Regulatory scrutiny of subsidiarity and proportionality

Anne Meuwese, Suren Gomtsyan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

As the monitoring of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality is mostly left up to the EU institutions, internal quality control bodies could play an important role in developing tests and standards which represent part of ‘subsidiarity and proportionality in action’. In this context, the Impact Assessment Board (Board), established within the European Commission in 2006 and recently renamed ‘Regulatory Scrutiny Board’ (to review impact assessments) holds a key position. This paper presents an analysis of opinions from the Board from 2010 and 2011 as an alternative jurisprudential source regarding subsidiarity and proportionality. The analysis tells us something about the ‘everyday meaning’ of these principles, but also about the way the Board functions as an ‘in-house’ regulatory review board.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)483-505
JournalMaastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law
Volume22
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

subsidiarity
proportionality
principle of subsidiarity
quality control
European Commission
EU
monitoring

Keywords

  • European Commission
  • proportionality
  • regulatory impact assessment
  • Regulatory Scrutiny Board
  • subsidiarity

Cite this

@article{24173058265047fab322d4aea64f0b0d,
title = "Regulatory scrutiny of subsidiarity and proportionality",
abstract = "As the monitoring of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality is mostly left up to the EU institutions, internal quality control bodies could play an important role in developing tests and standards which represent part of ‘subsidiarity and proportionality in action’. In this context, the Impact Assessment Board (Board), established within the European Commission in 2006 and recently renamed ‘Regulatory Scrutiny Board’ (to review impact assessments) holds a key position. This paper presents an analysis of opinions from the Board from 2010 and 2011 as an alternative jurisprudential source regarding subsidiarity and proportionality. The analysis tells us something about the ‘everyday meaning’ of these principles, but also about the way the Board functions as an ‘in-house’ regulatory review board.",
keywords = "European Commission, proportionality, regulatory impact assessment, Regulatory Scrutiny Board, subsidiarity",
author = "Anne Meuwese and Suren Gomtsyan",
year = "2015",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "483--505",
journal = "Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law",
issn = "1023-263X",
number = "4",

}

Regulatory scrutiny of subsidiarity and proportionality. / Meuwese, Anne; Gomtsyan, Suren.

In: Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2015, p. 483-505.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Regulatory scrutiny of subsidiarity and proportionality

AU - Meuwese, Anne

AU - Gomtsyan, Suren

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - As the monitoring of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality is mostly left up to the EU institutions, internal quality control bodies could play an important role in developing tests and standards which represent part of ‘subsidiarity and proportionality in action’. In this context, the Impact Assessment Board (Board), established within the European Commission in 2006 and recently renamed ‘Regulatory Scrutiny Board’ (to review impact assessments) holds a key position. This paper presents an analysis of opinions from the Board from 2010 and 2011 as an alternative jurisprudential source regarding subsidiarity and proportionality. The analysis tells us something about the ‘everyday meaning’ of these principles, but also about the way the Board functions as an ‘in-house’ regulatory review board.

AB - As the monitoring of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality is mostly left up to the EU institutions, internal quality control bodies could play an important role in developing tests and standards which represent part of ‘subsidiarity and proportionality in action’. In this context, the Impact Assessment Board (Board), established within the European Commission in 2006 and recently renamed ‘Regulatory Scrutiny Board’ (to review impact assessments) holds a key position. This paper presents an analysis of opinions from the Board from 2010 and 2011 as an alternative jurisprudential source regarding subsidiarity and proportionality. The analysis tells us something about the ‘everyday meaning’ of these principles, but also about the way the Board functions as an ‘in-house’ regulatory review board.

KW - European Commission

KW - proportionality

KW - regulatory impact assessment

KW - Regulatory Scrutiny Board

KW - subsidiarity

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 483

EP - 505

JO - Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law

JF - Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law

SN - 1023-263X

IS - 4

ER -