Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline: How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Standard

Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline : How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law. / Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg; Blauberger, Michael; Heindlmaier, Anita; Thierry, Jessica Maria Sampson.

In: Public Administration, Vol. 97, No. 4, 2019, p. 814-828.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Martinsen, DS, Blauberger, M, Heindlmaier, A & Thierry, JMS 2019, 'Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline: How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law', Public Administration, vol. 97, no. 4, pp. 814-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12603

APA

Martinsen, D. S., Blauberger, M., Heindlmaier, A., & Thierry, J. M. S. (2019). Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline: How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law. Public Administration, 97(4), 814-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12603

Vancouver

Martinsen DS, Blauberger M, Heindlmaier A, Thierry JMS. Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline: How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law. Public Administration. 2019;97(4):814-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12603

Author

Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg ; Blauberger, Michael ; Heindlmaier, Anita ; Thierry, Jessica Maria Sampson. / Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline : How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law. In: Public Administration. 2019 ; Vol. 97, No. 4. pp. 814-828.

Bibtex

@article{7c57b4eddd894b0b82f797c91b8fd0e4,
title = "Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline: How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law",
abstract = "This article analyses the implementation of European case law at the bureaucratic frontline of European member states. Theoretically, insights from street‐level implementation studies are combined with judicial impact research. Empirically, we compare how EU rules on free movement and cross‐border welfare are applied in practice in Denmark, Austria and France. We find that when applying EU rules in practice, street‐level bureaucrats are confronted with a world of legal complexity, consisting of ambiguous rules, underspecified concepts and a recent judicial turn by the Court of Justice of the European Union. In order to manage complexity, street‐level bureaucrats turn to their more immediate superiors for guidance. As a consequence, domestic signals shape the practical application of EU law. Despite bureaucratic discretion and many country differences, domestic signals create uniform, restrictive outcomes of EU law in all three cases. Thus we show that there is considerable room for politics in EU implementation processes.",
author = "Martinsen, {Dorte Sindbjerg} and Michael Blauberger and Anita Heindlmaier and Thierry, {Jessica Maria Sampson}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1111/padm.12603",
language = "English",
volume = "97",
pages = "814--828",
journal = "Public Administration",
issn = "0033-3298",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementing European Case Law at the Bureaucratic Frontline

T2 - How Domestic Signalling Influences the Outcomes of EU Law

AU - Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg

AU - Blauberger, Michael

AU - Heindlmaier, Anita

AU - Thierry, Jessica Maria Sampson

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - This article analyses the implementation of European case law at the bureaucratic frontline of European member states. Theoretically, insights from street‐level implementation studies are combined with judicial impact research. Empirically, we compare how EU rules on free movement and cross‐border welfare are applied in practice in Denmark, Austria and France. We find that when applying EU rules in practice, street‐level bureaucrats are confronted with a world of legal complexity, consisting of ambiguous rules, underspecified concepts and a recent judicial turn by the Court of Justice of the European Union. In order to manage complexity, street‐level bureaucrats turn to their more immediate superiors for guidance. As a consequence, domestic signals shape the practical application of EU law. Despite bureaucratic discretion and many country differences, domestic signals create uniform, restrictive outcomes of EU law in all three cases. Thus we show that there is considerable room for politics in EU implementation processes.

AB - This article analyses the implementation of European case law at the bureaucratic frontline of European member states. Theoretically, insights from street‐level implementation studies are combined with judicial impact research. Empirically, we compare how EU rules on free movement and cross‐border welfare are applied in practice in Denmark, Austria and France. We find that when applying EU rules in practice, street‐level bureaucrats are confronted with a world of legal complexity, consisting of ambiguous rules, underspecified concepts and a recent judicial turn by the Court of Justice of the European Union. In order to manage complexity, street‐level bureaucrats turn to their more immediate superiors for guidance. As a consequence, domestic signals shape the practical application of EU law. Despite bureaucratic discretion and many country differences, domestic signals create uniform, restrictive outcomes of EU law in all three cases. Thus we show that there is considerable room for politics in EU implementation processes.

U2 - 10.1111/padm.12603

DO - 10.1111/padm.12603

M3 - Journal article

VL - 97

SP - 814

EP - 828

JO - Public Administration

JF - Public Administration

SN - 0033-3298

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 216865219