When Learning Hits Politics or: Social Policy Coordination Left to the Administrations and the Ngos?

Processes of soft policy coordination in the EU and of Europeanization have in recent years mostly been conceptualised in terms of learning. The OMC is mostly seen as inducing ideational, cognitive and possibly normative learning between member states. However, the generalised learning assumption stands in sharp constrast with the little amount of empirical evidence provided so far by scholarly research. This contribution addresses the learning assumption by looking at two empirical processes of the OMC inclusion: the drawing-up of the National Action Plans (NAPs) in France and Germany, and the place of learning within this OMC, the peer reviews, in order to evaluate whether minimal conditions for supranational learning dynamics were given. The results show that minimal conditions for supranational learning processes were not met in both member states nor within the context of the peer reviews. While this can to some degree be explained by institutional differences, the main explaining variable appears to be the lack of political will: at the domestic level, this lack hinders a synchronisation of the European and national agendas while at the European level, the same lack stands in the way of further positive integration.

[1]  Stijn Smismans,et al.  New Modes of Governance and the Participatory Myth , 2008 .

[2]  Anna. Horvath Committee governance after the enlargement of the EU: The institutionalisation of cooperation within the Social Protection Committee. European Political Economy Review No. 6 (March 2007), pp. 53-73 , 2007 .

[3]  Kenneth A. Armstrong Inclusive Governance? Civil Society and the Open Method of Co-ordination , 2006 .

[4]  D. Friedrich Policy process, governance and democracy in the EU: the case of the Open Method of Coordination on social inclusion in Germany , 2006 .

[5]  B. Casey,et al.  Peer review of labour market programmes in the European Union: what can countries really learn from one another? , 2005 .

[6]  C. Radaelli WHO LEARNS WHAT? POLICY LEARNING AND THE OPEN METHOD OF COORDINATION , 2004 .

[7]  Kerstin Jacobsson Soft regulation and the subtle transformation of states: the case of EU employment policy , 2004 .

[8]  A. Atkinson Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion , 2002 .

[9]  Caroline de la Porte,et al.  Social Benchmarking, Policy Making and New Governance in the Eu , 2001 .

[10]  P. Hall Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain , 1993 .

[11]  M. Büchs,et al.  Surface integration: the national action plans for employment and social inclusion in Germany , 2005 .

[12]  S. Sacchi New models of governance in the EU and Italy's institutional capability : a comparison of employment and social inclusion policies , 2004 .

[13]  D. Mabbett Learning by numbers: The role of indicators in the social inclusion process , 2004 .

[14]  David M. Trubek,et al.  Governing work and welfare in a new economy : European and American experiments , 2003 .

[15]  E. Page,et al.  Future Governance and the Literature on Policy Transfer and Lesson Drawing , 2000 .

[16]  J. Woodroffe,et al.  A learning experience. , 1987, New Zealand hospital.