutional design’ by considering both the creative capacity of political personalities at the EU, e.g. ‘ideas’ in the cross-sectional part of the study, and the institutional practices that these persons proposed in history, which an

‘adaptation’ approach identifies for ‘success’, in the longitudinal part of the study.25

20_{Ibid., p. 10.} 21_{Ibid., p. 11.} 22_{Ibid., pp. 10-11.} 23_Ibid.

24_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 338.}

(11)

1.2 Research Questions and Objectives

This Research reflects on IR and European Integration Theories by considering their contributions with regard to institutional design. Among them are social constructivist and governance theoretical approaches. Social constructivist approaches suggest that ideas and agency are two aspects affecting institutional output and organizational behaviour. On the other hand, governance theory emphasizes the importance of institutional design with regard to efficiency when institutions pursue goals.26 In addition to this, a historical institutionalist approach stresses the role that history and agents have in institutional practices. Five Research Questions test whether, when, how and why the EU is

‘successful’ when its institutional design ‘adapts’ in front of policy problems and crises according to the eight-condition model of Edquist. The five Research Questions are:

v When do European institutions demonstrate to be capable of ‘adaptation’?

v Do the strategies chosen for shaping the European institutional design correspond to the

model that organizational research proposes for success?

v What is the influence of ideas on the European institutional design? v What are the main features in the design of current European institutions?

v What can be improved on the European institutional design in order to increase its

likelihood of success?

(12)

A study of Charles Edquist from organizational research found that there is a causal relation from the way in which an institution is designed to the organization’s reputation. According to his study, the fulfillment of eight ‘conditions’ in institutional design increases the likelihood of the occurrence of a good reputation among the public.27 Each of the eight conditions is a political action taken during the design of institutions, which showed to be positively associated with the successful achievement of goals. The Researcher summarizes the eight conditions for the success of political organizations in a list of eight points here below, forming the ‘eight-condition model’ (see

Appendix 1 for the original text). By exploring whether the EU shows to manifest the same

characteristics that the eight-condition model describes, this Research claims to be presenting some of the factors that are likely to have enhanced the efficiency and reputation of the EU.

5. Fifth Condition: Decision-Making Power Delegation to the Supranational Organization. 6. Sixth Condition: Administration Support for Innovative Policy-Making at the

Supranational Level.

7. Seventh Condition: Commercialization of Knowledge Production at the Supranational Level.

8. Eighth Condition: Consultancy Services Availability to Supranational Decision-Makers. In conclusion, efficiency and good reputation of an organization seem to be associated with institutional design. This appears in some of the words of the Swedish Government about the

27_{C. Edquist, ‘Towards a holistic innovation policy: Can the Swedish National Innovation Council (NIC) be a role}

(13)

success of the National Innovation Council (NIC), a Swedish political organization fulfilling the eight-condition model [emphases added]:28

• “There is a large potential for using procurement as an instrument to enhance development

and innovation.”

• “The public sector can also enhance innovation in suppliers by, in procurement, demand functions rather than ready solutions.”

• “By requiring functions instead of having specific requirements with regard to goods and services, the creativity and ability to innovate of the potential suppliers are enhanced.” • “To demand functions can increase competition in the procurement, since a larger number of

firms and organizations can respond to the tenders, which is beneficial particularly for small and medium-sized firms.”

(14)

Chapter Two

Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

How European institutions adapt to crises is explored in the field of European Integration Theory.29 Liberal theory, in particular the one held by intergovernmentalist thinkers, claims that state national interests are the central reason that explains delegation of political powers to European institutions: choosing to delegate decision-making powers to them occurs if state actors have the national

interest of doing so.30 However, following the creation of institutional organizations, the subsequent attitude among national leaders in political bargaining can lead to tensions, as it was seen in the European case. 31 Tensions are likely to complicate interstate relations beyond what the theory supposes is necessary to achieve goals in the national interest of states.32

On the other hand, neo-functionalist theory informs that the direction of the development of European organizations follows the logic of a ‘more centralized Europe’, following political integration and cooperation at the supranational level, as indicated previously.33 However, a neo-functionalist theory is not useful to understand why Member States have kept policymaking in many policy areas outside the control of European institutions, despite it would have relieved them

29_{J. Sterling-Folker, ‘Neoliberalism’, in T. Dunne, et al., International Relations Theories, Discipline and Diversity,}

4th Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, p. 95.

30_Ibid.

31_{T. Christiansen, ‘European and Regional Integration’, in J. Baylis, and S. Smith, The Globalization of World Politics,}

An Introduction to International Relations, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, p. 500.

32_{B. Van Apeldoorn, and L. Horn, ‘Critical Political Economy’, in A. Wiener, et al., European Integration Theory, 3}rd

ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019, p. 213.

33_{M. A. Pollack, ‘Rational Choice and Historical Institutionalism’, in A. Wiener, et al., European Integration Theory,}

(15)

from political responsibility to the European public in critical situations.34_{It follows that a novel}

explanation on institutional practices calls for considerations which do not lay on the rationalist ontology of the two previously presented theories, in order to grasp the sociological aspects of institutional processes at the EU. This is found in the contributions from sociology and

organizational research, in particular in the concepts of ‘adaptation’, ‘success’, ‘ideas’, the ‘European Institutions’, the ‘social model’ and its ‘four-function paradigm’, and the ‘eight-condition model’, which this Chapter presents.

2.2 Historical Institutionalism

A theoretical approach to historical political phenomena regarding organizations is historical institutionalism.35 Institutionalist theories explore the link between output and organizational settings, and explain the factors that make particular policy outcomes more likely to result from a certain kind of institutional practice, than others.36 Institutionalist theorists emphasize the analytical distinction between the way in which an organization is designed, the institutional processes that sustain its daily work, and delivered policies. 37_{Institutionalism defines the concepts of ‘institution’}

and ‘organization’, which organizational research employs, on the role that people have within institutional processes.

According to institutionalism and organizational research, an ‘organization’ differs from an ‘institution’: while ‘organization’ is the formal structure that actors create in order to pursue an ultimate policy objective, ‘institution’ is the set of rules and social norms on the relations between

34_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 96.}

35_{S. Steinmo,‘Historical institutionalism’, in D. Della Porta, and M. Keating, Approaches and Methodologies in the}

Social Sciences, A Pluralist Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 129.

36_{M. A. Pollack, p. 109.} 37_Ibid.

(16)

different agents.38_{Following institutionalism, the ‘learning’ capacity of political institutions can be}

seen as a component of the social process occurring within organizations.39 While

neo-functionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism offer valid interpretations about several aspects of institutional development, European organizations were designed on solutions, which belonged to a ‘middle ground’ in the range between the originality of innovative solutions from past practices, and structural constraints. For instance, the ‘agency’ and creative capacity of English politician Winston Churchill was seen in his new idea for a ‘United States of Europe’ in 1946; yet, his project became further developed for the first time at the Treaty of Paris signature in 1951, because

European societies and norms were favourable to implementing Churchill’s idea only at that year in history.40

Because of uncertainties about the line on which the EEC/EU has experienced change, an empirical and historical approach to European institutional development is chosen. Historical institutionalism is the theory selected for the aims of this Research, because it allows a longitudinal exploration of institutional factors on historical patterns, by taking into account individual agency, institutional norms and rules, as well as history.41_{Individuals and groups’ ideas are the source of change alone,}

unless institutional rules and norms, or history, set a limit on the agents’ capacity to develop a novel strategy in institutional design.42 This finding is in line with the ones of those claiming that the direction of development in the design of European institutions assumed three different shapes. They state that the way in which the final objectives of institutions were defined, and re-defined, answered to the needs perceived by leaders in their historical context.43_{These periods are featured}

by: the initial definition of purpose for institutional creation; the following extension of its goals to 38_{C. Edquist, p. 870.} 39_{M. A. Pollack, p. 113.} 40_{A. Bryman, p. 166.} 41_{S. Steinmo, p. 119.} 42_{A. Bryman, p. 26.} 43_{J. Ruszkowski, p. 143.}

(17)

political, and economic, policy areas; and the final pluralisation in the direction of tasks, the ‘multifinalité’, that the EU is expected to implement in our times.44

It is claimed that people at European institutions are able to solve problems, which implies that they are capable of learning from their own limits, when finding practical solutions in order to achieve the goals for which institutions are created.45_{The most common solution chosen by European}

leaders in history was to set up a collaborative arena, where they could meet, and create, or change, a supranational institution, which is capable of helping them solve the problems that they

encountered.46 Institutional change is described by liberal intergovernmentalist theory as a shift in the way European institutions function to pursue the ends of national constituencies.47 In contrast, neo-functionalist thinkers argue that the European institutional setting develops towards

‘integration’, which is the result of political wishes to further collaboration at the supranational level of decision-making through delegation of state prerogatives and powers to the EU.48 However, both approaches are based on a rationalist assumption: decision-makers at the EU propose changes in institutional design independently from influences by the social interaction between them, and the political environment in which they live at a specific point of time.

The aforementioned two non-rational factors are explored in social constructivist theories, and historical institutionalist theory, respectively.49 Social constructivism suggests that the role of organizational identity-building plays in institutional design is relevant, thus the EU institutional setting can additionally be inspired by ideas promoted by political leaders and groups.50_{In addition}

44_Ibid.

47

J. Sterling-Folker, p. 88.

48_{M. A. Pollack, p. 122.}

49_{T. A. Börzel, T. and T. Risse, pp. 243-244.} 50_{Ibid., p. 244}

(18)

to this, historical institutionalist theory considers that agents are bound by institutional rules, which can delimit the range of their proposals about institutional change.51

Liberal intergovernmentalist and neo-functionalist thinkers, in contrast with social constructivist theorists, debate on the ontological question about the rational, or irrational, nature of agency. Agency is the characteristic that people have when designing institutions, according to all positions.52 However, theories about the predictability of human behaviour in society stay on different positions of a theoretical range between subjectivist, called ‘constructivist’, and

objectivist, or ‘positivists’ ontological approaches on people’s actions.53 Along the objectivist end, theorists stress that people act from ideas driven solely by their wishes and rational calculations.54 For instance, Methodological Individualism (MI) represents such a theoretical view, because it claims that what causes an individual to respond to external inputs is her rational cognition about the full range of possible alternatives, and the likelihood that each of them has, when chosen, to solve an external problematic situation.55

Liberal intergovernmentalism and neo-functionalism rely on an objectivist ontological position.56

At the other end of the ontological spectrum of theoretical approaches, subjectivist thinkers consider the limitations that environmental factors set on the individual’s range of choices, which eventually limit her to adopt a single set of actions, as structural realist thinkers, for instance, suppose.57 In contrast to an objectivist or subjectivist ontological position, social constructivist theorists stress the role of ‘identity’, defined as an individual’s perception of her role in society:

51_{Ibid., p. 243.} 52_Ibid.

53_{A. Bryman, p. 27.}

54_{C. Chwaszcza, ‘Game Theory’, in D. Della Porta and M. Keating, Approaches and Methodologies in the Social}

Sciences, A Pluralist Perspective, 5th_{Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 139.}

55_Ibid. 56_Ibid.

57_{J. J. Mearsheimer, ‘Structural Realism’, in T. Dunne et al., International Relations Theories, Discipline and}

(19)

‘identity’ affects significantly on the range of possible definitions of ‘interest’ and choices by individuals and groups. Because of this, interpretation is their preferred epistemology, in order to identify the intangible factors of institutional behaviour, e.g. ‘ideas’ and ‘interest’, which influence social behaviour to unpredictable results.

2.3 Organizational Research

A parallelism between European institutions, and those of economic or political kind is drawn, and common features presented. While a supranational political body differs from a national one, it is useful to present the essential aspects of organizations for the purpose of adding a novel perspective to the European Integration Theory field of research, on the reasons that led European institutions toward the current institutional design through its capacity of adaptation to historical times of crisis.58

Both commercial and political organizations present a set of common characteristics for two reasons.59_{The first one is a ‘learning’ process: this is a change of institutional practices and norms}

following a recognized institutional incapacity to achieve political objectives.60 Commercial enterprises adopt a learning process in two ways, by innovating products or processes of production.61 Product innovations are new material goods or tangible services, while process innovations are the improved technological or organizational processes that produce products.62 Commercial enterprises and political organizations are similar in the relation between outputs and

58_{T. Dunne, ‘The English School’, in T. Dunne, et al., International Relations Theories, Discipline and Diversity, 4}th

Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, p. 113.

59_{C. Edquist, p. 870.} 60_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 98.} 61_{C. Edquist, p. 870.} 62_Ibid.

(20)

innovative processes of production.63_{In addition, both commercial and political institutions, in their}

‘learning’ capacities, employ product and process innovation. The difference lies in the kind of product delivered: while commercial enterprises deliver goods or services, political institutions in a liberal-democratic system are expected to propose policies following public needs.

A second reason for comparing commercial and political organizations is that commercial organizations are similar to political ones in the fact that both are set as a means to achieving political ultimate objectives.64 Ultimate policy objectives, which are political goals such as

economic progress, long-term sustainable development, social justice, or peace between states, can be achieved only by means of direct policy objective instruments, which organizations and

institutions possess by design.65_{By delegating part of direct policy objectives to a separate set of}

organizations, political actors increase the likelihood that problems hindering the achievement of ultimate policy goals are addressed, and obstacles removed.66

This seems to be the case of European institutions as well. The ideas behind the creation of the European Economic Community in 1957, which recalled the ones at the Messina Conference in 1955, resonate with the reasoning of Churchill in 1946.67 His ideas shows that the first steps of creating the European Economic Community were based on a liberal philosophy, which emphasizes the progress in interstate relations upon the work of a supranational organization governed by multilateral institutions.68 The Council of Europe represented the environment, where common direct political objectives were agreed upon, and where decision-makers designed an organizational

63_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 99.} 64_{Ibid., p. 97.}

65_{C. Edquist, p. 871.} 66_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 99.}

67_{europa.eu, ‘Winston Churchill: calling for a United States of Europe’,}

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history/eu-pioneers_en#winston_churchill accessed on 8th_{March 2021, 17:03, p. 1.}

(21)

setting suitable to achieve their goals after the aftermath of the Second World War.69_{Because of}

this, it is possible to state that both commercial and political organizations are ‘successful’ to the extent that the implementation of direct policy objectives is functional to the achievement of ultimate policy goals. While in commercial organizations ultimate policy goals are defined in economic terms, the ones of the European institutions seem to have aimed at non-economic political objectives. In international relations, a reason for the creation of policy-making organizations is the political wish to succeed in the achievement of ultimate goals of a political and multinational kind.70

Evidence suggests that it is possible to draw a comparison between political institutions, and those of commercial kind. It is found that the European institutions, similarly to commercial ones, adopt solutions that require innovative thinking.71 People live in a context that delimits their spheres of influence, as well as the range of their possible choices for action.72 Likewise, European leaders are people, whose range of creative solutions at European institutions has limitations on the base of institutional rules and norms. In addition to this, experts found European organizational responses in both policy and policy-making innovation processes.73_{The ‘learning’ capacity of European}

institutions is seen in ‘layering’, when new policies are made in order to replace ineffective ones, and in the refinement of ‘mechanisms of conversion’, which is the shift of direct policy objectives agreed by the institutional setting.74

69_{T. Christiansen, p. 496.}

70_{B. Russett, ‘Liberalism’, in T. Dunne, et al., International Relations Theories, Discipline and Diversity, 4th ed.}

Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, p. 81.

71_{A. Krok-Paszkowska, ‘How Much Diversity Can the European Union Withstand?’ Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman}

Paper Series, Vol. 5, No. 30, 2005, p. 10.

72_{K. M. Fierke, ‘Constructivism’, in T. Dunne, et al., International Relations Theories, Discipline and Diversity, 4}th

Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2016, p. 171.

73_{T. Christiansen, p. 500.} 74_{M. A. Pollack, p. 123.}

(22)

IR theories are chosen in order to analyse the social factors influencing institutional processes, when people are the agents for the development and change that occur within the institutions themselves.75 Theorists explore the role of ideas, as well as historical influences on the creation of organizations and in their capacity to adaptation and success, from several theoretical positions. In the context of European institutions, ‘ideas’ are solutions to several policy-, and process-related problems.76_{It becomes consequently necessary to adopt a theoretical perspective taking ‘ideas’ into}

account in the context of research about institutional behaviour. 77

Organizational research and sociology are two theoretical contributions that this Research takes into account in the present Chapter. They propose additional conceptual tools that the Analysis employs in Chapters 4, 5, and 6. The novel concepts of ‘adaptation’, ‘success’, ‘ideas’, and the ‘European institutional design’ are further described respectively in Section 2.8 about the ‘social theory’ of Talcott Parsons, as well as in Sections 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7. The aforementioned five concepts, as well as the ‘eight-condition model’ of Charles Edquist, are proposed to the field of European Integration Theory in the Conclusions of Chapter 7 following the Analysis Chapters, where theoretical compatibility is tested and evaluated.

2.4 Adaptation

Adaptation is the capacity that people at institutions have, when they change institutional design in a manner that is functional to pursuing goals.78_{In history, it is found that the EU changed some}

aspects of its institutional design in order to pursue its goals after policy problems. Political scientists as well as practitioners at the EU notice that, at times of history, the goals of the

75_{P. Willetts, ‘Transnational actors and international organizations’, in J. Baylis, and S. Smith, The Globalization of}

World Politics, An Introduction to International Relations, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, p. 377.

76_{T. Christiansen, p. 500.} 77_{K. M. Fierke, p. 170.} 78_Ibid.

(23)

organization have changed in order to respond adequately to new issues of political importance for Member States.79 Organizational studies focus on questions of institutional processes of

‘adaptation’, explaining the mechanisms that compound the social system sustaining, and changing, the implementation of political goals at institutions according to political needs.80 In addition to this, governance theory emphasizes the role of the relationship between a defined institutional setting, and the inventive motivations that drive agents in modelling the rules of the institution.81

Governance theory is the theoretical perspective that can explain the reason why the public gives legitimacy in correspondence to the efficiency of institutions, at the times when leaders at

organizations adapt the institutional setting to achieve ends fully and smoothly.82

2.5 Success

Success is defined as the good reputation that the EU holds both internationally, as well as nationally.83 The separation of the national, as opposed to supranational, spheres of power is the ‘constitutional equilibrium’ permitting both the achievement of political goals of transnational kind, and the maintenance of national, liberal-democratic political systems in European societies. 84_As

long as the ‘equilibrium’ is maintained, its reputation is sustained on public support, thus success is granted to the EU. It follows that European institutions are said to have reached a ‘constitutional equilibrium’ as a way to maintain a sense of purpose and reputation. This is claimed from those who studied the wordings in the Treaty of Lisbon.85

79_{European Commission, ‘White Paper on the future of Europe. Reflections and scenarios for the EU27 by 2025’,}

COM (2017), 2025 final, 2017, p. 3.

80_{S. Steinmo, p. 119.}

81_{T. A. Börzel, T. and T. Risse, p. 249.} 82_Ibid.

83_{S. Segre, p. 11.}

84_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 4.} 85_{J. Fiszer, p. 23.}

(24)

This suggests that European citizens give a sufficient extent of delegation from the national to the supranational setting, because of a good reputation that the EU shows them. However, alongside the numerous instances of delegation from national to the supranational decision-making setting, the societies of European states have also manifested opposition against the act of delegation on a number of occasions.86 The lack of success in the EU is the phenomenon that this Research aims to study from a sociological point of view, on the concepts suggested by organizational research. According to a sociological perspective, an evaluation of the European institutional design on the eight-condition model of Charles Edquist is conceivable, in order to identify some of the possible factors for institutional success.

Charles Edquist’s study on the Swedish National Innovation Council (NIC) is chosen as an instance of institutional ‘adaptation’, because it identifies the empirical strategies that lead likely to success, and presents them in the eight-condition model.87 The study is based on a sociological perspective, in order to identify the approaches that show to make organizations successful, when they are faced with policy, or process, problems.88 The NIC showed that a successful strategy for adaptation is based on a wide understanding of problems, called a holistic attitude to policy-making.89_{A holistic}

innovation policy is a ‘policy that integrates all public actions that influence or may influence innovation processes’.90 A systemic, holistic approach is distinguished from a linear model in the design of innovation policy, where product innovation is delivered by a research centre that bases its assessments on one or a few of the factors.91 Consequently, one can measure how much an organization has a holistic innovation approach to policy-making on the degree in which it evaluates the highest number of the factors involved therein in order to achieve policy objectives.

86_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 7.} 87_{C. Edquist, p. 878.}

88_{K. M. Fierke, p. 171.} 89_{C. Edquist, p. 870.} 90_{Ibid., p. 869.} 91_{Ibid., p. 871.}

(25)

Following this, a holistic approach to innovation policy making emphasizes the need to consider in its evaluations all the determinants involved in the process of policymaking itself.92 The study by Charles Edquist from organizational research shows that there is a common tendency leaning far from a holistic innovation approach, and closer to linear innovation policy attitudes, in the practice of both private and public organizations.93 While a linear innovation policy attitude is the one most commonly found within organizations, the most successful instances of change derive from

adopting a holistic innovation policy attitude, according to the findings.94 This results in the

inability to identify innovation policy instruments based on overlooked determinants involved in the process, which delays eventually the finding of solutions to policy problems.95 Because of this, evidence on the importance for European institutions of having a holistic innovation policy can be found in the successful performance of the Swedish National Innovation Council.96

2.6 Ideas

Ideas are fundamental aspects of a political organization such as the EU, because social behaviour at institutions is bound by ‘existing legal and social norms and [by] the systems of values to which these interests are anchored’.97 Traces of the origins of European politics are seen in the polities of single states since the late Middle Ages. Scholars write that ‘it is important to have good knowledge of the transformations’ in the major historical events that shaped considerably the polities of

European states.98 Events such as the Reformation and Counter-Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the French Revolution of 1789, the democratic revolutionary years around 92_{Ibid., p. 870.} 93_{Ibid., p. 871.} 94_Ibid. 95_Ibid. 96_{Ibid., p. 869.} 97_{S. Segre, p. 46.}

98_{J. M. Magone, Contemporary European Politics: A Comparative Introduction, 1}st_{ed., Routledge, New York, 2011,}

(26)

1848, or the Russian Revolution of 1917 shaped considerably Europeans’ imaginations on how a political system should function, and which institutional setting should be preferred among alternatives.99 The ideas behind the aforementioned events strengthened a liberal, democratic philosophy, whose aim is primarily to identify the practical ways of protecting freedom from oppression, and the life of individuals.100 In addition to this, a study from political science on the sources for a European political identity suggests that national ideas about the EEC/EU informed the Council what the role of a supranational organization would be.101 The existence of norms in institutions, and the similarity between the contents of national and international norms, is recognizable.

Today many suggest exploring the ideas held by European leaders, because these are informative on the capacity of the EEC/EU to become a political order compatible with the national ones.102

Institutions and organizations are defined as a reality compound by norms, or institutions, and a complex bureaucratic arrangement, or the organizational setting, where actors are located, and perform specialized tasks for achieving a common end.103 In particular, the EU is a set of different institutions, whose social interactions make up the organization as a distinct supranational entity.104

Social researcher Max Weber states that problems, which people within organizations encounter, relate to situations defined by them as obstacles to overcome, in order to obtain ‘redemption’ from the ‘distress, hunger, drought, sickness’, or ‘suffering and death’ that these situations generate.105 In the case of European institutions, policy problems have been defined in such a way, which prompted them to invent suitable solutions in the form of ‘mechanisms of conversion’, e.g. direct

99_Ibid.

100_{G. Nevola, Democrazia Costituzione Identità, Prospettive e limiti dell’integrazione europea, De Agostini Scuola,}

Novara, 2007, p. 6.

101_{A. M. Ruiz Jiménez, ‘Cultural, Instrumental, Civic and Symbolic Components of National and European Identities}

in Old and New European Union Member States’, Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 4, No. 9, 2004, p. 4.

102_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 105.} 103_{C. Edquist, p. 870.}

(27)

policy objective adaptation, and ‘layering’, e.g. creating new efficient strategies and policies, in order to replace the inefficient ones.106

Ideas are therefore products of people’s creativity. This follows the suggestion that supranational institutions were created following specific political needs, which were formally formulated by state leaders at a specific time in history, when societies had to face particular problematic situations in a collaborative way.107 According to a sociological perspective, people are the prime motor in the design of institutions, which forms the legal basis of organizational practice.108 Studying the European institutions from a sociological point of view implies considering the fact that there are multiple levels of social interactions involving the European institutions: local, transnational, national, and supranational. However, this Research considers in the study of European institutions the ideas of people at the supranational level only, because political leaders at the EU are the primary source of institutional design.109

2.7 The European Institutional Design

Separate political bodies make up the institutional composition of the ECSC, EEC, EC, and EU. There are interrelationships among institutions, which are based on rules and norms, in order to check that relative competences are pursued according to common standards.110 The importance of institutional rules and norms appears on Article 13, Comma 2, (TEU), stating that each institution ‘shall act within the limits of the powers conferred upon it in the Treaties’, and in the practices of cooperation and negotiation at the supranational level.111 For instance, the Council of the European

106_{M. A. Pollack, p. 123.}

107_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 336.} 108_{S. Steinmo, p. 119.}

109_{S. Segre, p. 52.}

110_{L. Woods, et al., Steiner & Woods EU Law, 13th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017, p. 52.} 111_{Ibid., p. 52.}

(28)

Union is established in order to hold normative primacy on the national sovereignty norm.112_The

Council is an arena of state representatives, who bargain directly among them, and whose deliberations have a significant weight in comparison with the ones taken by other European institutions.113

In addition to this, many notice that the policies generated from interstate bargaining at the Council do increasingly suggest that there is a tendency to accommodate more national interests than in the past, with the European institutions gaining relatively more powers of legislating.114 This suggests that the degree of collaboration among different European institutions can become itself a source of institutional change. A sociological perspective would explain this development on the interrelation between agency and institutional change: while its source can be ‘agency’, the change itself is evident in the particular distribution of legislative, executive, and jurisdictional power in history.115 Because European institutions came from ideas about politics by European state leaders, their shape is similar to the national ones, in a way that reflects the common values among all the European societies involved.116 A ‘systemic’ view on European institutional design follows a sociological perspective, which identifies the social factors that led the organization to assume a similar shape to a liberal-democratic European state, featured by the political and legal separation of legislative, executive and jurisdictional powers, on the basis of collaboration.117

2.8 The Four-Function Paradigm of Talcott Parsons

114_{L. Woods, et al., p. 52.}

(29)

In the context of this Research, the European Union is seen as a social system, which is ‘a system of social interactions between reciprocally oriented actors ... through a language or other shared

symbols’.118 European Integration Theory theorizes that the EU is such a ‘political system’, on the basis of which, this Research adopts the assumption that the EU is a ‘social system’, as Parsons defines it.119 Talcott Parsons writes a ‘social theory’ that explains the social mechanisms of institutions following a conceptual scheme: the ‘four-function paradigm’. In the scheme, there are four interrelated features making up a social system: ‘Latency’, ‘Integration’, ‘Goal-Attainment’, and ‘Adaptation’. Each concept is explained in relation to the role that ‘agents’ have when institutional solutions are found following policy problems of a social system.

‘Latency’, or ‘Latent Pattern Maintenance’, is the ‘problem of preserving, for the social system, actors’ motivations, as well as their knowledge, norms and values’.120 In the case of European institutions, ‘Latency’ refers to the capacity of leaders to formulate the ideas ‘which concern the effectiveness of mechanisms and processes that aim to achieve collective goals for which participants consider themselves responsible’.121 In the context of this Research, ‘ideas’ is the concept that explores the contributions of each European leader in specific solutions about institutional design at the EU. According to Parsons, stating that people have ‘motivations’, e.g. ideas, implies that these ‘make it possible for [people] not to orient [their] action only to the present situation’.122 As a consequence, ideas generate change in institutional design because they aim to ameliorate a situation in order to better face future problems of the same kind. It follows that there is a link between an idea, and institutional design: the latter is a consequence of the former.

118_{S. Segre, p. 11.}

119_{S. Hix, and B. Høyland, p. 337.} 120_{S. Segre, p. 11.}

121_{Ibid., p. 52.} 122_{Ibid., p. 7.}

(30)

Parsons explains this with the concept of ‘Integration’, which ‘means that the elements of the social system are reciprocally compatible, and the system is able to maintain internal solidarity and

analytically defined boundaries in relation to its external environments [emphasis added]’.123

Integration is therefore a consequence of compatibility among the institution’s purposes and

working methods, as defined in the design of the European institutions. This compatibility generates ‘internal solidarity’ among European societies for the EU, which this Research defines as ‘success’ in the form of ‘good public reputation’.

In addition, compatibility is the cause of the ‘analytically defined boundaries in relation to [the system’s] external environments’, which is seen in the previously described ‘institutional

compromise’ of the EU: European and national institutions have clearly defined separate spheres of power. In order words, when the European institutions are designed in a manner that each of them is based on norms, which are reciprocally compatible, European societies tend to maintain that such institutions are legitimate. This is seen as a ‘good reputation’. A second statement is that, in that evenience, the separation between supranational and national institutions is stable, because each institution performs its tasks in the most effective way. This is defined as ‘efficiency’. Thus, ‘Integration’ is the cause of ‘success’, which is the ‘good reputation’, and institutional ‘efficiency’, according to Parsons.

Parsons connects the occurrence of ‘Integration’ with the capacity of ‘Goal-Attainment’ of a social system, which he defines as the system’s capacity to be oriented to ‘specific goals. These can be functional for it alone and so not subordinated to others. They are therefore ultimate’.124 In the case of European institutions, they are capable of ‘Goal-Attainment’ when they achieve ultimate policy objectives, which are their political scopes and functions, as previously described. Finally, social

123_{Ibid., p. 11.} 124_Ibid.

(31)

systems being capable of ‘Goal-Attainment’ are also successful in their capacity of ‘Adaptation’, which, according to Parsons ‘means that the social system, and any system in general, conform to requirements imposed by external environments; at the same time, they actively transform them by mobilizing resources for adapting to system requirements’.125 In other words, European institutions and societies ‘adapt’ to the passing of time and changed geopolitical conditions because they are able to satisfy the change requirements, while they impose to the external forces European norms and practices. The concept of ‘adaptation’ was further described in Section 2.4. Figure 2-8 displays the ‘four-function paradigm’ of the ‘social theory’ of Talcott Parsons here below.

Figure 2-8: The ‘Four-Function Paradigm’

(32)

2.9 The Eight-Condition Model of Charles Edquist

Criticisms on the ‘social theory’ of Parsons underlie the need of empirical methods for his ‘four-function paradigm’ in case studies.126 They argue that Parsons’ explanation is ‘unsatisfactory’, because it ‘cannot be [verified] in the absence of the details of how, by whom, why change has occurred’.127_{Answering to this critique, the contributions of Charles Edquist’s ‘eight-condition}

model’ are presented as a viable solution, because they are based on an empirical case study about a commercial-political organization theoretically compatible with the EU (See 2.3). As a

consequence, it is implied that the ‘eight-condition model’ is a valid theoretical tool that researchers can employ when European institutions are the object of study.

In his study on the NIC, Charles Edquist adopted an institutionalist perspective to explore a number of strategies of institutional design that lead most likely to success.128 The aforementioned study grouped such actions in ten points according to the aspects on which they exercise a direct

influence, as it appears in Appendix 1.129 The same conditions are grouped in a list of eight points, and tested on European institutions in both the past and present times in Chapters 4, 5, and 6:

5. Fifth Condition: Decision-Making Power Delegation to the Supranational Organization. 6. Sixth Condition: Administration Support for Innovative Policy-Making at the Supranational

Level. 126_{Ibid., p. 107.} 127_Ibid. 128_{C. Edquist, p. 878.} 129_{Ibid., p. 869.}

(33)

7. Seventh Condition: Commercialization of Knowledge Production at the Supranational Level.

8. Eighth Condition: Consultancy Services Availability to Supranational Decision-Makers.

Following a sociological and organizational research perspective in a historical institutionalist study of the EU, the current European institutional design is evaluated on the eight conditions. It becomes subsequently apparent that current European institutions feature similar characteristics with the ones proposed for the EEC, EC, and EU. This is seen at the end of Chapters 4 and 5, and results

presented, as a historical institutionalist method suggests.

First Condition: Epistemic Communities at the Supranational Level.

The first condition is the kind of knowledge input to the process, which considers the provisions from R&D organizations, and the formal as well as informal learning occurring therein.130 In the case of European institutions, epistemic communities in decentralised agencies are employed to develop knowledge and know-hows on specific activities of the European Union.131_Recent

developments show that the exchange and creation of scientific knowledge among European states is a priority for the Union in the next incoming years; for example, on 15th March 2021 the

Commission adopted a new research and innovation programme named Horizon Europe, whose duration is of four years.132 This suggests that epistemic communities are a useful source of information for the EU, as well as for state leaders.133_{As a result, this first condition is satisfied.}

130_Ibid.

131_{europa.eu, ‘Decentralised agencies’,}_{https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/agencies/decentralised-agencies_en}

accessed on 8th March 2021, 17:09.

132_{ec.europa.eu, ‘Horizon Europe’s first strategic plan 2021-2024: Commission sets research and innovation priorities}

for a sustainable future’, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1122 accessed on 16th March 2021, 11:11.

133_{P. M. Haas, ‘Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination’, International}

(34)

Second Condition: Direct Channels of Influence from the Supranational Agent to the Public.

The second condition suggests establishing direct channels to the public, in order for the

organization to get information about the activities on the demand-side of the innovation system.134 There are several ways for linking directly the public to political institutions: through the direct applicability of legislation in the legal system, direct representation in democratic arenas, and social networking. Social media channels are regularly consulted by European institutions, on issues of interest among the public, as a policy input source from public opinion.135 Social media and networks are means of direct communication that almost every European citizen has available in order to control the policy outputs from the Union, whose website invites Internet users to choose among eleven channels: Twitter, Youtube, Flickr, Instagram, Foursquare, Blogs, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Spotify, or Reddit.136 The findings confirm that the second condition is satisfied.

Third Condition: The Foundation of a New Organization.

In the third condition, there are factors that seem to influence directly the way innovation systems behave.137 One of them is the creation of new organizations, for instance when an international organization is created upon a new treaty during an intergovernmental conference (IGC). 138 The EEC is a supranational organization, whose purposes were to increment transnational economic exchange and cooperation for the first time among Western European states.139_{For the EEC to}

134_{C. Edquist, p. 869.}

135_{europa.eu, ‘European Ombudsman’,}

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodies/european-ombudsman_en accessed on 8th March 2021, 17:08.

136_{europa.eu, ‘Social networks’,}_{https://europa.eu/european-union/contact/social-networks_en}_{accessed on 16th March}

2021, 11:18.

137_{C. Edquist, p. 878.} 138_{Ibid., p. 869.}

(35)

function, delegation to it of decision-making powers was necessary, and a solution was found in the Council.140 The Council was already present in 1958 when the EEC was established, and

represented the shift in the decision-making process of policies on economic integration, that was needed at the supranational level of the new organization, after intergovernmental agreement was reached in Rome the year before.141 This confirms that the third condition is satisfied.

Fourth Condition: Change in Inter-Institutional Relations.

The fourth condition presents an additional aspect affecting the conduct of political systems is the change in the interactions between different organizations.142 In the specific situation of

international organizations, it results in developments in the legal provisions of international treaties governing them.143 The Lisbon Treaty of 2010 amended provisions in the TEU, regulating the legislative functions of the European Parliament, consequently adding the number of policy areas under its and the Council’s control.144 Parity in legislative power is obtained through a new consultancy procedure, named the ordinary legislative procedure, which was established between the Council and the European Parliament for the first time on equal terms, changing the inter-institutional relations at the EU, in Article 289 TFEU, comma 1.145 The fourth condition is also satisfied.

Fifth Condition: Decision-Making Power Delegation to the Supranational Organization.

140_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 98.}

141_{europa.eu, ‘The history of the European Union – 1958’,}

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history/1946-1959/1958_en accessed on 8th March 2021, 17:11.

142_{C. Edquist, p. 869.}

143_{P. Malanczuk, Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, 7}th_{Ed., Routledge, Padstow, 2009, p. 96.}

144_{eur-lex.europa.eu, ‘Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the}

European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007’, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:FULL&from=EN accessed on 8th_{March 2021, 17:25.}

(36)

The fifth condition, that influences how an innovation system functions, is about the change of institutions, both when obstacles in process innovations are removed, and towards an increase in the independence of organizations following delegation.146 Evidence on the gain of autonomy from national constraints can be found when a supranational organization is delegated considerable making powers, because of the importance of national sovereignty norm in decision-making.147_{By introducing a voting method based on qualified majority in the Council on a wide}

variety of policy areas, European Member States accepted that a relative loss in autonomy in favour of European institutions would result as they vote from a minority position. 148 This loss in

legislative power by states gave European institutions considerable autonomy, when policies are defined at the supranational level.149 The fifth condition is therefore found to be satisfied.

Sixth Condition: Administration Support for Innovative Policy-Making at the Supranational Level.

In the sixth condition there are services that support organizations improving the formation of innovative, as opposed to linear, policies.150 Among these services, administrative support is necessary if solutions are to be easily found.151_{The European School of Administration has}

provided administrative support for the EU staff; its availability at the European institutional setting proves that innovative thinking is encouraged at the supranational level.152 This shows that the sixth condition is satisfied.

Seventh Condition: Commercialization of Knowledge Production at the Supranational Level.

146_{C. Edquist, p. 869.} 147_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 99.}

148_{eur-lex.europa.eu, accessed on 8}th_{March 2021, 17:25.}

149_{J. Sterling-Folker, p. 99.} 150_{C. Edquist, p. 869.} 151_{Ibid., p. 878.}

152_{europa.eu, ‘Interinstitutional bodies’,}

What Makes the EU Tick? : Understanding the Role of Ideas in the Design of the European Institutions in a Novel Way