1. Fabio Giglioni European Administrative Integration through the Differentiation. Methods of European Coordination

2. The starting point: value of integration Use of word “integration” Origin of national legal systems: annexation, substitution, abolition Unity replaced fragmentation Differentiation in national legal systems enhances self- government, autonomy EU takes differetiation for granted because of national sovreignty Integration describes a method through which unity is to be searched for EU integration is a dynamic method where boundaries between polity/law – in/out – validity/efficacy are blurried

3. The EU integration techniques How EU searched for integration Uniformity and harmonization (differentiation as a trouble) Mutual recognition and principle of equivalence (differentiation as a potentiality)

4. Integration through the differentiation Apparent paradox Coordination technique National diversity is considered a positive value Providing some conditions national and the European levels decide to share exclusive duties even if they would not be forced to do it Why would they do it? Because the interests and performance would not be attained otherwise at the same extent

5. Three case study The open method of coordination (OMC) The state aids (SA) The public markets (PM)

6. Open Method of Coordination The origin Four elements: a) periodical definition of short, medium and long objectives from EU; b) transposition of EU instructions in National frameworks; c) adoption of benchmarks for National actions evaluation; d) iterative monitoring and assessment according to a multilateral surveillance Effect of coordination: density instead of sanctions Fields of application Recent changes: sovreign debits Strategy Europe 2020 15/10/2015Titolo PresentazionePagina 6

7. State Aids The general rule of prohibition Exoneration of prohibition and role of Commission (particularly Art. 107(3) TFEU) Sense of exceptions The preliminary rules (the case of private financial crisis or GBER) The assessment procedure (SA necessity, proportionality, development, advantages outweighs disadvantages) Recent enlargements of benefits (cultural heritage, Strategy Europe 2020) 15/10/2015Titolo PresentazionePagina 7

8. Public Markets Economic operations run by Public Administration Public procurement rules as to protect competition However: –concessions contracts (dir. 2014/23/EU) based on the principle of free admnistration, discretionary power of public administration; very high thresold of application; procurement of social goods and services; –environmental and ethic award rules (new Single Market Act – 2010) Weak role of Commission 15/10/2015Titolo PresentazionePagina 8

9. What are their common aspects? - 1 They are based on sharing a function which is exclusively given to one of the two levels of government Functioning. The scheme is a Member State undertakes an action for national interests, but it is supported by the EU because of capacity to meet the EU objectives at the same time

10. What are their common aspects? - 2 The coordination through differentiation is an added value; does not replace the other tecniques, but completes it The legal sources are soft law Institutional implications: coordination is remitted to the Commission and the Council, CoJ has a trivial role

11. What are the differences? OMC regards national functions; SA and PM European ones, namely competition OMC outlines an upward movement; SA and PM a descending movement OMC aims to address national policy; SA and PM aim to control national policy OMC creates shared administration; SA and PM pursue common interests through procedural tools

12. Are we dealing with legal subjects? Is it a political issue? No, they pursue common interests having legal validity on the national choice (see many Articles of TFEU too) The novelty of Art. 197 TFEU The beginning is an opportunity, afterwards legal force prevails Is it an intergovernmental method? No, see above all the role of the Commission. Administrative enforcement instead of judicial enforcement