Learning from difference: the new architecture of experimentalist governance in the EU
Open accessAbstract
Abstract: This article argues that current widespread characterisations of EU governance as multi‐level and networked overlook the emergent architecture of the EU's public rule making. In this architecture, framework goals (such as full employment, social inclusion, ‘good water status’, a unified energy grid) and measures for gauging their achievement are established by joint action of the Member States and EU institutions. Lower‐level units (such as national ministries or regulatory authorities and the actors with whom they collaborate) are given the freedom to advance these ends as they see fit. But in return for this autonomy, they must report regularly on their performance and participate in a peer review in which their results are compared with those pursuing other means to the same general ends. Finally, the framework goals, performance measures, and decision‐making procedures themselves are periodically revised by the actors, including new participants whose views come to be seen as indispensable to full and fair deliberation. Although this architecture cannot be read off from either Treaty provisions or textbook accounts of the formal competences of EU institutions, the article traces its emergence and diffusion across a wide range of policy domains, including telecommunications, energy, drug authorisation, occupational health and safety, employment promotion, social inclusion, pensions, health care, environmental protection, food safety, maritime safety, financial services, competition policy, state aid, anti‐discrimination policy and fundamental rights.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Complex governance problems are often addressed through iterative rules and institutional learning rather than through one-off commands.
“As Sabel and Zeitlin show, complex governance problems are often addressed through iterative rules and institutional learning rather than through one-off commands (Sabel and Zeitlin, 2008).”
From Human-centric AI governance in the European Union. Accountability, fundamental rights, and institutional resilience in public administration (2026) · cites this paper as Sabel and Zeitlin, 2008
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The last common bilaterian ancestor
Erwin, D. H., & Davidson, E. H. (2002) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.129.13.3021 · Cited by 320 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- M. Nauerz, Does the European Employment Strategy Lead to a Soft Form of Europeanisation? An Analysis of the 'Local Dimension' in Germany, unpublished Masters Thesis, College of Europe, Bruges, 2004. 138
- E. Tulmets, 'The Management of New Forms of Governance by Former Accession Countries of the European Union: Institutional Twinning in Estonia and Hungary', (2005) 11 European Law Journal 657;
- D. Bailey and L. De Propris, 'A Bridge Too Phare? EU Pre-Accession Aid and Capacity-Building in the Candidate Countries', (2004) 42 Journal of Common Market Studies 77;
- J. Kelley 'New Wine in Old Wineskins: Promoting Political Reforms through the New European Neighbourhood Policy', (2006) 44 Journal of Common Market Studies 29;
- T. Börzel and T. Risse, Venus Approaching Mars? The EU as an Emerging Civilian World Power, unpublished paper presented to the biennial conference of the European Union Studies Association, Montreal, 17-19 May 2007. 152
Cited by
Sorted by citations
What is so wicked about wicked problems? A conceptual analysis and a research program
Peters, B. G. (2017) · Policy and Society · doi:10.1080/14494035.2017.1361633 · Cited by 475 · see citing works
“See also Sabel and Zeitlin (2008), (2011).”
Populism and Democratic Theory
Mansbridge, J., & Macedo, S. (2019) · Annual Review of Law and Social Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-042843 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Peixoto, I., & Temmes, A. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.307 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Towards experimental standardization for AI governance in the EU
Prifti, K., & Fosch-Villaronga, E. (2024) · Computer Law & Security Review · doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105959 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Dragomir, A. N., Bulea, I., & Tarnu, L. I. (2026) · Frontiers in Political Science · doi:10.3389/fpos.2026.1928481 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- European Union (BE)
- Venue
- European Law Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-03-17
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 271-327
- ISSN
- 1351-5993 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0386
- OpenAlex
- W2161575102
- Cited by
- 791
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 49 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 63 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 37
- FWCI
- 291.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- European Law Journal (publishedVersion)
- bepress Legal Repository (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European Union Policy and Governance
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European and International Law Studies
- Keywords
- EU governance, experimental governance, performance measurement, peer review, multi-level governance, network governance, EU institutions, member states, regulatory independence, policy diffusion, deliberation, EU competences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review