Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:02:25.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regulatory Agencies of the European Union as International Actors

Legal Framework, Development over Time and Strategic Motives in the Case of the European Food Safety Authority

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Martijn Groenleer  and
Simone Gabbi
Martijn Groenleer
Affiliation:
Public Administration, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Simone Gabbi
Affiliation:
Legal officer in the Legal and Regulatory Affairs Unit of the European Food Safety Authority
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

EU agencies, such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), are usually created in an environment that is replete with other organizations, not only other European bodies and member state agencies, but also international organizations and third country agencies. Through their interactionwith EUagencies, these international organizations and third country agencies may affect policies, policymaking processes, institutions and behaviour in the EU and its member states. But EU agencies do not necessarily serve as passive channels for the interaction between international organizations and third country agencies, on the one hand, and the EU institutions, on the other hand. They often seem to play an active role as policy entrepreneurs,making use of the opportunities offered by the policies and policymaking processes of these organizations and agencies to influence institutions and behaviour in the EU and its member states. The above raises the question of what international role EFSA actually has performed: has it, despite the formal-legal restrictions put in place by the EU institutions, been able to act relatively autonomously at the international level? In order to address this question, this article examines EFSA's international relations, notably those with international organizations and third country agencies in its field of action. It adopts a dynamic perspective, describing these relations throughout the agency's development. The article demonstrates that EFSA has developed a considerable international role, despite the relatively limited scope of action allowed by its legal framework, and shows that this development has been driven by both functional needs and strategic motives.

Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 4 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 479 - 492
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Groenleer, Martijn L.P., “Linking Up Levels of Governance: Agencies of the European Union and Their Interaction with International Institutions”, in Costa, Oriol and Joergensen, Knud Erik (eds) The Influence of International Institutions on the European Union (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012)Google Scholar.

2 Haas, Peter M., “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination”, 46(1) International Organization (1992), pp. 1–35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Slaughter, Anne-Marie, A New World Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

4 Gabbi, Simone, “Independent Scientific Advice: Comparing Policies on Conflicts of Interest in the EU and the US”, 2 European Journal of Risk Regulation (2011), pp. 213–226 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Shamoo, Adil E. and Resnik, David B., Responsible Conduct of Research (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Joined cases C-9/56 and C-10/56 Meroni & Co. vs. High Authority, [1958] ECR 133, pp. 152–4. In a narrow reading, also extended to the food safety domain, this doctrine implies that EU agencies may only perform tasks that have been explicitly attributed to them and do so within the legal boundaries prescribed in the delegating provisions. See e.g. Joined Cases C-154/04 and C-155/04, Alliance for Natural Health, [2005] ECR I-6451, at para. 90. The doctrine has been constitutionalized, see Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 30 March 2010, OJ 2010 C 83/47, Art. 290.

7 Consolidated Version of the Treaty of the European Union, 30 March 2010, OJ 2010 C 83/13, Chapter 1 of Title V.

8 Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 30 March 2010, OJ 2010 C 83/47, Art. 218.

9 Groenleer, Martijn L.P., “The Commission and Agencies”, in Spence, David and Edwards, Geoffrey (eds), The European Commission (London: John Harper Publishing, 2006)Google Scholar.

10 European Parliament, Council of the European Union and European Commission, “Joint Statement of the European Parliament, Council of the EU and European Commission on Decentralised Agencies”, 19 July 2012, available on the Internet at <http://europa.eu/agencies/documents/joint_statement_and_common_approach_2012_en.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

11 Ramboll, Eureval and Matrix Insight, “Evaluation of the EU Decentralised Agencies in 2009”, December 2009, available on the Internet at <http://www.statewatch.org/news/2012/apr/evaluation-eu-agencies-vol-II.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

12 Ott, Andrea, “EU Regulatory Agencies in EU External Relations: Trapped in a Legal Minefield Between European and International Law”, 13(4) European Foreign Affairs Review (2008), pp. 515–540 Google Scholar.

13 European Parliament, Council of the European Union and the European Commission, “Joint Statement on Decentralised Agencies”, supra note 10.

14 Most agencies are assigned with one or more tasks at the same time; some agencies are involved in activities covering all four tasks.

15 Groenleer, Martijn, Kaeding, Michael and Versluis, Esther, “Regulatory Governance Through EU Agencies? The Implementation of Transport Directives”, 17(8) Journal of European Public Policy (2010), pp. 1212–1230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Groenleer, Martijn L.P., The Autonomy of European Union Agencies: A Comparative Study of Institutional Development (Delft: Eburon, 2009)Google Scholar.

17 Thompson, James D., Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967)Google Scholar.

18 Aldrich, Howard E., “Resource Dependence and Interorganizational Relations”, 7 Administration & Society (1976), pp. 419–454 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Pfeffer, Jeffrey and Salancik, Gerald R., The External Control of Organizations (New York: Harper and Row, 1978)Google Scholar.

20 Meyer, John W. and Rowan, Brian “Institutionalizing Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony”, 83(2) American Journal of Sociology (1977), pp. 340–363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 DiMaggio, Paul J. and Powell, Walter W., “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, 48(2) American Sociological Review (1983), pp. 147–160 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Groenleer, Autonomy of European Union Agencies, supra note 16.

23 Barnett, Michael and Finnemore, Martha, Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

24 Carpenter, Daniel P., Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

25 See e.g. Metcalfe, Les, “International Policy Co-ordination and Public Management Reform”, 60(2) International Review of Administrative Sciences (1994), pp. 271–290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 See e.g. Dehousse, Renaud, “Regulation by Networks in the European Community: The Role of European Agencies”, 4(2) Journal of European Public Policy (1997), pp. 246–261 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 See e.g. Michelle Everson, Giandomenico Majone , Les Metcalfe et al. “The Role of Specialised Agencies in Decentralising EU Governance. Report Presented to the Commission” (1999).

28 See e.g. Jordan, Andrew and Schout, Adriaan, The Coordination of the European Union: Exploring the Capacities of Networked Governance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Craig, Paul P., EU Administrative Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), e.g. at p. 173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Ramboll, Eureval and Matrix Insight, “Evaluation”, supra note 11, at p. 77.

31 Kelemen, R.D., “The Politics of Eurocratic Structure and the New European Agencies”, 25(4) West European Politics (2002), pp. 93–118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As a result of the composition of its Management Board, Advisory Forum, and Scientific Committee and Panels, EFSA is an exception.

32 Egeberg, Morten (ed.), Multilevel Administration: The Transformation of Executive Politics in Europe (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33 Slaughter, A New World Order, supra note 3.

34 Zito, Anthony R., “Epistemic Communities, Collective Entrepreneurship and European Integration”, 8(4) Journal of European Public Policy (2001), pp. 585–603 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 For a similar point see Alemanno, Alberto, “How to Get Out of the Transatlantic Regulatory Deadlock over GMOs? Time for Regulatory Cooperation”, in Swinnen, Jo and Vogel, David (eds), Cooperating in Managing Biosafety and Biodiversity: California, The United States and the European Union (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2011)Google Scholar.

36 Metcalfe, Les, “Linking Levels of Government: European Integration and Globalization”, 66(1) International Review of Administrative Sciences (2000), pp. 119–142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Eberlein, Burkard and Newman, Abraham L., “Escaping the International Governance Dilemma? Incorporated Transgovernmental Networks in the European Union”, 21(1) Governance (2008), pp. 25–52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Everson, Majone, Metcalfe et al., “Specialised Agencies”, supra note 27.

39 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 Laying Down the General Principles and Requirements of Food Law, Establishing the European Food Safety Authority and Laying Down Procedures in Matters of Food Safety, OJ 2002 L 31/1, Art. 46(1).

40 Ibid, Art. 29. Exceptionally, EFSA also has the possibility of undertaking a self-task.

41 Ibid, Art. 23.

42 Ibid, Art. 33(2). In the period until 2007 the Authority also contributed to strengthening the food safety systems in accession or candidate countries, through involving these future EU member states in its work. This contribution, however, concentrates on EFSA's relations with international organizations and non-EU countries not being accession or candidate countries.

43 Ibid, Art. 49.

44 Ibid, Art. 34.

45 On the doctrine of implied powers in case of the European Community and European Union, see Eeckhout, Piet, External Relations of the European Union: Legal and Constitutional Foundations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

46 For more details on EU agencies’ contributions to the EU Preaccession Programme, see Coman-Kund, Florin, “Assessing the Role of EU Agencies in the Enlargement Process: The Case of the European Aviation Safety Agency”, 8 Croatian Yearbook of European Law (2012), pp. 335–368 Google Scholar.

47 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Report 2004”, 2005, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/corporate/doc/ar04en.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

48 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Report 2005”, 2006, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/corporate/doc/ar05en.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

49 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Report 2006”, 2007, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/corporate/doc/ar06en.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

50 The 2003 Annual Report does not include any information on EFSA's international relations.

51 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, supra note 39, Art. 60.

52 The first evaluation was undertaken in 2005, see Bureau Van Dijk Ingenieurs Conseils with Arcadia International EEIG, “Evaluation of EFSA. Final Report”, 2005, available on the Internet at <http://www.reading.ac.uk/foodlaw/pdf/eu-06001-efsa-evaluation.pdf> (last accessed 13 November 2013).

53 See online also European Food Safety Authority, “Management Board Conclusions of the External Evaluation of EFSA and Recommendations Arising from the Report”, 2006, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/keydocs/docs/extevaluation2006.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

54 See e.g. Alberto Alemanno, “L’Autorité européenne de sécurité des aliments souffle ses cinq premières bougies – Un bilan d’activité”, 3 Revue du droit de l’Union européenne (2007), pp. 610–629.

55 See e.g. Gabbi, Simone, L’autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare (Milano: Giuffré, 2009)Google Scholar.

56 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report of the European Food Safety Authority for 2007”, 2008, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/aar07.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013), at p. 34.

57 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report of the European Food Safety Authority for 2008”, 2009, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/aar08.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013), at p. 24.

58 European Food Safety Authority, “International Activities – A Strategic Approach. Document Describing EFSA's Strategic Approach to Its International Activities”, 2009, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/intstrategicen.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

59 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report of the European Food Safety Authority for 2009”, 2010, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/aar09.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

60 European Food Safety Authority, “International Activities”, supra note 58, at pp. 10–14.

61 The agreements are available online, see European Food Safety Authority, “International Initiatives”, 2013, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/networks/international.htm> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

62 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report 2009”, supra note 59, at p. 22.

63 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report of the European Food Safety Authority for 2010”, 2011, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/aar10.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November 2013), at p. 5.

64 Ibid, at p. 25.

65 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report of the European Food Safety Authority for 2011”, 2012, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/aar11.pdf> (last accessed on 13 November), at p. 17.

66 Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 On Maximum Residue Levels of Pesticides In or On Food and Feed of Plant and Animal Origin and Amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC, OJ 2005 L 70/1, at p. 1.

67 European Food Safety Authority, “Scientific Support for Preparing an EU Position in the 44th Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR)”, 10(7): 2859 The EFSA Journal (2012)Google Scholar.

68 Pharmacologically classified as a phenethanolamine β-adrenoceptor agonist.

69 For an overview of the ractopamine dispute, see Alemanno, Alberto and Capodieci, Giuseppe, “Testing the Limits of Global Food Governance: The Case of Ractopamine”, 3 European Journal of Risk Regulation (2012), pp. 400–407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Ractopamine has been evaluated at the 40th, 62nd, 66th, JECFA meetings, and by a special review in 2010.

71 European Food Safety Authority, “Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances Used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) On a Request From the European Commission on the Safety Evaluation of Ractopamine”, 1041 The EFSA Journal (2009), pp. 1–52 Google Scholar.

72 As duly highlighted by the Commission in a press release, see European Commission, “Midday Express of 2012-07-06”, 6 July 2012, available on the Internet at <http://europa.eu/rapid/middayExpressAction.do?date=06/07/2012&guiLanguage=en_> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

73 European Food Safety Authority, “Strategic Plan of the European Food Safety Authority for 2009–2013”, 2008, available on the Internet at <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/pub/strategicplan.htm> (last accessed on 13 November 2013).

74 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report 2007”, supra note 56, at p. 40.

75 European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report 2009”, supra note 59, at p. 25.

76 See e.g. Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, supra note 39, recital 22.

77 Eberlein, Burkard and Grande, Edgar, “Beyond Delegation: Transnational Regulatory Regimes and the EU Regulatory State”, 12(1) Journal of European Public Policy (2005), pp. 89–112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 But see also Randall, Ed, “Not That Soft or Informal: A Response to Eberlein and Grande's Account of Regulatory Governance in the EU With Special Reference to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)”, 13(3) Journal of European Public Policy (2006), pp. 402–419 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

79 See further Sabel, Charles F. and Zeitlin, Jonathan (eds), Experimentalist Governance in the European Union: Towards a New Architecture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

80 Gabbi, Simone, “The Interaction between Risk Assessors and Risk Managers: The Case of the European Commission and the European Food Safety Authority”, 3 European Food and Feed Law Review (2007), pp. 126–135 Google Scholar.

81 Groenleer, The Autonomy of European Union Agencies, supra note 16.

82 Groenleer, Martijn L.P., “The Actual Practice of Agency Autonomy: Tracing the Developmental Trajectories of the European Medicines Agency and the European Food Safety Agency”, 5 CES Papers – Open Forum (2011)Google Scholar.

83 E.g. EFSA's Annual Management Plans and Annual Activity Reports, supra note 57, 58, 60, 64, 66 .

84 European Parliament, Council of the European Union and European Commission, “Joint Statement”, supra note 10, at p. 8.

85 See European Food Safety Authority, “Annual Activity Report 2010, supra note 63, at p. 18.

86 Egeberg, Multilevel Administration, supra note 32.

87 Slaughter, A New World Order, supra note 3.