CIVGOV

1
CIVGOV

• Organised Civil Society and European Governance
• Workpackages

2
Workpackage 1

• National landscape studies of public preferences
  and issue cultures (Background for research)
• National policy histories record of key policy
  developments/controversies for 3 policy spheres
  (6 sub-issues)
• Identification of key civil society (SMO/MAC)
  actors in each sector
• Analysis of public attitudes regarding 3 sectors
• Use of existing survey data/secondary literature
  to identify public preferences and relationship
  to MACs

3
Workpackage 2 - Representation Processes and
Political Opportunities

• Analysis of national/sub-national of Organised
  Civil Society (OCS) MACs - and relationship to
  societal attitudes, role in agenda-setting,
  relationship and impact on decision-making/governi
  ng institutions
• Two main perspectives. 1) A focus on
  representation 2) focus on political
  opportunities and impact of policy ideas proposed
  by OCS organisations.
• Focus on representation operationalises issues
  stressed in official EU documents in relation to
  civil society - relate to openness,
  participation, accountability, effectiveness and
  coherence (European Commission White Paper on
  European Governance, COM 2001/428). Thus the
  extent to which SMOs/MACs represent civil society
  and reflect public opinion, and to which they
  themselves are democratic and transparent bodies
  was examined.

4
WP2 - POS and Framing Processes

• Focus on political opportunities structures (POS)
  - include the relative openness or closure of the
  institutionalised political system the stability
  or instability of that broad set of elite
  alignments that typically undergird a policy and
  the presence or absence of elite allies.
• Contrast between national and sub-national
  (regional/local) levels
• Framing Processes examination of the framing
  processes by which MACs seek to reflect societal
  opinion and affect the policy-making agenda. What
  is the degree of common understanding among and
  between SMOs/MACs, institutional and other actors
  regarding the problems facing the policy area?
  How does this affect the success of SMOs/MACs?
  What strategies do they employ to make themselves
  heard?

5
WP2 - Methodology

• Interviews with local/national activists
• 5 localities for environment/anti-racist sector.
  3 regions for regional sector
• Additional interviews with key actors at national
  level, inc. civil society sympathisers/institution
  al actors and privileged witnesses
• 700 interviews in total (_at_75 per country)
• Common interview questions, methodology for
  analysis required

6
Questionnaires

• Modified for each policy sector and for type of
  actor (activist/institutional)
• Nature and Structure of MACs in policy sector
  (type of organisations, relationship to each
  other, style of leadership, accountability to
  members/supporters etc)
• Issues and Campaigns - exploration of issues that
  SMOs/MACs campaign on for policy sector
• SMOs/MACs and public opinion assessment of
  public identification with SMOs/MACs in policy
  sector
• Strategies examination of strategies employed
  by SMOs/MACs in policy sector to affect
  decision-making/agenda-setting
• Examination of openness/responsiveness of
  political opportunity structure for SMOs for in
  policy sector
• Assessment of degree of common understanding
  among SMOs/MACs and between SMOs/MACs and
  institutional and other relevant actors in policy
  sector (involvement in alliances, mutual learning
  etc)
• SMOs/MACs and Europe perceptions of EU level of
  decision-making, involvement in European
  level/trans-national alliances and impact etc.
• Assessment of the general degree of success of
  SMOs/MACs

7
WP2 Analysis and Reporting of Data

• Common methodology used for analysing the
  interview data. Two main analytical tools, the
  interpretative grid and the frame analysis
  (developed on basis of trials and reliability
  tests held in coding workshop involving all
  partners).
• Interpretative Grid attempt made to close
  each of the interview questions set out in the
  questionnaire (anticipating and categorising
  likely answers). For all interviews undertaken by
  the national teams, the interviewers would use
  the grid to interpret the answers given by
  interviewees, and input the data given (i.e. the
  interviewees' responses) into an Access database
  (e-g- involvement in decision-making, alliances
  and contact with other civil society actors,
  perceptions of decision-makers and different
  levels of governance).
• However, for some questions, an attempt to close
  or pre-empt possible answers was seen as
  unfeasible or futile left to be interpreted
  qualitatively by researchers or to interpret
  through the frame analysis.

8
WP2 Analysis and Reporting of Data

• Frame Analysis - a number of common frames were
  identified - grouped under a number of
  master-frames i) perceptions on the political
  system, ii) perceptions of Europe, iii)
  perceptions of public opinion, iv) perceived
  constituency and v) perspectives on the future.
  18 Interviews (6 per sector) analysed by each
  country team. Examples of use of these frames
  sought for each interview how was frame
  conceptualised? Various different frames
  identified for each master-frame, e.g EU seen as
  distant, EU seen as opportunity. Political system
  seen as closed/open/biased etc..
• Results of the interpretative grid and the frame
  analysis elaborated by co-ordinators as basis of
  comparative conclusions of WP2 report. Country
  teams also produced country reports based on
  interpretations of interview data (sectoral
  chapters and comparative conclusions). Sectoral
  co-ordinators produced cross-country sectoral
  comparisons.

9
Workpackage 3

• Workpackage 3 aims at an analysis of the
  interaction between national SMOs/MACs and
  European Social Movement Organisations (EMOs) or
  EMACs and the impact this relationship has. Also
  direct relationship between national SMOs/MACs
  and EU decision-making
• The focus of this package is therefore on the
  nature of mediation between the national and
  European level of civil society/decision-making.
• Assessment of extent and impact of
  Europeanisation of civil society
• Required interviews with actors that play a
  mediating role, i.e. national activists who deal
  specifically with the EU or EU level activists
  who have a liaison role in relation to activists
  in a particular country, and institutional actors
  who link the national and EU levels in the
  European Parliament, Council of
  Ministers/COREPER, Commission, Committee of the
  Regions and other institutions and agencies of
  the EU.

10
WP3 - methodology

• Continuation of work of WP2 revisiting
  organisations interviewed for WP2 to examine
  links with EU level (bottom-up approach)
  interviewing intermediaries (e.g. European
  officers)
• Combined with top-down approach identifying
  main EU level organisations and examining links
  with national level
• Total 180 interviews (18 per country, 6 per
  sector)
• Common questionnaires, country reports and
  comparative overviews

11
WP3 Questionnaires

• Relevance of EU for national/sub-national
  SMOs/MACs
• Perception of Openness/Responsiveness of EU
  decision-making vis-à-vis civil society
  (comparison with national/sub-national level) and
  factors in achieving political access
• Nature of involvement of SMOs/MACs in EU policy
  making process and nature of institutional
  contacts at EU level. Comparison with
  national/sub-national level
• Level of common understanding between EU
  decision-makers and civil society)
• Nature of involvement of SMOs in EU level
  alliances/networks (comparison with national
  level) and perception of utility and cohesion
• Relationship between policy agendas of national
  SMOs and those of EU level SMO organisations/allia
  nces
• Grassroots and public interest and involvement in
  EU matters (Q.10)
• Europeanisation of policy area and broader
  perspectives

12
Workpackage 4

• Focus on direct interaction between EU level
  civil society organisations (EMOs/EMACs) and EU
  decision-making
• Analysis of role of EMOs/EMACs in representing
  European public preferences as whole
• Interviews with representatives of EMOs/EU
  officials/MEPs and other significant actors
  (around 30 interviews)
• Analysis of EU policy-communities

13
WP4 - methodology

• Same approach as WP2 but focused on EU level
• Interviews/Reporting focus on i) Assessment of
  Political Opportunity Structures and ii)
  Representativenes of organsiations
• POS - General openness and responsiveness of
  institutions Factors/Strategies in gaining
  access Involvement in stages of EU
  policy-making Assessment of formal access
  channels Common understandings,
• Representativeness - Structure of organisations
  Coordination of member organisations Dependence
  on European funding Criteria and perception of
  representativity
• Broader perspectives - What kind of European
  civil society Future institutional responses

14
Workpackage 5 (Jan 2006)

• Final Report to Commission will bring together
  key findings of the project, drawing from the
  various workpackage reports and results
• Multi-level model of civil society reflecting
  multi-level nature of governance
• Policy recommendations reflecting analysis of
  results and views of civil society and key actors

15
Additional output - Publications

• Pan-European comparisons across sectors, books on
  EMACs/national MACs in particular
  sectors/sub-sectors
• National level publications on specific policy
  sectors in each country, and on civil society,
  social movements and issue cultures in each
  country
• Books on European civil society as a whole,
  comparing EMACs across a variety of sectors