Silent professionalization: EU integration and the professional socialization of public officials in Central and Eastern Europe
| Author | Jan-Hinrik Meyer-Sahling,Will Lowe,Christian van Stolk |
| DOI | 10.1177/1465116515608270 |
| Published date | 01 March 2016 |
| Date | 01 March 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
European Union Politics
2016, Vol. 17(1) 162–183
! The Author(s) 2015
Silent professionalization:
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
EU integration and the
DOI: 10.1177/1465116515608270
eup.sagepub.com
professional socialization
of public officials in Central
and Eastern Europe
Jan-Hinrik Meyer-Sahling
School of Politics and International Relations, University of
Nottingham, UK
Will Lowe
Princeton University, USA
Christian van Stolk
RAND Europe, UK
Abstract
This paper applies theories of international socialization to examine the impact of
European Union contact on the professional socialization of public officials in Central
and Eastern Europe. Based on a survey of officials in seven new member states, the
paper finds that daily work on European Union issues is associated with favourable
attitudes towards merit-based civil service governance. The distinction between
types of European Union contact shows that officials dealing with ‘reception’-related
European Union activities such as the transposition and implementation of European
Union policies develop more meritocratic attitudes. By contrast, ‘projection’-related
activities that involve personal contact with European Union officials have no effect.
The paper concludes that the small but consistent impact of European Union contact
on professional socialization promotes the silent professionalization of public adminis-
tration in Central and Eastern Europe.
Corresponding author:
Jan-Hinrik Meyer-Sahling, School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham, University
Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.
Email: j.meyer-sahling@nottingham.ac.uk
Meyer-Sahling et al.
163
Keywords
Attitude change, Central and Eastern Europe, Europeanization, public administration,
socialization
Introduction
What is the impact of the European Union (EU) on the professionalization of
public administration in Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs)?
Research on the Europeanization of public administration in post-communist
CEECs has long focused on the impact of EU conditionality (Camyar, 2010;
Dimitrova, 2005). The development of administrative capacity was one of the
conditions for EU membership (Dimitrova, 2002). Proponents of EU conditional-
ity stress a considerable degree of formal institutional change such as the adoption
and revision of civil service laws by CEEC governments (Dimitrova, 2005). In
contrast, skeptics point to problems of ‘shallow Europeanization’ due to the failure
of CEEC governments to properly implement the new formal rules (Goetz, 2005).
Moreover, research into the post-accession sustainability of administrative reforms
has identified risks of reform backsliding and the persistence of formal rules as
‘empty shells’ (Dimitrova, 2010; Fink-Hafner, 2014; Meyer-Sahling, 2011).
This article develops an alternative perspective on the relation between the EU
and public administration in CEECs. It focuses on the effect of the EU on the
professional socialization of public officials in CEECs. Specifically, we examine the
effect of EU contact on the attitudes of public officials towards non-political, merit-
based civil service governance.
The establishment of meritocratic civil service systems has been at the center of
debates on the reform of public administration in CEECs. Both practitioners and
academic research stress the importance of professional, depoliticized civil service sys-
tems for the successful implementation of EU policies at the national level and progress
during the EU accession process (Falkner and Treib, 2008; Hille and Knill, 2006; The
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 1999). More
generally, the quality of a country’s bureaucracy – in particular, recruitment on merit
and promotion of staff – is commonly regarded as essential for economic develop-
ment, the successful consolidation of democracy and the curbing of public sector
corruption (Dahlstro¨m et al., 2012; Evans and Rauch, 1999; Linz and Stepan, 1996).
Theoretically, our study builds on the insights of studies of international social-
ization (Checkel, 2005; Risse et al., 2013). In the European context, this research
has examined the socializing impact of EU institutions on the attitudes of national
and supranational officials towards modes of EU governance (Beyers, 2005, 2010;
Hooghe, 2005, 2012).1 In relation to third countries, theories of international
socialization have been applied to study the impact of EU contact on democratic
attitude change among state officials in the Southern neighborhood of the EU
(Freyburg, 2011, 2015). For CEECs, the application of this body of theory has
focused on democratic socialization in the context of North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) enlargement (Flockhart, 2004; Gheciu, 2005).
164
European Union Politics 17(1)
Our article shifts the focus of attention to the relation between European inte-
gration and professional socialization in public administration, which we under-
stand as a positive attitude change of public officials towards merit-based civil
service governance generated through EU contact. Focusing on EU contact in
the work context, we first examine the general EU influence on professional social-
ization by comparing public officials who deal with EU issues on a daily basis and
those who do not. Subsequently, we examine the effect of different types of EU
contact on the meritocratic attitudes of public officials in order to gain a better
understanding
of
the
mechanisms
underlying
EU-inspired
professional
socialization.
The empirical analysis is based on a survey of public officials employed in the
central government ministries of seven CEECs that joined the EU in the context of
the 2004 Eastern enlargement. The data set includes information regarding the
careers, job activities and evaluation of different principles of civil service
governance.
Our analysis shows that day-to-day work on EU issues has a small but consist-
ent impact on the professional socialization of public officials. Looking more clo-
sely at the type of EU contact that matters for professional socialization, we find
that the daily application of EU rules and procedures in the context of the trans-
position and implementation of EU policies (so-called reception-related EU activ-
ities) has a positive effect on attitudes towards merit-based civil service governance.
In contrast, direct, interpersonal contact with officials from EU institutions and
other member states (so-called projection-related EU activities) does not appear to
affect officials’ meritocratic attitudes.
The positive impact of EU contact on professional socialization provides an
alternative perspective on the relation between the EU and public administration.
Our study shifts the focus of attention from the level of formal rules to the level of
attitudes and, in particular, from the level of countries to the level of individual
public officials. It therefore opens the debate around the micro-foundations of
the Europeanization of public administration in CEECs. Substantively, our
findings raise the prospect that public officials develop more meritocratic
attitudes as a result of bringing CEECs closer to the EU. Thanks to integration
into the European Administrative Space, professional socialization thus presents
the potential to promote the silent professionalization of public administration in
CEECs.
The professional socialization of public officials in CEECs
Mechanisms of socialization have remained largely unexplored in relation to the
Europeanization of public administration in CEECs. Checkel (2005: 804) has
defined socialization as ‘a process of inducting actors into the norms and rules
of a given community’ (2005: 804). For him, the essence of socialization is a
change in the logic of action from a logic of consequences to a logic of appropri-
ateness. Checkel (2005) argues that this change can manifest itself in two ways.
Meyer-Sahling et al.
165
First, type I socialization refers to role-playing when actors consciously
accept the norms of behaviour associated with a given situation or position
and behave accordingly. Role-playing assumes that actors know what is expected
from them and they choose to behave in the appropriate way. Second, type II
assumes deeper socialization, in that actors are persuaded by the ‘rightness’ of a
norm associated with a given position. They do not question their behaviour in
relation to the position nor do they need to think much about what is expected.
Rather, the behavioural expectation has acquired ‘taken-for-grantedness’ (Checkel,
2005).
In this article, we are mainly interested in type I socialization, which is especially
relevant for the context of public administration. When entering public adminis-
tration, officials in most countries have to pass an entry examination, they receive
induction training and will receive an introduction to their specific job responsi-
bilities. Such training usually covers a range of general issues such as constitutional
and administrative law, the budget process, civil service law and the rules and
procedures within their own institution.
The steps and items covered during preparatory training aim to contribute to the
professional socialization of officials into public administration, as they learn what
is expected from them as civil servants in their institution and specifically within
their position. Indeed, the very notion of ‘induction’ training neatly resonates with
Checkel’s (2005) definition...
To continue reading
Request your trial