Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis
As part of the “better regulation” agenda, the European Commission created a semi‐independent institution, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, to monitor the preparation of policy proposals. The position of this Board is potentially wide‐ranging. A proposal that is not given the green light by it cannot...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Regulation & governance 2021-10, Vol.15 (4), p.1436-1453 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1453 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 1436 |
| container_title | Regulation & governance |
| container_volume | 15 |
| creator | Senninger, Roman Blom‐Hansen, Jens |
| description | As part of the “better regulation” agenda, the European Commission created a semi‐independent institution, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, to monitor the preparation of policy proposals. The position of this Board is potentially wide‐ranging. A proposal that is not given the green light by it cannot proceed in the Commission's internal decisionmaking process. But so far, the Board has only received scant scholarly attention. We provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on the Commission's policy preparation. Using machine learning techniques and quantitative text analysis, we study 673 Board opinions and compare almost 100 draft and final policy proposals. Our findings show that the Board is an active watchdog that is taken seriously by the Commission's departments. A full understanding of policy preparation in the EU therefore requires more scholarly attention to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/rego.12312 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_rego_12312</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2587750214</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3702-d2d295475be5fbcfb7c02632ddfaeb879d5d03be4deefc46e25cebc5038437b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkN1LwzAUxYsoOKcv_gUBHwRlMx_N2vqmZU5hMpjzuaTp7ZbRNTNJ1frXm32wR_G-3Ev4ncPJCYJLgvvEz52Bue4Tygg9CjokCuMeTxJyfLhjdhqcWbvEeIApZZ2gegVwyC0ASaOckvYePdSian9UPd8-D99RqlcrZa3S9bVFU5g3lXDatOhNmsapukWPWpjC00Y38wX6aETtlBNOfQJy8O2Q2DhaZc-Dk1JUFi72uxvMnoaz9Lk3noxe0odxT7II015BC5rwMOI58DKXZR5JTAeMFkUpII-jpOAFZjmEBUApwwFQLiGXHLM4ZFHOusHVznZt9EcD1mVL3RifwWaUx1HEMSWhp252lDTaWgNltjZqJUybEZxtysw2ZWbbMj0c7-AvyHVppYJawkGAMebUGycDf2GSbj-v61Q3tfPS2_9LPU32tKqg_SNSNh2OJrtwv9g9mlM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2587750214</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /></source><creator>Senninger, Roman ; Blom‐Hansen, Jens</creator><creatorcontrib>Senninger, Roman ; Blom‐Hansen, Jens</creatorcontrib><description>As part of the “better regulation” agenda, the European Commission created a semi‐independent institution, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, to monitor the preparation of policy proposals. The position of this Board is potentially wide‐ranging. A proposal that is not given the green light by it cannot proceed in the Commission's internal decisionmaking process. But so far, the Board has only received scant scholarly attention. We provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on the Commission's policy preparation. Using machine learning techniques and quantitative text analysis, we study 673 Board opinions and compare almost 100 draft and final policy proposals. Our findings show that the Board is an active watchdog that is taken seriously by the Commission's departments. A full understanding of policy preparation in the EU therefore requires more scholarly attention to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1748-5983</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-5991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/rego.12312</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</publisher><subject>European Commission ; European Union ; Governance ; Government & Law ; impact assessment ; Law ; policy preparation ; Political Science ; Public Administration ; Regulation ; regulatory scrutiny ; Social Sciences ; Text analysis</subject><ispartof>Regulation & governance, 2021-10, Vol.15 (4), p.1436-1453</ispartof><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</rights><rights>2021 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>4</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000528779600001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3702-d2d295475be5fbcfb7c02632ddfaeb879d5d03be4deefc46e25cebc5038437b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3702-d2d295475be5fbcfb7c02632ddfaeb879d5d03be4deefc46e25cebc5038437b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2254-145X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Frego.12312$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Frego.12312$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,1419,27873,27931,27932,39264,45581,45582</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Senninger, Roman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blom‐Hansen, Jens</creatorcontrib><title>Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis</title><title>Regulation & governance</title><addtitle>REGUL GOV</addtitle><description>As part of the “better regulation” agenda, the European Commission created a semi‐independent institution, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, to monitor the preparation of policy proposals. The position of this Board is potentially wide‐ranging. A proposal that is not given the green light by it cannot proceed in the Commission's internal decisionmaking process. But so far, the Board has only received scant scholarly attention. We provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on the Commission's policy preparation. Using machine learning techniques and quantitative text analysis, we study 673 Board opinions and compare almost 100 draft and final policy proposals. Our findings show that the Board is an active watchdog that is taken seriously by the Commission's departments. A full understanding of policy preparation in the EU therefore requires more scholarly attention to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.</description><subject>European Commission</subject><subject>European Union</subject><subject>Governance</subject><subject>Government & Law</subject><subject>impact assessment</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>policy preparation</subject><subject>Political Science</subject><subject>Public Administration</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>regulatory scrutiny</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Text analysis</subject><issn>1748-5983</issn><issn>1748-5991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GIZIO</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkN1LwzAUxYsoOKcv_gUBHwRlMx_N2vqmZU5hMpjzuaTp7ZbRNTNJ1frXm32wR_G-3Ev4ncPJCYJLgvvEz52Bue4Tygg9CjokCuMeTxJyfLhjdhqcWbvEeIApZZ2gegVwyC0ASaOckvYePdSian9UPd8-D99RqlcrZa3S9bVFU5g3lXDatOhNmsapukWPWpjC00Y38wX6aETtlBNOfQJy8O2Q2DhaZc-Dk1JUFi72uxvMnoaz9Lk3noxe0odxT7II015BC5rwMOI58DKXZR5JTAeMFkUpII-jpOAFZjmEBUApwwFQLiGXHLM4ZFHOusHVznZt9EcD1mVL3RifwWaUx1HEMSWhp252lDTaWgNltjZqJUybEZxtysw2ZWbbMj0c7-AvyHVppYJawkGAMebUGycDf2GSbj-v61Q3tfPS2_9LPU32tKqg_SNSNh2OJrtwv9g9mlM</recordid><startdate>202110</startdate><enddate>202110</enddate><creator>Senninger, Roman</creator><creator>Blom‐Hansen, Jens</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</general><general>Wiley</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>17B</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DVR</scope><scope>EGQ</scope><scope>GIZIO</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2254-145X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202110</creationdate><title>Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis</title><author>Senninger, Roman ; Blom‐Hansen, Jens</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3702-d2d295475be5fbcfb7c02632ddfaeb879d5d03be4deefc46e25cebc5038437b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>European Commission</topic><topic>European Union</topic><topic>Governance</topic><topic>Government & Law</topic><topic>impact assessment</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>policy preparation</topic><topic>Political Science</topic><topic>Public Administration</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>regulatory scrutiny</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Text analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Senninger, Roman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blom‐Hansen, Jens</creatorcontrib><collection>Web of Knowledge</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Social Sciences Citation Index</collection><collection>Web of Science Primary (SCIE, SSCI & AHCI)</collection><collection>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Regulation & governance</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Senninger, Roman</au><au>Blom‐Hansen, Jens</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis</atitle><jtitle>Regulation & governance</jtitle><stitle>REGUL GOV</stitle><date>2021-10</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1436</spage><epage>1453</epage><pages>1436-1453</pages><issn>1748-5983</issn><eissn>1748-5991</eissn><abstract>As part of the “better regulation” agenda, the European Commission created a semi‐independent institution, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, to monitor the preparation of policy proposals. The position of this Board is potentially wide‐ranging. A proposal that is not given the green light by it cannot proceed in the Commission's internal decisionmaking process. But so far, the Board has only received scant scholarly attention. We provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on the Commission's policy preparation. Using machine learning techniques and quantitative text analysis, we study 673 Board opinions and compare almost 100 draft and final policy proposals. Our findings show that the Board is an active watchdog that is taken seriously by the Commission's departments. A full understanding of policy preparation in the EU therefore requires more scholarly attention to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.</abstract><cop>Melbourne</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/rego.12312</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2254-145X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1748-5983 |
| ispartof | Regulation & governance, 2021-10, Vol.15 (4), p.1436-1453 |
| issn | 1748-5983 1748-5991 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_rego_12312 |
| source | PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Access via Wiley Online Library; Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /> |
| subjects | European Commission European Union Governance Government & Law impact assessment Law policy preparation Political Science Public Administration Regulation regulatory scrutiny Social Sciences Text analysis |
| title | Meet the critics: Analyzing the EU Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board through quantitative text analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T22%3A31%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Meet%20the%20critics:%20Analyzing%20the%20EU%20Commission's%20Regulatory%20Scrutiny%20Board%20through%20quantitative%20text%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Regulation%20&%20governance&rft.au=Senninger,%20Roman&rft.date=2021-10&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1436&rft.epage=1453&rft.pages=1436-1453&rft.issn=1748-5983&rft.eissn=1748-5991&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/rego.12312&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2587750214%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2587750214&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |