When Do National Administrations Adapt to EU Policies? Variation in Denmark and Greece

Abstract

This article joins the Europeanization studies and examines the administrative adaptation to Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), a highly institutionalized and regulated policy, in two small older member states, Denmark and Greece. The findings demonstrate variation in administrative adaptation. In Denmark, both formal and informal administrative structures adapt to CAP, while in Greece administrative adaptation is limited to formal structures. This variation is attributed to two dimensions of the domestic institutional and organizational settings, namely “centralization” and “professionalism.” The comparative analysis provides an in-depth understanding of the administrative differences between North and South—a cleavage that became prominent during the Eurozone crisis.

Keywords:

• Europeanization
• administrative adaptation
• centralization
• professionalism

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Earlier versions of this article were discussed at the Danish PhD Network on European Studies. The author would also like to thank Kennet Lyngaard, Wyn Grant, Kostas Karantininis, Susana Borrás, Peter Triantafyllou, and the anonymous referees for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Notes

¹ The CAP is established by the Treaty of Rome (Art.32–39) and is financed by the EU budget through the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), which is divided into two sections, the Guarantee Section and the Guidance Section. The former and larger section consists of refunds for exports to third countries granted under the common organization of the agricultural markets (COMs) and intervention payments to regularize agricultural markets. The latter is used to finance structural policy measures which are not strictly related to the administration and management of agricultural markets. The Guarantee section finances rural development measures that are not covered by the Guarantee fund (e.g., the rural development Community initiative) (Regulation 1258/99) (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/facts/4_1_6_en.htm).

² The EU member states that joined with the fifth EU enlargement in 2004 followed certain CAP rules and received different levels of support until 2013.

³ “State” denotes the elected government, the political parties, and the parliament.

⁴ “Society” refers to the sector and the actors that have direct and indirect interests in the policy area (mainly farmers and the sector).

⁵ These include the cabinet, cabinet sub-committees, horizontal inter-ministerial committees dealing with cross-sectoral issues through their interactions with the political leadership, parliament, and even regional and local government bodies that are potentially involved in the administration of EU decisions depending of the administrative system (Laffan, 2003).

⁶ No trade agreement should affect negatively EU farmers.

⁷ The COMs constitute the CAP management rules and regulate the agricultural production and trade in all the EU member states (Reg. 1258/1999, recent Reg. 1307/2013). They gradually replaced the national market organizations of most products (e.g., cereals, pig-meat, eggs, and poultry, except alcohol and potatoes and certain products from the outermost regions) (http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l11047.htm).

⁸ In 1992, the EU Agency for Restructuring and Modernization of Agriculture developed the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS), with the objective of setting up domestic computerized database system to manage certain Community aid and payment schemes of the CAP (Regulation (EEC) No. 3508/92). This system was amended by the Council Regulation (EC) No. 165/94 and Council Regulation (EC) No. 3235/94, requiring the establishment of institutional and administrative structures for the coordination of the policy.

⁹ Law nr.595, 1972 (last amended by nr. 445 of April 23, 2010).

¹⁰ Since the 2006 communal reform, the regional and local governments have certain limited competences on environmental issues (operational January 1, 2007), InterviewSS-DFFE, 2006

¹¹ InterviewMA, 2006.

¹² DFAC represents professional organizations, cooperatively and privately owned by the food industry. The establishment of two organizations, the Organic Denmark (Økologisk Landsforening) in 2002 and the Sustainable Agriculture (SA) (bæredygtiglandbrug) in 2010, represent a small number of farmers and do not really affect the DAFC.

¹³ Constitution, Art.104, January 1, 1952.

¹⁴ Law No. 1541/85, simple proportional system for the election of the governing boards and cooperatives leaders.

¹⁵ InterviewMPMIN2006.

¹⁶ Thirteen Agricultural Ministers during 1972–2010 in Denmark and 26 during 1981–2010 in Greece (since the countries EU membership until 2010).

¹⁷ Interview, PR Thessaloniki 2005.

¹⁸ PASEGES, PR Thessaloniki, 2005.

¹⁹ Ministers’ Decision No. 324032, http://www.minagric.gr/greek/agro_pol/KAP/1921B_.pdf, December 14, 2004.

²⁰ InterviewGIO2, 2005.

²¹ InterviewSS, DFFE, 2006.

²² The Cadastre is a single system that includes the geometrical description and the property status of each department of ground with the responsibility and the guarantee of the state.

²³ OPEKEPE has been accused for “the whirlwind of mistakes in Individual Papers for the Temporary Assistance Rights related to the publication and the requirement to submit applications for review by producers paying up to 25 euros to the local Unions of Agricultural Cooperatives (EAS)” OPEKEPE and mistakes, Eleftherotipia (EΛEYΘEOTYΠIA), October 7, 2005.

²⁴ Law 3481/2006 set the Hellenic Cadastre on new foundations, financing, and the implementation of the Cadastre’s institution.

²⁵ Interview CoopPtolemaida, 2004.

²⁶ http://www.ogeeka-dimitra.org.gr/.

²⁷ InterviewPAS, 2006.