Advertisement

European Political Science

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 48–59 | Cite as

political leadership in the European Union: a time-centred view

  • klaus h goetzEmail author
Symposium

Abstract

This article explores the connection between time and political leadership within the institutional setting of the European Union (EU). The discussion first notes how time is linked to power, legitimacy and efficiency, and how time rules, time budgets and time horizons influence the potential for both institutional and individual leadership. Next, the article sets out core features of political time in the EU, discusses their implications for leadership and highlights the skilful handling of multiple times as a central leadership challenge. Leaders with larger, more predictable time budgets and more extended time horizons are in a privileged position as are those who enjoy discretion regarding the timing of their actions and who are able to act as time-setters. Increasingly, leaders in the supranational institutions of the EU – notably the Commission and the European Parliament – follow their own calendars. In the intergovernmental bodies, differences in executives’ time budgets and horizons affect their leadership potential.

Keywords

European union political time leadership timescape 

References

  1. Frye, T. (1997) ‘A politics of institutional choice: Post-communist presidencies’, Comparative Political Studies 30(5): 523–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Goetz, K.H. (2009) ‘How does the EU tick? Five propositions on political time’, Journal of European Public Policy 16(2): 202–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Goetz, K.H. (2012) ‘Time and Power in the EU’, in E. Jones, A. Menon and S. Weatherill (eds.) The Oxford Handbook on the EU, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 703–715.Google Scholar
  4. Goetz, K.H. (2014a) ‘A question of time: Responsive and responsible democratic politics’, West European Politics 37(2): 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goetz, K.H. (2014b) ‘Time and power in the European Commission’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 80(3): 577–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goetz, K.H. (2015) ‘Synchronisation demokratischen Regierens in der Europäischen Union’, in H. Straßheim und and T. Ulbricht (eds.) Zeit der Politik: Demokratisches Regieren in einer beschleunigten Welt. Leviathan Sonderheft 30 Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp. 132–151.Google Scholar
  7. Goetz, K.H. and Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. (2009) ‘Political time in the EU: Dimensions, approaches, theories’, Journal of European Public Policy 16(2): 180–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Helms, L. (2016, this issue of European Political Science) ‘Introduction: Leadership Questions in Transnational European Governance’, European Political Science, doi: 10.1057/eps.2015.113.Google Scholar
  9. Howlett, M. and Goetz, K.H. (2014) ‘Introduction: Time, temporality and timescapes in administration and policy’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 80(3): 477–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kassim, H. (2016, this issue of European Political Science) ‘What’s New? A First Appraisal of the Juncker Commission’, European Political Science, doi: 10.1057/eps.2015.116.Google Scholar
  11. Meyer-Sahling, J.H. and Goetz, K.H. (2009) ‘The EU timescape: From notion to research agenda’, Journal of European Public Policy 16(2): 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Patz, R. and Goetz, K.H. (2015) From Politicised Budgeting to Political Budgets in the EU? Paper presented at the International Conference on Public Policy, 1–4 July, Milan, Panel ‘Sequencing in Public Policy’ (T01P01), http://www.icpublicpolicy.org/conference/file/reponse/1434615065.pdf, accessed 6 January 2016.
  13. Pierson, P. (2004) Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Protocol, Press Conference of Chancellor Merkel and Chancellor Faymann, 15 September. (2015) http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Mitschrift/Pressekonferenzen/2015/09/2015-09-15-merkel-faymann.htm.
  15. Scharpf, F.W. (1973) ‘Komplexität als Schranke der politischen Planung’, in F.W. Scharpf (eds.) Planung als Politischer Prozess. Aufsätze zur Theorie der Planenden Demokratie, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, pp. 73–113.Google Scholar
  16. Schmitter, P.C. and Santiso, J. (1998) ‘Three temporal dimensions to the consolidation of democracy’, International Political Science Review 19(1): 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shugart, M.S. and Carey, J. (1992) Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Skowronek, S. (1993) The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush, Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Skowronek, S. (2008) Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal, Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  20. Tholoniat, L. (2009) ‘The temporal constitution of the European Commission: A timely investigation’, Journal of European Public Policy 16(2): 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Willumsen, David and Goetz, K.H. (2015) ‘Staggered political institutions: Design and effects’, Journal of European Public Policy 22(7): 1040–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Consortium for Political Research 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Political Systems and European Integration, Department of Political Science, Ludwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations