Michael Buess’s research while affiliated with University of Lucerne and other places

The role of national representatives on the management boards (MBs) of European Union agencies (EUAs) is crucial in two respects. From a democratic point of view, national MB representatives' accountability may constitute a possible additional source of legitimacy for these technocratic bodies. From the perspective of European integration, their relationship with national institutions tells us about the status of EUAs and the extent to which their MBs constitute an intergovernmental control tool in the hands of the Member States. Contrary to their formal design, the collected data suggest that MBs have a rather supranational, technocratic character. With regard to their contribution to EUAs' democratic accountability, although the general level of accountability is high, the findings are more diverse. However, rather than reflecting control intentions by the Member States, different levels of accountability can best be explained by functional and institutional rather than strategic factors.

This paper analyzes the underexplored relationship between European Union agencies (EUAs) and the member states. It is argued that the vertical link constitutes a hitherto unexplored source of political accountability for EUAs. In particular, member states’ representation on the EUAs’ management boards (MBs) can be considered as an instance of vertical political accountability and, therefore, also as a possible substitute for input legitimacy — a feature EUAs are conventionally seen to be lacking. However, drawing on document analysis and survey data, the empirical results reveal a rather ambivalent picture of MBs’ vertical political accountability. The strong vertical political accountability relationships expected are only present for one EUA out of six. It can also be shown that more powerful EUAs are not held more accountable than less powerful ones.

Inspired by the notion of demoi-cracy, this contribution analyses the legitimacy of European Union agencies (EUAs). It asks how far member states' representation on the management boards (MBs) of EUAs constitutes an instance of vertical accountability and a possible source of demoi-cratic legitimacy. In accordance with the horizontal dimension of demoi-cracy, the contribution additionally investigates the transnational links between MB representatives and their peers from other member states as possible instances of peer accountability. Drawing on document analysis and an original survey with MB representatives from six EUAs, the empirical results reveal a rather ambivalent picture of MBs' political accountability. Only the MB of the European Railway Agency (ERA) meets the established demoi-cratic criteria in the sense of vertical accountability. All other EUA MBs investigated possess either weak de jure or de facto political accountability (or both). Peer accountability, in contrast, is more pronounced for most EUAs, but is still predominantly nationally rather than transnationally oriented. This implies that, from a demoi-cratic perspective, there is considerable potential to improve MBs' de jure and de facto political and peer accountability.