管理欧洲联盟的恢复和复原机制:国家自主权和基于绩效的理论与实践筹资

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Jonathan Zeitlin, David Bokhorst, Edgars Eihmanis
{"title":"管理欧洲联盟的恢复和复原机制:国家自主权和基于绩效的理论与实践筹资","authors":"Jonathan Zeitlin, David Bokhorst, Edgars Eihmanis","doi":"10.1111/rego.12619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic marks an important departure in European Union (EU) governance, as it introduces an innovative “demand-driven, performance-based” model aimed at overcoming the limitations of past policies seeking to promote national reforms. In this study, we set out the theoretical assumptions underlying the RRF governance model, and assess its practical effectiveness and legitimacy by analyzing the drafting, implementation, and monitoring of National Recovery and Resilience Plans in eight member states. The study concludes by assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the RRF's governance model, relating them to theoretical expectations derived from previous international experience with similar approaches elsewhere, and considers the implications for future EU policy. Our core argument is that while the RRF's governance design has reinforced national ownership and commitment to reform and investment objectives, its performance-based financing system leads to a mechanical focus on formal verification of predetermined milestones and targets, with negative consequences for both effectiveness and legitimacy. Addressing these problems would require a redesign of the RRF's complete contracting approach, giving member states greater flexibility on the means for achieving agreed commitments, as well as for revising them, not only in response to unanticipated changes in objective circumstances, but also to lessons learned during the implementation process.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Governing the European Union's recovery and resilience facility: National ownership and performance-based financing in theory and practice\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Zeitlin, David Bokhorst, Edgars Eihmanis\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rego.12619\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic marks an important departure in European Union (EU) governance, as it introduces an innovative “demand-driven, performance-based” model aimed at overcoming the limitations of past policies seeking to promote national reforms. In this study, we set out the theoretical assumptions underlying the RRF governance model, and assess its practical effectiveness and legitimacy by analyzing the drafting, implementation, and monitoring of National Recovery and Resilience Plans in eight member states. The study concludes by assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the RRF's governance model, relating them to theoretical expectations derived from previous international experience with similar approaches elsewhere, and considers the implications for future EU policy. Our core argument is that while the RRF's governance design has reinforced national ownership and commitment to reform and investment objectives, its performance-based financing system leads to a mechanical focus on formal verification of predetermined milestones and targets, with negative consequences for both effectiveness and legitimacy. Addressing these problems would require a redesign of the RRF's complete contracting approach, giving member states greater flexibility on the means for achieving agreed commitments, as well as for revising them, not only in response to unanticipated changes in objective circumstances, but also to lessons learned during the implementation process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12619\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12619","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为应对 COVID-19 大流行而采用的恢复和复原力基金(RRF)标志着欧盟(EU)治理模式的重要转变,因为它引入了一种创新的 "需求驱动、基于绩效 "的模式,旨在克服以往旨在促进国家改革的政策的局限性。在本研究中,我们阐述了 RRF 治理模式所依据的理论假设,并通过分析八个成员国的国家恢复和复原计划的起草、实施和监督情况来评估其实际有效性和合法性。本研究最后评估了恢复与重建基金治理模式的优缺点,将其与其他地方类似方法的以往国际经验所产生的理论预期联系起来,并考虑了对未来欧盟政策的影响。我们的核心论点是,虽然农村重建基金的治理设计加强了国家对改革和投资目标的自主权和承诺,但其基于绩效的融资系统导致机械地将重点放在对预定里程碑和目标的正式核查上,对有效性和合法性都产生了负面影响。要解决这些问题,就必须重新设计重建和恢复基金的完整合同方法,使成员国在实现商定承诺的手段方面以及在修订承诺方面有更大的灵活性,这不仅是为了应对客观情况的意外变化,也是为了吸取实施过程中的经验教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Governing the European Union's recovery and resilience facility: National ownership and performance-based financing in theory and practice
The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic marks an important departure in European Union (EU) governance, as it introduces an innovative “demand-driven, performance-based” model aimed at overcoming the limitations of past policies seeking to promote national reforms. In this study, we set out the theoretical assumptions underlying the RRF governance model, and assess its practical effectiveness and legitimacy by analyzing the drafting, implementation, and monitoring of National Recovery and Resilience Plans in eight member states. The study concludes by assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the RRF's governance model, relating them to theoretical expectations derived from previous international experience with similar approaches elsewhere, and considers the implications for future EU policy. Our core argument is that while the RRF's governance design has reinforced national ownership and commitment to reform and investment objectives, its performance-based financing system leads to a mechanical focus on formal verification of predetermined milestones and targets, with negative consequences for both effectiveness and legitimacy. Addressing these problems would require a redesign of the RRF's complete contracting approach, giving member states greater flexibility on the means for achieving agreed commitments, as well as for revising them, not only in response to unanticipated changes in objective circumstances, but also to lessons learned during the implementation process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信