Skip to main content

Responding to Crises—Worries About Expertization

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

Abstract

The chapter discusses challenges arising from the growing role of experts and expert knowledge in policymaking. It identifies a series of distinguishable epistemic and democratic worries about “expertization.” Examples are drawn from EU governance, in particular economy policy and debates over EU’s democratic deficits. It is argued that worries about larger expert influence on EU policymaking should be taken seriously, and that several of the listed problems have become more urgent in a time when the Union faces multiple crises. Still, good governance requires significant amounts of expert input. The solution thus is not to debunk expertise, but to organize and institutionalize expert arrangements in better ways. The chapter suggests a reform approach and takes up implications for different scenarios of EU integration.

This chapter builds on three other co-authored articles by Holst and Molander (2018, 2019, 2020). Some sub-sections overlap across these pieces. The list and discussions of democratic worries over expertise are, however, unique to this chapter. The chapter is moreover framed specifically to address the role of experts in EU’s recent crises, and includes a novel section that proposes reforms to address both democratic and epistemic worries, and with examples drawn from the EU context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See the introduction chapter to this handbook.

  2. 2.

    See Alvin I. Goldman’s (2011: 14) influential definition.

  3. 3.

    The reports can be found in the Register of Commission Expert Groups, see http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert.

  4. 4.

    https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/research/working-papers/html/index.en.html.

  5. 5.

    On disagreement among economists, see Machlup (1965) and Fuchs et al. (1997).

  6. 6.

    https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/orga/escb/html/index.en.html.

  7. 7.

    https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/economic-performance-and-forecasts/economic-forecasts_en.

  8. 8.

    https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/projections/html/index.en.html.

  9. 9.

    See for example https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/european-economic-forecasts-why-do-they-get-it-wrong/.

  10. 10.

    See for example https://eutoday.net/news/business-economy/2017/brexit-forecast-economists-admit-they-got-it-wrong.

References

  • Angner, E. (2006). Economists as Experts: Overconfidence in Theory and Practice. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1968). Truth and Politics. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Between Past and Future: Eights Exercises in Political Thought. New York: The Viking Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy, R. (2019). A Republican Europe of States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, O., Romer, D., Spence, M., & Stiglitz, J. (2012). In the Wake of the Crisis: Leading Economists Reassess Economic Policy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blankenburg, S., King, L., Konselmann, S., & Wilkinson, F. (2013). Prospects for the Eurozone. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 37(3), 463–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome, A. (2013). The Politics of IMF-EU Co-operation: Institutional Change from the Maastricht Treaty to the Launch of the Euro. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(4), 589–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A. (2004). Political Liberalism and Social Epistemology. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 32(2), 95–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiano, T. (2012). Rational Deliberation Among Experts and Citizens. In J. Parkinson & J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale (pp. 27–51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1985). Controlling Nuclear Weapons: Democracy versus Guardianship. Syracuse NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earle, J., Moran, C., & Ward-Perkins, Z. (2017). The Econocracy: The Perils of Leaving Economics to the Experts. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1998). Introduction. In Deliberative Democracy (pp. 1–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett, P., Flinders, M., Hay, C., & Wood, M. (2017). Anti-politics, Depoliticization, and Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fossum, J. E. (2015). Democracya and Differentiation in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(6), 799–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, V. R., Krueger, A. B., & Poterba, J. B. (1997). Why Do Economist Disagree About Policy? The Roles of Beliefs About Parameters and Values (NBER Working Paper 6151). Available at: www.nber.org/papers/w6151.pdf.

  • Gesang, B. (2010). Are Moral Philosophers Moral Experts? Bioethics, 24(4), 153–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A. (2011). Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust? In A. Goldman & D. Whitcomb (Eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings (pp. 109–133). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas. J. (1968/1974). The Scientization of Politics and Public Opinion. In Toward a Rational Society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic Dependence. Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardwig, J. (1991). The Role of Trust in Knowledge. Journal of Philosophy, 88(12), 693–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heipertz, M., & Verdun, A. (2004). The Dog That Would Never Bite? What Can We Learn from the Origins of the Stability and Growth Pact. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(5), 765–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holst, C., & Moodie, J. R. (2015). Cynical or Deliberative? An Analysis if the European Commission’s Public Communication on Its Use of Expertise in Policy-Making. Politics and Governance, 3(1), 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holst, C., & Molander, A. (2017). Public Deliberation and the Fact of Expertise: Making Experts Accountable. Social Epistemology, 31(3), 235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holst, C., & Molander, A. (2018). Asymmetry, Biases and Biases: Epistemic Worries About Expertise. Social Epistemology, 32(6), 358–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holst, C., & Molander, A. (2019). Epistemic Democracy and the Role of Experts. Contemporary Political Theory. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-00299-4.

  • Holst, C., & Molander, A. (2020). Epistemic Worries About Economic Expertise. In J. Bátora and J. E. Fossum (Eds.), Crises, EU Trajectories and the Question of Resilience. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabko, N. (1999). In the Name of the Market: How the European Commission Paved the Way for Monetary Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(3), 475–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jabko, N. (2010). The Hidden Face of the Euro. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(3), 318–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2012). Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landemore, H. (2012). Democratic Reason: Politics. Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. (1965). Why Economist Disagree? Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 109(1), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and Utopia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKay, D. (2005). Economic Logic or Political Logic? Economic Theory, Federal Theory and EMU. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(3), 528–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercier, H. (2011). When Experts Argue: Explaining the Best and the Worst of Reasoning. Argumentation, 25(3), 313–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mügge, D. (2011). From Pragmatism to Dogmatism: European Union Governance, Policy Paradigms and Financial Meltdown. New Political Economy, 16(2), 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mügge, D. (2013). The Political Economy of Europeanized Financial Regulation. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(3), 458–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D. (2008). Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory? Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 521–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myrdal, G. ([1930] 1953). The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikolaïdis, K. (2013). European Demoicracy and Its Crisis. Journal of Common Market Studies, 51(2), 351–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palley, T. I. (2012). From Financial Crisis to Stagnation: The Destruction of Shared Prosperity and the Role of Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peter Weingart. (2005). Die Wissenschaft der Öffentlichkeit. Essays zum Verhältnis von Wissenschaft, Medien und Öffentlichkeit. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, E., & Véron, N. (2010). The EU and Financial Regulation: Power Without Purpose? Journal of European Public Policy, 17(3), 400–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin, J. (2008). Economists and Uncertainty. In G. Bammer & M. Smithson (Eds.), Uncertainty and Risk: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, J. (2008). Error in Economics: Towards a More Evidence-Based Methodology. London-New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salines, M., Glöckler, G., & Trchlewski, Z. (2012). Existential Crisis Incremental Response: The Eurozone’s Dual Institutional Evolution. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(5), 665–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlefer, J. (2012). The Assumptions Economists Make. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. ([1942] 2005). Capitalism, Socialism & Democracy. Routledge: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E., Edlin, A. S., & Bradford DeLong, J. (2008). The Economists’ Voice: Top Economists’ Take on Today’s Problems. New York: Colombia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1972). Moral Experts. Analysis, 32(4), 115–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R., & Hastie, R. (2015). Wiser: Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift, A., & White, S. (2008). Political Theory, Social Science, and Real Politics. In D. Leopold & M. Stears (Eds.), Political Theory: Methods and Approaches (pp. 49–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellmann, S. M. (2016). Experts in Public Policymaking: Influential, yet Constrained. Doctoral Thesis. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tranøy, K. E. (1976). Norms of Inquiry: Methodologies as Normative Systems. In G. Ryle (Ed.), Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy. London: Oriel Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. (2014). Democracy Disfigured: Opinion, Truth, and the People. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vibert, F. (2007). The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. (1997). Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments from Authority. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis. London: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cathrine Holst .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Holst, C., Molander, A. (2021). Responding to Crises—Worries About Expertization . In: Riddervold, M., Trondal, J., Newsome, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51791-5_38

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics