Wednesday, November 30, 2022

Creating liberating content

AI for Digital Advertising...

AI for Digital Advertising, messages in the entrance of customers throughout digital channels resembling search, social media, and websites.

Here’s How Industrial Drones...

Industrial drones are nothing new, adoption of commercial drone packages by trade is predicted to, How Industrial Drones Help Your Bottom Line

Smart Shopping – AiFi...

Smart Shopping: What is smart shopping? Walk into a retailer. Grab your stuff. And...

Global Energy Crises –...

Global Energy Crises: The global energy crisis of 2021-2022 is the latest in a...

Export and Investment Promotion Agencies

This is an excerpt from Varieties of European Subsidiarity: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Get your free obtain from E-International Relations.

The idea of subsidiarity has gained prominence as an organising precept for methods of multi-level governance (MLG). It captures the method by which political authority is allotted to the bottom sensible degree. In the European context, supranational establishments shall solely take measures, if a ‘proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level’ (European Union 2012). Given the dearth of a proper EU structure or a centralised EU authorities, subsidiarity seems as a great technique of mediating between the issues of assorted actors at completely different ranges of the European polity. As Davies (2006, 64) factors out, ‘what could be more liberal than allowing the Member States to do anything that is not forbidden?’. In addition, Article 5 (3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) locations the burden of proof relating to the benefits of a centralised strategy firmly on the EU (Craig 2012). Indeed, ‘the Union shall act only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States’ (European Union 2012, 18).

However, there are inherent flaws inside the authorized capability of subsidiarity to control successfully. Impartiality, for instance, in respecting the pursuits of upper and decrease tiers of the EU system may solely be assured if there have been ’no battle between the aims of the varied ranges’ (Davies 2006, 78). As the precept impacts on core duties of the state in addition to of EU establishments, it won’t suffice to realize a compromise between diverging pursuits at completely different decision-making ranges. To this finish, it will additionally require the implementation of carefully associated authorized ideas reminiscent of proportionality; or acceptance of the top-tiered, final authority of the European Court of Justice. As Scharpf (2010, 230) factors out: ‘European law has no language to describe and no scales to compare the normative weights of the national and European concerns at stake’. Therefore, the mediation results and organisational deserves of the authorized subsidiarity idea are strongly contested. From the angle of political principle, subsidiarity is best understood as a basic tenet to look at and design advanced methods of MLG. Accordingly, this chapter doesn’t interpret subsidiarity as a strict authorized doctrine, however as an organising precept which underpins key features of the MLG strategy. To make this level, this chapter explores the case of Export and Investment Promotion Agencies (EIPAs) and, thus, provides new insights right into a key part of German and European commerce coverage. More particularly, it focuses on how normative subsidiarity mechanisms form MLG in apply with out following the authorized prescriptions of Article 5 (3) TEU.

The complexity of governance preparations

EIPAs are a brand new and understudied phenomenon from the attitude of European governance. Given the range of such businesses inside in addition to throughout states, the multitude of actors concerned does problem commonplace comparisons. Traditionally, funding promotion actions have been related to embassies, consulates, and nationwide delegations to commerce gala’s. More typically, the design and implementation of overseas financial coverage was thought-about the duty of sovereign establishments. For nationwide governments, attempting to draw overseas direct funding (FDI), this meant the creation of a beneficial home regulatory surroundings and direct negotiations with overseas counterparts. In flip, export promotion coverage was pushed by producer initiatives via chambers of commerce, commerce associations and guilds, together with companies reminiscent of export recommendation, export credit score insurance coverage and advertising and marketing help. Yet, because of financial globalisation, the dividing line between state companies and non-public sector provision has been blurred. Most states now expertise the stress to extend their world competitiveness in the event that they wish to entice overseas capital. In addition, sub-state areas search new methods of accessing worldwide markets and attempt to develop their native economies aside from nationwide or supranational coverage measures. 

Within the EU, for instance, every member state has – underneath the path of overseas or financial ministries – created a devoted funding promotion company, normally within the type of a state-owned enterprise or service supplier. More particularly, respective businesses can take the type of restricted public legal responsibility corporations, crown firms, contracted consultancies, authorities departments or industry-run initiatives and associations. Frequently, this organisational set-up and the division of governance competences is the results of distinct nation experiences. 

To complicate issues additional, there was a notable EU affect on the operation of the blended financial system. Germany, with one of many oldest and most advanced methods for export and funding promotion in Europe, is a living proof. While the Federal Republic recognises subsidiarity as a key precept (Article 72 Basic Law), it differs from comparable preparations in Westminster democracies. The federal competence is topic to subsidiarity necessities as outlined in Article 72 (2) Basic Law in addition to a requirement for legislative energy within the particular subject material (Taylor 2006). In reality, the 16 German state entities (Länder) insisted on the inclusion of the precept of subsidiarity within the EU treaties (Scharpf 2010). As a results of a powerful home subsidiarity custom, the Federal Republic operates EIPAs via a two-tiered system: one on the federal degree, and one on the regional ‘Länder’ degree.

Accordingly, this chapter identifies a number of ranges of governance within the German and European EIPA system. Due to overlapping spheres of duty, the precept of subsidiarity could be noticed on the core of respective EU efforts, even whether it is unable to account for all EIPA actions. Instead, there’s a system of shared authority throughout an institutionalised set of actors which works with various levels of unity and coverage coherence in addition to ‘commitment to EU norms, and power resources’ (Smith 2004, 743). In different phrases, the EIPA system is characterised by a unfastened MLG strategy – or MLG kind II – within the terminology superior by Marks and Hooghe (2004). This emphasises voluntary cooperation amongst actors at a number of ranges, sharing their authority with out clear vertical hierarchies. It suggests a bottom-up strategy to authority that comes with a pure delegation of authority to numerous working ranges. However, as this chapter concludes, the current creation of the European External Action Service (EEAS) resembles a conventional federalist top-down strategy affecting EIPAs in step with Marks and Hooghe’s MLG kind I strategy. Regardless of MLG kind, although, each system traits stay appropriate with a basic, underlying conception of subsidiarity. This recognises overlapping spheres of authority at a number of ranges, enabling key actors to have interaction in vertically fluid exchanges for the sake of purposeful coverage making. 

EIPAS at regional and federal state degree

Before assessing the affect of the supranational MLG part, it is very important perceive the governance relationship between EIPAs at regional and nationwide degree. Prior to the Lisbon Treaty, most European EIPAs have been present in two completely different coverage sectors (authorities/non-government) and at two ranges of governance (native/regional – nationwide/federal). Therefore, respective businesses may fall into one of many 4 classes outlined in Figure 1 for the case of Germany. The coordination system signifies an extra sectoral differentiation in addition to the potential of overlapping governance preparations.

Figure 1

Along the precise quadrants of the vertical axis, there may be the financial improvement company of the Federal Republic (Germany Trade and Invest, GTAI), in addition to the German system of Chambers of Commerce Abroad (Auslandshandelskammern, AHKs). Both organisational types promote funding flows into the nation, whereas concurrently representing German export pursuits overseas. At the native or regional degree, EIPAs comply with extra carefully the precept of subsidiarity via an unique deal with sub-state promotion efforts. This consists of EIPAs of the German Länder reminiscent of Bayern International, Baden-Württemberg International, and Berlin Partner, or region-specific Chambers of Commerce (Industrie- und Handelskammern, IHKs). Frequently, these too function with a twin process division of inward FDI promotion and exterior commerce help. In the case of Bavaria, as an illustration, the related state ministry operates two separate corporations, one coping with FDI (Invest in Bavaria), and one coping with export promotion and overseas market improvement (Bayern International). In the case of neighbouring Baden Württemberg, in contrast, the duty division is achieved via two completely different departments inside a single official company (Baden-Württemberg International, BW-I).

Along the horizontal axis, the normal relationship between native and nationwide EIPAs doesn’t comply with a centralised or hierarchical sample. The actors at nationwide or federal degree don’t have any authorized authority over their counterparts at native or regional degree. Given the federal political system, the native and regional EIPAs work together with their respective state governments (Landesregierungen), and don’t keep institutional ties with the federal authorities (Bundesregierung) or centralised non-public enterprise initiatives. In reality, the native and regional EIPAs are owned and operated by state governments, whereas native Chambers of Commerce (IHKs) are non-public non-profit associations, joined up in a federal community with the Association of German Industry and Trade Chambers (Deutscher Industrie und Handelskammertag, DIHK) as their umbrella organisation. Again, the latter has no management over the actions of particular person IHKs however represents their views for lobbying functions at nationwide degree. 

Some regional EIPAs comply with a hybrid industrial mannequin with a number of shareholders coming from the general public and semi-public area. BW-I, for instance, is financed by the Land, its state financial institution, and the {industry} affiliation of Baden-Württemberg, in addition to an umbrella organisation of native chambers of commerce and commerce. It can also be value noting that neither of the 2 recognized ranges has a centralised planning or coordinating committee to streamline actions inside completely different segments of the system. Thus, subsidiarity shouldn’t be an official part of German overseas financial coverage and, as an alternative, finds its recognition within the casual practices of organisational actors adhering to the associated precept of federal comity.

The German system in apply

At federal degree, GTAI and AHKs work carefully with native EIPA actors and contain them in their very own initiatives. Local EIPAs are feeder organisations offering federal businesses with export-ready contracts, new shoppers and rising alternatives via direct entry to beneficial info from the native enterprise group. Moreover, for the externally working AHKs, native businesses in Germany are potential clients and a supply of earnings, offering funding for commerce delegations, advertising and marketing occasions or contracts of illustration. Usually, this collaboration is predicated on private relationships which can be fostered and maintained informally on behalf of federal businesses. Therefore, EIPAs within the German system are free to cooperate with one another throughout completely different ranges as that is perceived to be in their very own financial curiosity. 

In apply, native promotion businesses have turn into tenants within the overseas places of work of their federal counterparts, outsourcing the planning of commerce delegations, making budgetary contributions or co-financing members of workers to symbolize their particular pursuits internationally. For instance, already because the Nineties the state of Bavaria has operated its personal community of 20 world enterprise representations with main help coming from the workers of German Chambers of Commerce Abroad (AHKs) (Bayerisches Staatsministerium 2017). In this set-up, subsidiarity preparations permit native areas to run worldwide promotion networks independently of federal interference. The MLG strategy is a useful gizmo in analysing the associated cooperation and coordination efforts between completely different teams of actors.

The federal authorities endorses this method regardless of uncommon circumstances the place centrally funded EIPAs have concentrated excessively on the collaborative relationship with a single native supplier. Under such circumstances, it is going to concern a reminder to the federal company in regards to the obligation to serve the financial improvement of the entire nation moderately than handing aggressive benefits to particular person areas. Due to the dearth of an overarching organisational construction, the system depends on shared financial issues as a part of Germany’s nationwide curiosity. Thus, the country-specific governance construction follows neo-functionalist understandings as embedded within the MLG kind II idea. Here, authority shouldn’t be exercised round pre-existing vertical hierarchies however evolves with particular drawback constellations (Hooghe and Marks 2003). This has the benefit to permit for aggressive processes amongst completely different units of actors in overlapping areas of jurisdiction. True to the spirit of subsidiarity, particular person ranges of governance should show their means to outperform others of their capability to understand new enterprise alternatives. Potentially, this competitors may also be used as a deliberate coverage instrument to extend the standard or effectivity of service supply (Benz 2007). Overall, the relative autonomy of EIPAs within the German system has led to a excessive diploma of specialisation and useful resource maximisation in exterior promotion efforts. Similarly, by way of inward funding acquisition, the GTAI as the important thing federal actor with worldwide presence is well-positioned to establish native and regional companion organisations for overseas clients. While the EIPAs at greater and decrease ranges can function independently on this market section, they’re more likely to cooperate with one another for the sake of price effectiveness.

Consequently, the effectiveness of the co-ordination course of throughout a number of ranges relies upon largely on communication flows in interpersonal networks and the readiness of key actors to have interaction in voluntary exchanges. If private relationships break down, or particular person representatives haven’t sufficiently internalised subsidiarity norms, important monetary burdens can comply with by way of duplicate institutional constructions or equivalent service provision. Together with inefficient useful resource allocation, this will add to a level of confusion amongst home exporters and exterior buyers within the day-to-day working of the system. What is extra, the complexity of the coordination system makes EIPAs significantly delicate to modifications within the exterior surroundings. The absence of clear delineations of competences between ranges of governance complicates public-private interactions and requires political decision-making to reply adequately to new funding streams and enterprise alternatives.

Take, on this context, the speedy organisational change that occurred within the regional promotion system of the state of Lower Saxony (Niedersachsen). In 2009, the Land introduced its devoted funding promotion company into public-private possession, now constituted as a restricted legal responsibility firm (NGlobal GmbH) and outfitted with a global community for export promotion. The shares of the reformed entity have been held by the state of Lower Saxony, a regional commerce truthful organiser (Deutsche Messe), an area state financial institution (NordLB), native chambers of commerce, in addition to a semi-public academy for administration coaching (Deutsche Management Akademie). Already two years later, the official state part coping with funding acquisition was relocated to a different semi-private firm, supposedly to serve the precise goal of enterprise innovation (Innovationszentrum Niedersachsen GmbH) (Niedersächsisches Ministerium 2013a). Finally, in 2013, NGlobal was dismantled to present means for a brand new authorities division within the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Labour and Transport, re-uniting funding acquisition, export promotion in addition to the associated delegation and networking actions in a single public entity. In the phrases of the accountable Minister, Olaf Lies (Niedersächsisches Ministerium 2013b; creator’s translation): 

After analysing the prevailing export promotion system, the criticism of the enterprise group, and the requests of the ministerial paperwork, I’ve determined to re-integrate overseas commerce improvement into the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Labour and Transport. 

The noticed stress between public and non-public provision of promotion actions has a historic legacy. Not solely was the creation of Chambers of Commerce Abroad perceived as an pointless duplication of companies, it additionally challenged the sovereign monopoly of the state to conduct worldwide commerce coverage. Parliamentary debates going again so far as Reichstag classes within the interval from 1899 to 1901 point out the essential perspective held by the Foreign Office (Auswärtiges Amt) in response to the opening of the primary German Chamber of Commerce in Brussels (Reichstagsprotokolle 1903). More than a century later, the non-governmental sector represented by the home IHK system and the externally situated AHKs is taken into account an vital aspect of official governmental coverage and formally recognised because the third pillar of exterior commerce promotion. Currently, the respective community spans 139 worldwide places of work (with greater than 1500 members of workers) and with as much as 20 per cent of their budgets lined by direct federal grants. By distinction, the non-public non-associational sector populated with consultancies reminiscent of Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC) or Ernst and Young (EY) performs a a lot smaller function. In current years, their actions have targeting the profitable of presidency contracts to conduct promoting campaigns, to organise commerce delegations and to draw inward FDI. 

The affect of the EEAS

From the German perspective, the sensible EU makes an attempt to implement the precept of subsidiarity are something however clear reduce, particularly if duties are imagined to be allotted to the bottom potential degree. Comparable to different coverage areas addressed on this e book, the empowerment of actors on the EU member state degree has not been a major goal. Recurrent EU efforts within the subject of export and funding promotion have clashed with organically grown nationwide promotion methods, whereas making an attempt to supersede their mandate by the formation of real European actor capability. Hence, it will be deceptive to attach subsidiarity with a bottom-up strategy. Instead, the insertion of a further top- layer serves to by-pass nationwide governments whereas straight participating with native or regional businesses. With the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, the ambition of a pan-European strategy has turn into way more apparent. 

In explicit, the creation of the EEAS has impacted exterior commerce promotion and the EIPAs of the member states. Following Council Decision 2010/427/EU, the diplomatic service has seen a dramatic enlargement to 139 internationally working places of work. With a funds exceeding 600 million euros, a workforce of 4237 individuals, and greater than half of these energetic in EU delegations overseas, actor capability in European overseas coverage can’t be denied (EEAS 2017). In analogy to the turf battles between the EEAS and nationwide overseas companies, comparable skirmishes are anticipated with the actors of home promotion methods (Adler-Nissen 2014). The EU already holds unique competences in exterior commerce relations and negotiates on behalf of the member states via the Directorate General for Trade of the Commission (DG Trade). In addition, the EEAS (2019) interprets the portfolio of its delegations moderately broadly in as far as they’re

liable for all coverage areas of the connection between the EU and the host nation – be they political, financial, commerce or on human rights and in constructing relationships with companions in civil society.

Unfortunately, the 2013 reform assessment of the EEAS neither talked about subsidiarity issues nor urged various types of sharing authority in a strengthened system of European governance. This, by the way in which, is in stark distinction to the imaginative and prescient initially outlined for lower-level actors within the 2009 White Paper on Multilevel Governance (Committee of the Regions 2009). In reality, the EEAS (2013, 18) appears to harbour much more far-reaching ambitions by addressing 

residual competence points to make sure that EEAS and EU delegations are the only channel for EU exterior relations points, together with in areas of blended competence and in multilateral fora. 

Therefore, de facto, the EU has already established a 3rd degree of authority, which in the end acts inside the similar sphere as conventional buying and selling states. This poses a long-term problem to the coverage devices within the fingers of nationwide export promotion businesses in addition to the lobbying actions of embassies and consulates.

Towards a European EIPA system?

Of course, a further sphere of EU duty doesn’t robotically undermine all subsidiarity issues as expressed in Article 5 (3) TEU. It is an empirical query how the sensible interplay with the member states impinges on home motion capability in commerce issues. In this respect, a serious level of contestation has been the function of EEAS delegations in initiating and co-funding European Chambers of Commerce (ECC) in third international locations. In distinction to German AHKs, these reveal no standardised construction of their formal set-up or exhibit regulatory constraints of their exterior promotion actions. Accordingly, they’re recognised as an rising problem to the dominant enterprise mannequin of nationwide EIPAs. If their numbers improve – whereas providing comparable companies inside a bigger community – non-public corporations at native, regional and nationwide ranges might be simply persuaded to modify suppliers.

On the one hand, representatives of the German EIPA system admire the optimistic advocacy function of EEAS delegations in multilateral commerce relations. From this angle, it is smart for bigger member states to actively cooperate and form new pan-European initiatives. On the opposite hand, this entails the danger that over time the EEAS and ECC companies can be in direct competitors with nationwide provisions as soon as these have gained entry to EU-wide funding alternatives. Indeed, the current EU efforts level within the path of a federalist kind I strategy to MLG. Although the actors at decrease ranges aren’t centrally managed inside a strictly hierarchical relationship, the top-layer tries to delegate authority downwards with out permitting for a extra fluid, interactive alternate. The first step in the direction of a European EIPA system challenges the raison d’être of established nationwide organisations, even whether it is welcomed by a number of the smaller member states hoping for a greater useful resource stream to their export and funding initiatives. 

Paradoxically, the normal EU coverage technique on this sector, originating within the pre-Lisbon interval, was nearer to MLG kind II. Due to an emphasis on widespread problem-solving and useful resource maximisation moderately than hierarchical ordering, it higher included the subsidiarity concerns of Article 5 (3) TEU. In reality, the EU continues to help nationwide export promotion efforts via the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), which leaves precise implementation within the fingers of downstream actors.

Take, for instance, the continued Bavarian ‘Go International’ undertaking for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The collaborating companies are entitled for reimbursements of as much as half of their export promotion bills inside a person restrict of 20,000 euros over a three-year interval. The general organisation rests with regional chambers of commerce and commerce, who administer the joint funding from the ERDF and the Bavarian Ministry for Economic Affairs, Media, Energy and Technology. Importantly, the exact co-funding preparations rely upon the geographic location and industrial sector of the collaborating SMEs. For this goal, as Figure 2 exhibits, the ERDF identifies precedence areas and funding alternatives focused at particular authorities districts and metropolis areas in Bavaria (BIHK Service 2017). Despite their complexity, such funding streams are extra appropriate for the basic MLG kind II surroundings of the German case. The established EIPAs can nonetheless faucet into EU assets, but with out sacrificing their operational independence.

Figure 2: ERDF precedence areas in Bavaria, 2014–2020. Source: BIHK Service (2017, 4).

Similarly, the function of the European Commission in offering grants or co-funding preparations for EU exterior promotion initiatives aligns extra carefully with subsidiarity calls for. Consider, on this context, the joint EU-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Invest undertaking, working for 3 years from 2012 to 2015. It did be part of up conventional AHK actors within the type of the German Emirati Joint Council for Industry and Commerce and the German-Saudi Liaison Office for Economic Affairs with comparatively new preparations such because the GCC Federation of Chambers and Eurochambres, an ECC umbrella organisation. The partnership, moreover, meant to have interaction all European EIPAs within the Gulf area via the conduct of conferences, workshops and examine programmes. 

Essentially, the Commission doesn’t implement coverage measures on the bottom however requires proposals from the EIPAs of the member states. The undertaking supply got here with an EU co-funding promise of 60 per cent, if different companions contributed via their workforce to the remaining prices. Different to the Bavarian ERDF undertaking, the Brussels establishment insisted right here on an inclusive strategy. For EU-GCC Invest, the specific intention was to contain as many member state EIPAs as potential in programme actions, additionally to disseminate broadly the accessible info on European funding promotion methods. Moreover, the participation of nationwide suppliers from Europe was solely voluntary; the UK’s former Trade and Invest division (UKTI), for instance, most well-liked to chart its personal path within the Gulf area. In reality, even the collaborating German AHK places of work remained autonomous and, in the end, in command of the implementation course of via their very own members of workers. In quick, the EU programme didn’t try to determine competing governance constructions and, as an alternative, had the target to foster these already in place. In sum, the examples introduced on this part present that MLG kind I and II coexist within the advanced house of European export and funding promotion. However, if subsidiarity is taken critically, it champions a conventional bottom-up use of coverage instruments in help of native, regional and nationwide businesses.


The MLG strategy is especially helpful to grasp the sharing of authority throughout completely different ranges of the European polity. In the case of German export and funding promotion coverage, bottom-up and top-down processes coexist. For the actors within the noticed EIPA methods, casual conceptions of subsidiarity matter when setting out the final path of their organisational relationships. Rather than suggesting mere decentralisation to the bottom working degree, the coverage space analysed right here suggests sharing preparations by autonomous actors working at completely different organisational ranges and with numerous sectoral divisions. Instead of centrally enforced governance, EIPA efforts are dominated by voluntary, market-driven cooperation. Under such circumstances, the idea of subsidiarity works as a compass steering the fluid switch of authority in promotion methods with robust vertical dynamics.

Traditionally, an identical relationship existed within the EU dimension when utilizing Commission and ERDF funding. At first sight, subsequently, the enlargement of EEAS delegations and creation of ECCs constitutes a big problem to the EIPA constructions of the member states, and particularly to these of the Federal Republic. Yet, given the truth that the brand new ‘top’ EU tier neither bans nor supersedes the promotion actions of nationwide EIPAs, the relevance of the subsidiarity precept stays intact within the European dimension of overseas financial coverage. Regardless of whether or not the variation to altering commerce relations happens at house or overseas, the excellence between two MLG sorts, superior on this chapter, is significant to grasp the normative implications of subsidiarity. 


Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). ‘Symbolic Power in European Diplomacy: The Struggle between National Foreign Services and the EU’s External Action Service’. Review of International Studies 40(4): 657–81.

Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft und Medien, Energie und Technologie (2017). Bayerische Repräsentanzen im Ausland – Bavarian Representative Offices Worldwide. Available at:

Benz, A. (2007). ‘Inter-Regional Competition in Co-operative Federalism: New Modes of Multi-level Governance in Germany’. Regional and Federal Studies 17(4): 421–36.

BIHK Service (2017). Förderbestimmungen über das Förderprojekt ‘Export Bavaria 3.0 – Go International’. Available at:

Committee of the Regions of the EU (2009). The Committee of the Regions’ White Paper on Multilevel Governance, CdR 89/2009 fin. Available at:

Craig, P. (2012). ‘Subsidiarity : A Political and Legal Analysis’. Journal of Common Market Studies 50(1): 72–87.

Davies, G. (2006). ‘Subsidiarity: The Wrong Idea, In The Wrong Place, At The Wrong Time’. Common Market Law Review 43: 63–84.

European External Action Service (2013). EEAS Review. Available at:

European External Action Service (2017). Annual Activity Report 2016. Available at:

European External Action Service (2019). About the European External Action Service (EEAS). Available at:

European Union (2012). ‘Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union’. Official Journal of the European Union C 326/13, 26 October. 13–46. Available at:

Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2003). ‘Unraveling the Central State , but How ? Types of Multi-Level Governance’. American Political Science Review 97(2): 233–43.

Marks, G. and Hooghe, L. (2004). ‘Contrasting Visions of Multi-level Governance’. In Bache, I. and M. Flinders (eds) Multi-level Governance, 15–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr (2013a). Antwort vom Minister für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr Olaf Lies auf die mündliche Anfrage der Abgeordneten Jörg Bode, Gabriela König und Christian Dürr (FDP). Sitzung des Niedersächsischen Landtages am 01.11.2013 – Top 26. Available at:

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr (2013b).  Außenwirtschaftsförderung wird neu aufgestellt und Chefsache. Available at:

Reichstagsprotokolle (1903). Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des Reichstags. Berlin: Norddeutsche Buchdruckerei.

Scharpf, F.W. (2010). ‘The Double Asymmetry of European Integration Or : Why the EU Cannot Be a Social Market Economy’. Socio-Economic Review  8: 211–50.

Smith, M.E. (2004). ‘Toward a Theory of EU Foreign Policy Making: Multi-level Governance, Domestic Politics, and National Adaptation to Europe’s Common Foreign and Security Policy’. Journal of European Public Policy 11(4): 740–58.

Taylor, G. (2006). ‘Germany: The Subsidiarity Principle’. Institutional Journal of Constitutional Law 4(1): 115–30.

Further Reading on E-International Relations

Source: httpspercent3Apercent2Fpercent2Fwww.e-ir.infopercent2F2021percent2F03percent2F19percent2Fsubsidiarity-and-european-governance-export-and-investment-promotion-agenciespercent2F

Get notified whenever we post something new!


Continue reading

How White House Economists Are Thinking About COVID-19 Relief

Bernstein stated that the White House Economists are also focused on economic inequalities, dismissed the idea of a modest COVID-19 relief package

US Inflation Gauge Jumps As Recovery Accelerates

US inflation measure carefully, Federal Reserve posted its greatest year-on-year soar, rising greater than anticipated and fuelling considerations worth

Biden’s cabinet meeting proves the reality TV presidency wasn’t renewed | Biden administration

Poor outdated Joe Biden. He might need received the electoral faculty and the standard vote however he’ll by no means really feel the love of his underlings like Donald Trump did.The former president’s first full cabinet meeting in...