soft governance promoting policy coordination the case of psb
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Soft Governance Promoting Policy Coordination: the Case of PSB

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 11

Soft Governance Promoting Policy Coordination: the Case of PSB - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 110 Views
  • Uploaded on

Soft Governance Promoting Policy Coordination: the Case of PSB. Dr. Maria Michalis University of Westminster [email protected] University of Exeter, July 1st workshop : ‘ Public Service Broadcasting in Europe in the Digital Age. ’. Outline. Questions:

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Soft Governance Promoting Policy Coordination: the Case of PSB' - navid


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
soft governance promoting policy coordination the case of psb

Soft Governance Promoting Policy Coordination: the Case of PSB

Dr. Maria Michalis

University of Westminster

[email protected]

University of Exeter, July 1st

workshop: ‘Public Service Broadcasting in Europe in the Digital Age.’

outline
Outline
  • Questions:
    • 1) are soft policy measures attempts to close the gap between negative & positive integration?
    • 2) can such voluntary measures promote policy transfer and harmonisation?
  • Case study:
    • 2009 Broadcasting Communication of the European Commission : application of State aid rules to PSB
eu approach towards psb
EU approach towards PSB
  • Challenge:
    • How to reconcile the long established national PSB institutions with the predominantly economic provisions the EU Treaty
  • Solution: division of responsibilities
    • E.g. 2007 [1989] Audiovisual Media Services Directive
    • EU: economic policy
    • Member States: public service objectives
prominence of competition decisions
Prominence of competition decisions
  • EU regulatory framework = minimal
    • Subsidiarity as bulwark against pro-liberal intrusions
  • But minimal EU regulatory framework has left PSB exposed to competition law arguments
    • Series of State aid investigations
    • The Commission, though often critical, has generally supported PSBs in its decisions
    • Market failure has progressively become a key concept
but gradual in tandem
But gradual In tandem...
  • Gradual recognition of public interest and democratic considerations, e.g.
    • 1997: public services = core shared value
    • 1997 Amsterdam Protocol: PSB = national responsibility
    • 2000 Charter of Fundamental Rights
    • 2001 Broadcasting Communication : clarifying application of State aid rules to PSB
2009 broadcasting communication
2009 Broadcasting Communication
  • Strengthens the 3 main criteria set by its predecessor that make State aid admissible:

1) definition of the remit 2) entrustment and monitoring 3) proportionality

  • Ex ante test of major additions to or changes in remit
    • Public value vs market impact
  • Strengthens subsidiarity. Member states to determine
    • What ‘significant new services’ are
    • Details of ex ante test
    • Regulatory institutional structures
soft policy used to close regulatory gap
Soft policy used to close regulatory gap
  • EU policy: more about liberalisation (negative integration) than harmonisation (positive integration)
  • Still, markets are predominantly national
  • Liberalisation: vertical and coercive Europeanisation mechanisms
  • Content and cultural issues: national level
  • Harmonisation has become less-directive driven; emphasis on soft instruments, socialisation (e.g. Audience share – media ownership), reputational enforcement (e.g. Quotas)
public value test policy transfer
Public Value Test: Policy Transfer
  • Argument:
    • Soft policy measure (2009 Broadcasting Communication) has contributed to policy transfer (PVT is being introduced throughout the EU) and has promoted harmonisation in the governing structures of PSB
    • Indirectly coercive policy transfer
    • Impact upon
      • 1) public policy
      • 2) cognitive and normative structures
    • But national variations
      • In terms of processes, institutional structures, actors ...
      • Policy adapted to domestic conditions (new institutionalism)
national variations
National Variations
  • Germany:
    • ‘three-step’ approach (PVT test) explicitly incorporates qualitative criteria (e.g. Pluralism)
    • Carried out by internal broadcasting councils of PSBs
    • Market impact: external consultants
    • Concerns existing as well as future activities
    • No opportunity for direct audience involvement
  • UK:
    • Carried out by BBC Trust
      • BBC Trust: public value. Ofcom: market impact
    • Concerns significant changes in remit
    • Extensive public consultation
conclusion and observations
Conclusion and Observations
  • Paper suggests that soft policy measures may trigger domestic policy adjustment and promote harmonisation
  • this proposition rests on a single case study
  • The potential of a soft measure to trigger policy change was conditioned upon its strong association with the EU’s competition powers
    • indirectly coercive transfer
    • ‘shadow of hierarchy’
slide11

Thank you!

Dr. Maria MichalisUniversity of [email protected]

ad