What characterizes European Union soft law and what are its implications for the EU multilevel system? What is the proportion of hard and soft law in EU policy? Which types of soft law act are adopted in different policy sectors? This article introduces the conceptual and analytical framework that encompasses the EfSoLaw dataset and explains its methodology, advantages, and limitations. This dataset unites information on thousands of EU hard and soft law acts from seven different policy sectors, drawn from over fifteen years (2004–2019) and from various sources (EUR-Lex, DGs, agencies). We present implementation options of the dataset making it exploitable for other scholars and we propose hypotheses to explain the variation in the adoption of soft law in different policy sectors.
AbbottKWSnidalD (2013) Law, legalization, and politics: an agenda for the next generation of IL/IR scholars. In: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.33–57.
2.
BarattaR (2014) Complexity of EU law in the domestic implementing process. The Theory and Practice of Legislation2(3): 293–308.
3.
BeachDPedersenRB (2016) Causal Case Study Methods: Foundations and Guidelines for Comparing, Matching, and Tracing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
4.
BekkerS (2014) EU coordination of welfare states after the crisis: further interconnecting soft and hard law. International Review of Public Administration19(3): 296–307.
5.
BlutmanL (2010) In the trap of a legal metaphor: international soft law. International and Comparative Law Quarterly59: 605–624.
6.
BörzelTA (2005) Mind the gap! European integration between level and scope. Journal of European Public Policy12: 217–236.
7.
Börzel TA and Knoll M (2012) Quantifying non-compliance in the EU: A database on EU infringement. Berlin Working Paper on European Integration 15: 1-24. http://www.infringement-db.jmce.org/Index.html
8.
BusuiocM (2013) European Agencies: Law and Practices of Accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
ChamonM (2016) EU Agencies: Legal and Political Limits to the Transformation of the EU Administration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
CiniM (2001) The soft law approach: commission rule-making in the EU’s state aid regime. Journal of European Public Policy8(2): 192–207.
11.
CraigPDe BúrcaG (2011) The Evolution of EU Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12.
DehousseR (2016) Has the European Union moved towards soft governance?Comparative European Politics14(1): 20–35.
13.
EliantonioMKorkea-ahoEStefanO(eds) (2021) EU Soft Law in Member States: Theoretical Findings and Empirical Evidence. Bloomsbury: Hart Publishing.
14.
EliantonioMŞtefanOA (2021) The elusive legitimacy of EU soft law: an analysis of consultation and participation in the process of adopting COVID-19 soft law in the EU. European Journal of Risk Regulation12(1): 159–175.
15.
FjelstulJC (2019) The evolution of European Union law: a new data set on the acquis communautaire. European Union Politics20(4): 670–691.
16.
GuinardD (2013) A propos du soft law en droit de l’Union Européenne : analyses théorique et pratique. Revue de L’Union Européenne12(573): 609–617.
17.
GuzmanATMeyerTL (2010) International soft law. Journal of Legal Analysis2(1): 171–225.
18.
HartlappMHofmannA (2021) The use of EU soft law by national courts and bureaucrats: how relation to hard law and policy maturity matter. West European Politics44(1): 134–154.
19.
HägeFM (2011) The European Union policy-making dataset. European Union Politics12(3): 455–477.
20.
HillgenbergH (1999) A fresh look at soft law. European Journal of International Law10(3): 499–515.
21.
HofmannA (2021) Types of EU soft law and their national impact. In: EliantonioMKorkea-ahoEStefanO (eds) EU Soft Law in the Member States: Theoretical Findings and Empirical Evidence. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp.39–56.
22.
HurkaSHaagMKaplanerC (2021) Policy complexity in the European Union, 1993-today: introducing the EUPLEX dataset. Journal of European Public Policy: 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1938174.
23.
KönigTLuetgertBDannwolfT (2006) Quantifying European legislative research: using CELEX and PreLex in EU legislative studies. European Union Politics7(4): 553–574.
24.
LeuffenDRittbergerBSchimmelfennigF (2012) Differentiated Integration: Explaining Variation in the European Union. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.
25.
Monar J (2012) Justice and Home Affairs. Journal of Common Market Studies 50: 116–131.
26.
OvádekM (2021) Facilitating access to data on European Union laws. Political Research Exchange3(1): e1870150.
27.
PetersA (2011) Soft law as a new mode of governance. The Dynamics of Change in EU Governance21: 423–424.
28.
PollackMA (1994) Creeping competence: the expanding agenda of the European Community. Journal of Public Policy14, 95–145.
29.
Ripoll ServentATraunerF (2014) Do supranational EU institutions make a difference? EU asylum law before and after ‘communitarization’. Journal of European Public Policy21(8): 1142–1162.
30.
Rocca P and Eliantonio M (2019) European Union Soft Law by Agencies: an Analysis of the Legitimacy of their Procedural Framework. SoLar Working Paper 1–40.
31.
SauruggerSTerpanF (2021) Normative transformations in the European Union: on hardening and softening law. West European Politics44(1): 1–20.
32.
Schelkle W (2007) EU fiscal governance: Hard law in the shadow of soft law? Columbia Journal of European Law 13(3): 705–731.
33.
SchimmelfennigFWinzenT (2014) Instrumental and constitutional differentiation in the European Union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies52(2): 354–370.
34.
SendenLA (2004) Soft Law in European Community Law. Oxford: Hart.
35.
SnyderF (1994) Soft law and institutional practice in the European Community. In: MartinS (ed.) The Construction of Europe: Essays in Honour of Emile Noël. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp.197–225.
36.
StefanOAAvbeljMEliantonioM, et al. (2019) EU Soft law in the EU legal order: A literature review. SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3346629.
37.
SteunenbergBToshkovD (2009) Comparing transposition in the 27 member states of the EU: the impact of discretion and legal fit. Journal of European Public Policy16(7): 951–970.
38.
TerpanF (2015) Soft law in the European Union-the changing nature of EU law. European Law Journal21(1): 68–96.
39.
Terpan F and Saurugger S (2021) Soft and hard law in times of crisis: Budget monitoring, migration and cybersecurity. West European Politics 44(1): 21–48.
40.
ToshkovD (2010) Taking stock: a review of quantitative studies of transposition and implementation of EU law. Working paper. Institute of European Integration Research, Maastricht.
41.
TraunerFRipoll ServentA (2016) The communitarization of the area of freedom, security and justice: why institutional change does not translate into policy change. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies54(6): 1417–1432.
42.
TrubekDMCottrellPNanceM (2006) ‘Soft law,’ ‘hard law,’ and European integration: toward a theory of hybridity. In: ScottJde BúrcaG (eds) New Governance and Constitutionalism in Europe and the US. Bloomsbury: Hart Publishing, pp.65–107.
43.
TrubekDMTrubekLG (2005) Hard and soft law in the construction of social Europe: the role of the open method of co-ordination. European Law Journal11(3): 343–364.
44.
Von BogdandyAArndtFBastJ (2004) Legal instruments in European Union law and their reform: a systematic approach on an empirical basis. Yearbook of European Law23(1): 91–136.
45.
ZhelyazkovaABörzelTASchimmelfennigF, et al. (2015) Beyond uniform integration? Researching the effects of enlargement on the EU’s legal system. MAXCAP Working Paper Series8: 1–44.
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.
