‘Problem-oriented micro-institutionalization’: a requisite approach to cross-national problem-solving

Abstract

In order to contribute to cross-national problem-solving, intergovernmental organizations need to perform a ‘problem-oriented micro-institutionalization’, which means the establishment of additional contacts and channels of communication within the original organizational structure. The study of problem-solving in cross-national multi-layered political systems has been a debate predominantly oriented on the policy process. This, however, nearly ignores the nexus between the policy process and the outcome in terms of the social reality in need of being changed. By focusing on this, it becomes apparent that the difficulties of problem-solving are often founded in problematic social situations among the problem-relevant societal actors, which makes problem-solving hard to impossible. In this article, I focus on the politics dimension of problem-solving and suggest an institutional answer to these classical difficulties.

Keywords:

• European Coal and Steel Community
• micro-institutionalization
• multi-level governance
• organizations
• problem-solving
• steel crises

Acknowledgements

For their helpful comments and criticisms, I would like to thank Liesbet Hooghe, Evelyne Huber, Gary Marks, Timothy McKeown, Thomas Oatley, Jürg Steiner, John Stevens, Christopher Swader, Dieter Wolf, the participants of the comparative politics study group at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the editor, and the anonymous reviewers.

Notes

1 The Commission was the main legislative body and could decree decisions, recommendations, and opinions.

2 The latter are features of economies of scale (see, e.g., Cockerill 1974: 67; Morris 1954).

3 Steel crisis simplified means a significant divergence between capacities and the demand for steel.

4 The Bresciani (a group of independent steel firms) in Northern Italy were using this technology very successfully in the 1960s and 1970s (Fumigalli 1978).

5 ‘EC moves to force steelmakers to reduce capacity’, The Guardian, 17 February 1994; ‘British Steel urges EC attack on Spanish and Italian subsidies,’ The Financial Times, 22 June 1993.

6 ‘Bangemann und van Miert reagieren auf Kritik von Eurofer’, Agence Europe, 8 December 1993; ‘Weitere Klagen gegen Stahlsubventionen,’ Agence Europe, 23 June 1994.

7 ‘Commission asks private steel companies to finalize closure commitments’, Agence Europe, 17 February 1994. See also ‘Keine Brüsseler Hilfen ohne Stillegungspläne’, Frankfurter Rundschau, 26 January 1994.

8 ‘EU hofft auf Stahl-Stillegungspläne im Februar’, Agence Europe, 25 January 1994. See also ‘Das europäische Stahlmonster bewegt sich doch’, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 20 December 1993.

9 ‘Stahlbranche hofft kaum auf Rexrodt’, Agence Europe, 2 February 1994.

10 ‘Napkin diplomacy puts deal on the table’, The Guardian, 26 March 1994. See also ‘EU steel industry restructuring plans remain hazy’, Agence Europe, 30 March 1994; ‘Steel firms agree to cuts’, The Guardian, 25 March 1994.

11 ‘Commission notes that public steel firms overall meet conditions (notably in case of restructuring) set for granting of aid’, Agence Europe, 28 April 1995.

12 ‘Deutsche Stahlbranche sieht Krise überwunden’, Reuters, 3 October 1994; ‘Stahlindustrie muß sich auf das Ende der Interventionspolitik einstellen. EU-Präsident Santer hält die Branche für saniert. Alle Unternehmen machen 1996 Gewinn’, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 31 May 1996.