EU社会政策発展過程における裁量型調整方式導入の意義

抄録

　The development of EU social policy is characterized by the introduction of new policy tools. Beginning with the application of Community-method, EU social policy has adopted Social Dialogue at the Treaty of Maastricht, and the Open Method of Coordination （OMC） with the launch of Lisbon Strategy. Why has EU social policy necessitated these new tools? Focusing on the introduction of the OMC into EU policy toolbox and on the operation of the OMC on Social Inclusion, this article attempts to shed a light on the significance of the OMC in the development of EU social policy.

　For this purpose, firstly, this article analyzes the role of institutions in the European integration process. From the viewpoint of historical institutionalism （HI）, there is often divergence between the intents behind the design of institutions and the actual operation of them. Indeed, as the case of Working Time Directive demonstrates, we can find divergence caused by EU organs’ interpretation―‘conversion’ in the term of HI―in the development of EU social policy. Thus, the development of EU social policy contains a tension between EU organs’ potential of creating divergence and Member States’ desire of controlling EU policy-making.

　Considering this tension, secondly, this article examines the intents behind the design of the European Employment Strategy （EES）, which is the original of the OMC. Exploring Member States’ Treaty proposals reveals that the opponents to the EES tried to limit the potential of conversion by detailing conditions on the EU to exercise its power. Therefore, this section argues that the institutional design of the OMC reflects Member States’ cautiousness about unintended expansion of EU competence.

　Lastly, this article reviews the OMC on Social Inclusion. In the study of the OMC, researchers have tried to measure the effects of the OMC. Instead of the measurement of effects, this section examines the expected causal mechanisms in the OMC―peer-pressure and bench-marking mechanisms―in order to clarify the actual function of the OMC. This examination shows that Member States’ control has prevailed over the European Commission’s influence in peer-review process and Member States’ discretion has expanded to the degree that they can manipulate benchmarks.

　From these analyses, this article concludes that the OMC was introduced into EU social policy as a prevention against unintended consequence, and that the Member States have consequently succeeded in enhancing the control over EU social policy-making process.