A new form of governance? comparing the open method of co-ordination to multilateral surveillance by the IMF and the OECD

Abstract

The open method of co-ordination (OMC) has received much attention in the recent EU literature. The predominant view claims that the OMC is not only a new but also an effective policy-making instrument. This paper raises doubts about both claims by offering a comparison of soft law policy co-ordination in three international organizations. More specifically, this paper compares the European Employment Strategy to the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines of the EU, the OECD Economic Surveys, and the IMF Article IV Consultations. Based on expert interviews, it seeks to demonstrate that these procedures are forms of multilateral surveillance that do not differ in kind. Such a comparative analysis of the OMC refutes claims to its novelty. Having compared the four procedures, a more general model of multilateral surveillance consisting of six elements is generated that facilitates further comparisons. This paper concludes that governments select voluntarist procedures mainly to secure their own competencies rather than to realize common goals. Effective problem-solving is therefore not necessarily the dominant objective of soft law.

Keywords:

• European Employment Strategy
• Lisbon Strategy
• neo-voluntarism
• open method of co-ordination (OMC)
• peer review
• soft law

Notes

1. I am grateful to Burkhard Eberlein, Susanne Schmidt, Cornelia Woll, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

2. In a more critical vein Trubek and Mosher (2003: 47–8) stress that the OMC bears a potential for policy learning which as yet has not been realized.

3. A brief comparison of the EES and the OECD Jobs Strategy can be found in Noaksson and Jacobsson (2003). See also recently Dostal (2004).

4. The adjective ‘multilateral’ can refer either to the object or the subject of surveillance. I take it to mean the former as these processes are geared towards multilateral discussion of national policies. The latter would in contrast mean the discussion of several states' policies and their interdependencies. Of course, all three organizations conduct both kinds of surveillance.

5. Notions like ‘most’, ‘many’, ‘some’ or ‘a few directors’ indicate how great a disagreement exists.

6. This is, however, a recent development and results from a conscious effort to increase transparency. Cf. IMF (2002, 2003).

7. Ferrera and Sacchi (2004) find that the EES had an impact on Italian policies as it was in line with the government's approach. However, the ‘Social Inclusion’ OMC was totally muted by national politics.

8. For example, they also apply to the World Trade Organization's Trade Policy Review Mechanism. See Laird (1999).