Multilevel governance as way towards a more involved and accountable political union

Introduction

Throughout history there has been a trend towards decentralisation. This is a continuing process in several member states which are constantly facing constitutional reforms to empower local or regional authorities with the management and co-financing of European funds. This process has been challenged recently by the economic crisis, as member states have had to make cuts to some of their sub-national structures, but the concept of subsidiarity remains at the centre of policymaking, both on the EU level and in the member states.

While the creation of an official full-time president of the European Council was an essential development for the EU, it also brings the risk that the EU may become increasingly intergovernmental in its approach. By unbalancing the equilibrium with the European Parliament and enhancing the role of national parliaments as the chief protectors of the subsidiarity principle, Europe is not fully grasping the opportunity to empower and engage with regions and cities, which are stable pillars for democracy and key investors in the European economy.

Promoting growth and creating more job opportunities are both central to the new strategic agenda for European integration and the most demanding challenges for governments at member state, regional and local level. At the beginning of the new political cycle this article makes the case for an EU working in partnership: a Union fostering a culture of multilevel governance (MLG).

Working in partnership with all levels of government

Relations across levels of government have changed significantly over the last two decades. Decentralisation has empowered local and regional governments to formulate and deliver territorial development policies, thereby increasing their scope for improving the competitiveness of the regional economy and the well-being of residents. The recent reform of regional policy has fostered the so-called partnership principle among regional and local authorities. These authorities are called on to cooperate with their equivalents in other member states to design the EU's investments in order to meet the real needs at the grass-roots level. Moreover, member states are obliged to respect the guiding principle of MLG throughout the entire programming cycle for the funds.

With this in mind, and as policy coordination, budget synchronisation and a shared commitment to the joint implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy for Growth and Jobs are a top priority, Europe's economies can only be successfully restructured if this is done in partnership with Europe's regions and cities. A good example is given by the Cohesion Policy, where funds are provided to regional and local authorities to foster economic growth, create jobs and close gaps in territorial development within the internal market area. In particular, when structural funds are used well by local authorities to promote investments in partnership with public and private sectors, economic recovery can happen. In this context, MLG offers the possibility for cooperation between all players: European institutions, member states, regions, cities, socioeconomic partners and civil society platforms. The objectives of Europe 2020 can either be reached in partnership, or, put simply, they will be missed.

MLG does not question the state's authority; on the contrary, it makes sure that those who have the expertise on the ground are also committed to implementing the grand strategies put in place by the state. MLG strengthens openness, participation, coordination and commitment. It allows Europe to take account of the real territorial diversity in Europe.

In other words: if Europe wishes to succeed and become competitive once again, it should further strengthen the legal and political participatory instruments in order to create a renewed governance architecture based on this principle, and also adopt a ‘European Code on Participatory Administrative Procedures’. This could involve a systematic dialogue with regional and local authorities before proposing legislative acts. It would be even better if these authorities were involved during the process, by including the Committee of the Regions in a trialogue either for topics in which it is directly involved or when a Territorial Impact Assessment is systematically required before taking formal decisions.

MLG will also incentivise greater policy experimentation and institutional discovery. The European, national, regional and local bodies should test new procedures for creating greater synergies and cooperation that result in win-win situations. Of course, flexibility is required. Each institution has its own way of working. What is also clear is that this must not result in new procedures without doing away with the cumbersome and complex old administrative routine.

The treaty basis for MLG

‘There are many goals which we cannot achieve on our own, but only in concert. Tasks are shared between the European Union, the Member States and their regions and local authorities.’ (European Council et al. 2007) The notion that the EU must take account of local and regional authorities is not a new concept, as demonstrated by this quote. Today, three of the EU's member states have a federal structure (Austria, Belgium and Germany), five have strong federal elements (Spain, Italy, the UK, Finland and Portugal) and, in general, all member states have developed some form of internal decentralisation.

Both ‘partnership’ and ‘subsidiarity’ are key principles and at the heart of the values that the European People's Party holds dear. Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation for the European Structural and Investment Funds (CPR) (European Parliament and Council 2013) was a real breakthrough in this respect. Upon a proposal of the European Commission, the principle of subsidiarity was introduced to the CPR. The partnership principle was also strengthened by obliging member states to organise ‘partnerships’ at all stages of programming and at all levels.

The European Code of Conduct on Partnership (European Commission 2014a) constitutes yet another important step forward in view of enhancing the collective commitment to and ownership of the Cohesion Policy. The Code defines the objectives and criteria to be met to allow member states to implement the MLG and partnership principles, but leaves the necessary flexibility for the practicalities of implementation to the internal structure of the member state in question. An important pillar in this respect is that it provides for a differentiated approach for the partners according to their functions and competences.

According to EU legislation, operational programmes and the newly initiated ‘Partnership Agreements’, which constitute the long-term reference framework for the operational programmes, need to be drawn up in line with the philosophy of MLG and reinforced through partnerships. In this context, the European Commission's guidance for the drafting of Partnership Agreements can be considered as supportive of MLG.

This demonstrates that there is already a willingness to look to MLG and that full deployment of it would not require a treaty change at this stage because it could be achieved via secondary law.

MLG in practice

The European Committee of the Regions has been engaged in a process of developing a culture of MLG since 2008 and launched a White Paper on the matter in 2009 (Committee of the Regions 2009). The Committee of the Regions is not the only body looking carefully at MLG: to promote good practice in the area of MLG in public investment the OECD has developed a ‘Recommendation on Effective Public Investment: A Shared Responsibility Across Levels of Government’ (OECD 2014), which was adopted by the OECD Council on 12 March 2014 as an official instrument.

According to the ongoing scoreboards for monitoring MLG in eight policy fields (Europe 2020 Strategy, Energy Strategy 2020, the Stockholm Programme, the Spring Package 2010, the Single Market Act, the European Neighbourhood Policy, the Structural Funds Regulation and the Common Agricultural Policy), it seems that MLG is already being practiced to some extent. The challenge, however, is to evolve it from a governance concept and put it into practice on a larger scale. This process takes time because member states differ: in the most decentralised, the MLG approach is already a familiar concept, while in more centralised countries it is more difficult to implement. The answer is not to force one model for all, but rather to implement MLG according to the existing structures in each member state or adopt, if needed, specific reforms.

The charter for multilevel governance in Europe

The Charter for Multilevel Governance was adopted by the Committee of the Regions on 3 April 2014 and officially emphasises the legitimacy of local and regional authorities as fully fledged partners in European policymaking (Committee of the Regions 2014). It recommends the systematic involvement of European towns and regions in the preparation, implementation and evaluation of policies carried out at a local or regional level, with the ultimate aim of obtaining better policy delivery.

At the time of writing, more than 170 regional and local authorities have signed up to make use of MLG tools and procedures in the management of public policy, and the Charter is supported by the OECD, the Congress of Europe and the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights. However, for the Charter to succeed, it has to take into consideration the interplay between institutions and policy organisations.

The Charter, which is not a binding legal instrument, attempts to formally establish a set of common values, fundamental principles and tangible procedures underpinning this new method of governance. Participating entities should have access to a European online platform where MLG best practice is exchanged, breaking through the administrative walls that often separate them. Concrete success stories can demonstrate the potential of MLG for changing the conservative ways in which policy has been conducted in the past. Of course, inspiring role models are needed, such as the Covenant of Mayors, an inspiring initiative launched by the European Commission to endorse and support the efforts made by local authorities in the implementation of sustainable energy policies. Digital platforms for services can help institutions to share information and better communicate with their citizens. This is exactly what ‘smart cities’ do.

When in place, member states and regions could also task their ombudsman with facilitating cooperation, whilst promoting transparency and mediating when administrative bottlenecks hinder cooperation. At the city level, a ‘local MLG contact point’ could be installed as a single point of entry for nongovernmental organisations, civil society, businesses and public authorities. These MLG experts could connect societal partners and spur inter-institutional cooperation. An evolving map should be put in place, highlighting signatories, the labelling process and progress in the field, as a tool for disseminating and implementing the Charter. This would encourage local and regional authorities to spread the idea, sign up to the Charter and strengthen their political commitment, as is already the case for the Covenant of Mayors. Educational resources, in the form MLG training, should also be considered.

Both the EU and member states should promote the Charter by highlighting coordination bottlenecks and identifying real potential for cooperation. Through the structural funds the Charter could also incite institutional capacity-building, providing institutions with the necessary assistance and expertise. Obviously, a ‘culture of MLG’ can only be developed if universities and schools educate students on the principle, provide MLG training and practice MLG themselves in their day-to-day relations with society.

Conclusion

The recently published Sixth Report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion (European Commission 2014b) underlines the importance of good governance: low-quality governance, it says, creates a vicious cycle in which trust in government breaks down, taxes are evaded, corruption rises and participation in public calls for tender declines because of the lack of trust. An effective Cohesion Policy and effective management of the funds are two of the main tools needed to restore confidence in EU policies after the wake-up call of the European elections.

In the many comments gathered by the Committee of the Regions during its drafting of the White Paper on MLG, it became clear that the skills, competences, experience and knowledge of the different levels of government are crucial for implementing the principles of MLG and good governance. In terms of both theoretical and practical experience, it seems that partnership and creating synergies are essential prerequisites for enhancing the efficiency of EU policymaking. Only an effective MLG system can ensure effective links between the strategic guidelines set out by the EU and the local and regional challenges that are being faced every day on the ground.

It is now just months after the 2014 elections for the European Parliament, in which participation rates in many places were at their lowest level ever. At this juncture in time, the future of Europe is all about partnership and dialogue between all those in places of responsibility–-and in this process the further development of MLG is essential. The signing of the Charter on Multilevel Governance by President Juncker and many Members of the European Parliament provides a clear signal that the new European Commission and Parliament will work in partnership for a better Europe.