We studied Europeanization of anti-corruption policy in Spain, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, using the process tracing method and drawing on theories of policy transfer and policy change. Two Europeanization processes are underway. One is linked to the strategy of coordination and learning, characterized by its multi-level nature and incrementalism. The other is related to crisis processes, which are indirectly coercive and state-centric. What characterizes the Spanish model is that the two processes of Europeanization took place simultaneously in the same policy subsystem, with two different images and strategies, one for national budgets and European cohesion funds and the other for Recovery and Resilience Facility funds. The implications of this duality provide interesting theoretical and practical conclusions.
AcemoglouD.RobinsonJ. A. (2013). Why nations fail. Profile Books, Ltd.
2.
AdesA.Di TellaR. (1996). The causes and consequences of corruption: A review of recent empirical contributions. IDs Bulletin, 27(2), 6–11.
3.
ArndtC.OmanC. (2008). The politics of governance ratings. Maastricht Graduate School of Governance.
4.
BaumgartnerF. R.JonesB. D. (2009). Agendas and instability in American politics. University of Chicago Press.
5.
BélandD.HowlettM. (2016). How solutions chase problems: Instrument constituencies in the policy process. Governance, 29, 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12179
6.
BennettA.CheckelJ. T. (Eds.) (2015). Process tracing: From metaphor to analytic tool. Cambridge University Press.
7.
BerryF.BerryW. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In SabatierP. (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 169–199). Westview.
8.
Bril-MascarenhasT.MailletA.MayauxP.-L. (2017). Process tracing. Inducción, deducción e inferencia causal [Process tracing: Induction, deduction, and causal inference].
CairneyP.HeikkilaT. (2018). Comparison of theories of the policy process. In WeibleC. M.SabatierP. A. (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 363–389). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429494284
11.
CapanoG.HowlettM. (2009). The multidimensional world of policy dynamics. In CapanoG.HowlettM. (Eds.), European and North American policy change: Drivers and dynamics (1st ed., pp. 1–12). Routledge.
12.
CapocciaG. (2016). Critical junctures. In FioretosO.FalletiT. G.SheingateA. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical institutionalism (p. 89). Oxford University Press.
ClosaC.KochenovD. (Eds.) (2016). Reinforcing rule of law oversight in the European Union. Cambridge University Press.
15.
CollierD. (2011). Understanding process tracing. PS: Political Science & Politics, 44(4), 823–830.
16.
CreswellJ. W.CreswellD. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
17.
David-BarrettE.PhilpM. (2022). Political corruption. In HallE.SablA. (Eds.), Political ethics: A handbook (pp. 170–192). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691231310-010
18.
deSchampK.StiegelU. (2023). The impact of the European Commission’s rule of law report in monitoring the prevention and fight against corruption. Eucrim, 2023(4), 346–349.
19.
DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
20.
DolowitzD.MarshD. (1996). Who learns what from whom: A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Studies, 44, 343–351.
21.
DolowitzD.MarshD. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 5–24.
22.
Eurofound. (2023). Involvement of social partners in the implementation of national recovery and resilience plans. Publications Office of the European Union.
23.
European Commission. (2014). EU anti-corruption report (Brussels, 3.2.2014/COM (2014) 38 final). Annex 9.
24.
European Commission. (2024). Communication. Strengthening the EU through ambitious reforms and investments (Brussels, 21.2.2024/COM (2024) 82 Final).
25.
European Court of Auditors. (2019). Tackling fraud in EU cohesion spending: Managing authorities need to strengthen detection, response and coordination (Special report; EN 06/2019).
26.
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). (2022). Involvement of organized civil society in the national recovery and resilience plans—How can we improve it? (ECO/592).
27.
European Public Prosecution Office. (2024). EPPO annual report 2024. Publications Office of the European Union.
28.
EvansP.RauchJ. E. (1999). Bureaucracy and growth: A cross-national analysis of the effect structures on economic growth. American Sociological Review, 64, 748–765.
29.
FukuyamaF. (2015). Political order and political decay: From the industrial revolution to the globalization of democracy. MacMillan.
30.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge. (Original work published 1967).
31.
GrindleM. S. (2010). Good governance: The inflation of an idea (CID Working Paper No. 202). Harvard University.
32.
HaasP. M. (1992). Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.
33.
HolsteinJ. A.GubriumJ. F. (1995). The active interview. Sage Publications.
34.
HoogheL.MarksG. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Rowman & Littlefield.
35.
HubertsL. W. J. C.SixF. E. (2012). Local integrity systems. Public Integrity, 14(2), 151–172.
36.
International Monetary Fund. (1997). The role of the IMF in governance issues: Guidance note.
37.
JefferyC.PetersonJ. (2020). “Breakthrough” political science: Multi-level governance—Reconceptualising Europe’s modernised polity. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 22(4), 753–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120959588
38.
JohnstonM. (2014). Corruption, contention, and reform: The power of deep democratization. Cambridge University Press.
39.
JohnstonM.FritzenS. A. (2021). The conundrum of corruption: Reform for social justice. Routledge.
40.
JonesB. D.BaumgartnerF. R. (2012). From there to here: Punctuated equilibrium to the general punctuation thesis to a theory of government information processing. Policy Studies Journal, 40(1), 1–20.
41.
KarchA. (2007). Democratic laboratories. University of Michigan Press.
42.
KatzarovaE. (2018). From global problems to international norms: What does the social construction of a global corruption problem tell us about the emergence of an international anti-corruption norm. Crime, Law and Social Change, 70, 299–313https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9733-z
43.
KaufmannD.KraayA.MastruzziM. (2004). Governance matters III: Governance indicators for 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. The World Bank Economic Review, 18(2), 253–287.
44.
KaufmannD.KraayA.Zoido-LobatonP. (1999). Governance matters (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2196). World Bank.
45.
KerberW.EckardtM. (2007). Policy learning in Europe: The open method of co-ordination and laboratory federalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(2), 227–247.
46.
KingdonJ. W. (2002). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Longman.
47.
KlitgaardR.2021. The culture and development manifesto. Oxford University Press.
48.
LadiS. (2012). Rival hypotheses: Comparing the roles of the European Union and Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization in good governance reforms. In ExadaktylosT.RadaelliC. M. (Eds.), Research design in European Studies. Establishing causality in Europeanization (pp. 221–236). Palgrave MacMillan.
49.
LadiS.TsarouhasD. (2020). EU economic governance and Covid-19: Policy learning and windows of opportunity. Journal of European Integration, 42(8), 1041–1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2020.1852231
50.
LadiS.WolffS. (2021). The EU institutional architecture in the Covid-19 response: Coordinative Europeanization in times of permanent emergency. Journal of Common Market Studies, 59, 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13254
51.
LambsdorffJ. G. (2006). Consequences and causes of corruption—What do we know from a cross-section of countries?. In Rose-AckermanS. (Ed.), International handbook on the economics of corruption (pp. 3–52). Edward Elgar.
52.
LegnaniS. (2024). Europeanization and domestic governance of the RRF: The case of Italy and Spain. Quaderns IEE: Revista de l’Institut d’Estudis Europeus, 3(1), 34–61. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/quadernsiee.68
53.
MaesschalckJ.BertokJ. (2009). Towards a sound integrity framework: Instruments, processes, structures and conditions for implementation. OECD.
54.
MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (2010). A gradual theory of institutional change. In MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency and power (pp. 1–37). Cambridge University Press.
55.
MarchJ. G.OlsenJ. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. The Free Press.
56.
MauroP. (1995). Corruption and growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 681–712.
57.
MeyerJ.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/226550
58.
MinkmanE.van BuurenA.BekkersV. (2018). Policy transfer routes: An evidence-based conceptual model to explain policy adoption. Policy Studies, 39(2), 222–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2018.1451503
59.
MöckM.FeindtP. H. (2024). Policy learning in the face of ambiguity: Puzzling and powering in multiple streams. International Review of Public Policy, 6, 267–301. https://doi.org/10.4000/130zk
60.
MorrisS. D.KlesnerJ. L. (2010). Corruption and trust: Theoretical considerations and evidence from Mexico. Comparative Political Studies, 43(10), 1258–1285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414010369072
61.
Mungiu-PippidiA.2015. The quest for good governance: How societies develop control of corruption. Cambridge University Press.
62.
OECD. (1997). Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in International Business Transactions (OECD/LEGAL/0293). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
63.
OECD. (2020). OECD handbook on public integrity.
64.
OlsonM. (2002). Power and prosperity: Outgrowing communist and capitalist dictatorships. Basic Books.
65.
OstromE. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 1–22.
66.
PalL. (2014). Beyond policy analysis—Public issue management in Turbulent Times (5th ed.). Nelson Education.
67.
PattonM. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
68.
PiattoniS. (2009). Multi-level governance: A historical and conceptual analysis. Journal of European Integration, 31(2), 163–180.
69.
PiersonP. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011
70.
PicciL. (2024). Rethinking corruption. Reasons behind the failure of anti-corruption efforts. Cambridge University Press.
71.
PolveraniL. (2024). Coordinative Europeanization as a response to crisis: What lessons from the RRF for future EU cohesion policy?Comparative European Politics, 23, 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-024-00388-2
72.
PopeJ. (2000). TI Sourcebook 2000. Confronting corruption: The elements of a National Integrity System. Transparency International.
73.
RadaelliC. (2000). Policy transfer in the European Union: Institutional isomorphism as a source of legitimacy. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 25–43.
74.
RadaelliC. (2003). The Europeanization of public policy. In FeatherstoneK.RadaelliC. M. (Eds.), The politics of Europeanization (pp. 27–56). Oxford University Press.
RadaelliC. (2008). Europeanization, policy learning, and new modes of governance. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 10(3), 239–254.
77.
RadaelliC. (2012). Europeanization: The challenge of establishing causality. In ExadaktylosT.RadaelliC. M. (Eds.), Research design in European studies. Establishing causality in Europeanization (pp. 1–17). Palgrave MacMillan.
78.
Rodríguez-PoseA.KettererT. (2020). Institutional change and the development of lagging regions in Europe. Regional Studies, 54(7), 974–986.
79.
RoseR. (1993). Lesson drawing in public policy. Chatham House.
80.
Rose-AckermanS. (1978). Corruption: A study in political economy. Academic.
81.
RothsteinB. (2011). The quality of government. Corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. University of Chicago Press.
82.
SabatierP. A.Jenkins-SmithH. C. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press.
83.
SabatierP. A.Jenkins-SmithH. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In SabatierP.Jenkins-SmithH. (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 117–165). Westview Press.
84.
SchellerH.KörnerA. S. (2022). Federal challenges in the implementation of the EU’s recovery and resilience facility in Germany. Gestión y Análisis de políticas públicas, 29, 23–37.
85.
SchmidtV. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.
86.
ScottJ.TrubekD. M. (2002). Mind the gap: Law and new approaches to governance in the European Union. European Law Journal, 8(1), 1–18.
87.
SimonsA.VoßJ.-P. (2018). The concept of instrument constituencies: Accounting for dynamics and practices of knowing governance. Policy and Society, 37(1), 14–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1375248
88.
StakeR. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
89.
StephensonP. (2013). Twenty years of multi-level governance: “Where does it come from? What is it? Where is it going?”!Journal of European Public Policy, 20(6), 817–837.
90.
StoneD.de OliveiraO. P.PalL. A. (2020). Transnational policy transfer: The circulation of ideas, power and development models. Policy and Society, 39(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2019.1619325
91.
Szarek-MasonP. (2010). The European Union’s fight against corruption. The evolving policy towards member states and candidate countries. Cambridge University Press.
92.
Tribunal de Cuentas. (2023a). Informe de fiscalización de los planes antifraude aprobados por las entidades locales que participen en la ejecución de las medidas del Plan de Recuperación, Transformación y Resiliencia [Audit Report on the Anti-Fraud Plans Approved by Local Entities Participating in the Implementation of the Recovery, Transformation, and Resilience Plan Measures]. Madrid. https://www.tcu.es/repositorio/27e762c8-52a7-443d-86eb-75f46f7aad8c/I1528.pdf
93.
Tribunal de Cuentas. (2023b). Informe de fiscalización sobre las medidas adoptadas en el ámbito autonómico para la implementación del plan de recuperación, transformación y resiliencia [Audit Report on the Measures Adopted at the Regional Level for the Implementation of the Recovery, Transformation, and Resilience Plan]. www.tcu.es/repositorio/9c9dcff8-804d-4029-8ef2-c59ed73e6bbf/NR_I1515.pdf
94.
United Nations. (2004). United Nations convention against corruption. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
WolmanH. (2009). Policy transfer: What we know about what transfers, how it happens, and how to do it (Working Paper 038). GW Institute of Public Policy.
98.
World Bank. (1996). The World Bank annual report 1996.
99.
YinR. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications.
100.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.
101.
YomS. (2015). From methodology to practice: Inductive iteration in comparative research. Comparative Political Studies, 48(5), 616–644.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
