Project description
A closer look at regulatory dynamics post-pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic compelled the EU to employ unconventional regulatory tools, diverging from its established law-making procedures. This departure from the norm has raised questions about the shifting landscape of EU governance and its implications for democratic legitimacy. With the support of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) programme, the REXPO project investigates these critical shifts in post-pandemic regulatory practices. Through empirical case studies, REXPO reveals a strengthening of the Commission’s executive functions. This increase, termed ‘residual’, emerges from pandemic-driven necessities, rather than intentional policy changes. Overall, the project’s interdisciplinary approach illuminates the pandemic’s legal and political ramifications for EU governance and democratic legitimacy, underscoring the significance of overlooked institutional transformations.
Objective
REXPO investigates shifts in EU regulatory practices following the Covid-19 pandemic. To contrast the pandemic the EU has mobilised unconventional legal tools such as financial assistance, cohesion policy or soft-law coordination, which fundamentally deviate from the community-method as the traditional EU law-making process. REXPO analyses the impact of this post-pandemic landscape on EU governance. Its central research question asks how the EU response to the pandemic has changed the nature of EU regulation and how new regulatory practices have affected the EU institutional balance in general and EU executive power in particular.
The project focuses on the relationship between executive power and the unconventional regulatory instruments mobilised to face the crisis. It resorts to four empirical case-studies encompassing: the temporary recovery instrument NextGenerationEU, the unemployment financing scheme SURE, the distribution of vaccines, and soft-law coordination in the field of health policy. As these tools are all steered by the Commission, REXPO argues that they have strengthened the Commissions executive functions, while moving away from the Community Method. Using a historical institutionalist lens, REXPO defines this increase in the Commissions executive power as residual, because it emerged as a secondary result of choices necessary to fight the pandemic and not from an intentional attribution of competences by political leaders.
REXPO combines empirical and theoretical research and adopts an innovative interdisciplinary approach to shed light on the legal and political consequences of the pandemic for EU governance and, eventually, for its democratic legitimacy. Whereas scholarship has focused on the political impact of the crisis and on the legality of the measures adopted, these interstitial institutional changes have passed unnoticed. However, precisely these changes can trigger a transformation of EU executive governance.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
- social sciences sociology governance
- medical and health sciences health sciences public health epidemiology pandemics
- medical and health sciences basic medicine pharmacology and pharmacy pharmaceutical drugs vaccines
- social sciences sociology social issues unemployment
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Keywords
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
HORIZON.1.2 - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
HORIZON-TMA-MSCA-PF-EF - HORIZON TMA MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships - European Fellowships
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) HORIZON-MSCA-2023-PF-01
See all projects funded under this callCoordinator
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
10117 BERLIN
Germany
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.