SCIENCE@home

Shifting the Blame or Defending Implementation: How Do Explanations for Compliance Shape the Legitimacy of Contested EU Policies?

Asya Zhelyazkova,Thijs Lindner,Tim Heinkelmann‐Wild,Agnieszka Kanas

Published 2025 in Governance. An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions

ABSTRACT

As European Union (EU) policymaking becomes increasingly politicized, national and local authorities face pressure to justify compliance with contested EU rules. This study examines how different explanations for compliance affect citizens' perceptions of legitimacy. We distinguish between blame‐shifting and defending strategies communicated by national and municipal authorities. Our expectations and findings challenge the popular view that blaming the EU is the most credible approach. In policy implementation, national governments are often perceived as primarily responsible, making their blame‐shifting attempts less persuasive. Instead, we expect and find that defending compliance by claiming responsibility increases perceived legitimacy. Municipal authorities, however, can more credibly deny responsibility for externally mandated policies because of their distance from the EU decision‐making process. These results advance research on elite communication and the legitimacy of EU policies, offering new insights into how governments can reconcile public responsiveness with supranational obligations in an era of contested EU governance.

PUBLICATION RECORD

  • Publication year

    2025

  • Venue

    Governance. An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions

  • Publication date

    2025-09-30

  • Fields of study

    Not labeled

  • Identifiers
    DOI 10.1111/gove.70065
  • External record

    Open on Semantic Scholar

  • Source metadata

    Semantic Scholar

CITATION MAP

EXTRACTION MAP

CLAIMS

  • No claims are published for this paper.

CONCEPTS

  • No concepts are published for this paper.

REFERENCES

Showing 1-34 of 34 references · Page 1 of 1

CITED BY