Public Ethics at the European Commission

Andreea Nastase is Assistant Professor in European Public Policy at Maastricht University, the Netherlands. She holds a PhD from the Central European University, Budapest.

• IntroductionEthics management and corruption world-wide Central concepts, limitations and some finer pointsThe analytical contribution of this bookThe European Commission as a case study in ethics managementResearch approachPlan of the book1. Public Ethics, Socialization and the Organizational Profile of the European Commission1.1. A conceptual framework for addressing public ethics 1.1.1. Ethical dilemmas and views towards public ethics 1.1.2. Ethics management in public organizations 1.2. Organizational socialization: learning ethics on the job 1.2.1. Formal and informal learning sources 1.2.2. Socialization as acquiring role knowledge 1.3. The officials of the European Commission and their organizational socialization 1.3.1. Choosing a significant group of officials 1.3.2. Characteristics of the sample 1.3.3. Gaining access and recruiting participants 1.4. Conclusion 2. Change, Continuity and the Politics of Ethics Reforms 2.1. The compliance-integrity continuum 2.2. The development of ethics management in the European Commission services2.2.1. The Kinnock reforms: a rule-based ethics system2.2.2. The Kallas package: moving to a trust-based ethics system2.2.3. The Kallas package after 20102.3. The Ethics Communication and the delivery of change2.3.1. Public scrutiny and ethics scandals 2.3.2. Ethics as a political liability2.4. Conclusion 3. "You are the Human Face of the Commission": Ethics Translated in Internal Administrative Practice 3.1. Ethics in internal communication: rules and the public image of the European Commission 3.2. Ethics "hot spots" in the European Commission 3.2.1. Types of ethical dilemmas 3.2.2. Type 1 issues: conflict of interests, outside activities and the limits of individual freedom of expression3.2.3. Type 2 issues: whistleblowing 3.2.4. Type 3 issues: exchanges with private interests 3.3. Conclusion 4. Individual Views towards Ethics in the European Commission 4.1. Methodological observations4.1.1. General observations on the vignette technique4.1.2. The use of vignettes in this research project4.2. Individual positions on public ethics4.2.1. Vignette 1: The organization and the individual4.2.2. Vignette 2: Officials within the organization4.2.3. Vignette 3: The official, the organization, and external actors4.3. Ethics on the work-floor: commonalities, divergence, and determinants4.3.1. Commonalities and divergence4.3.2. Exploring the divergence4.3.2.1. Nationality4.3.2.2. Organizational position4.4. Conclusion5. Discussing "Common Sense" – How Ethics Management Shapes Individual Views to Ethics 5.1. Official communication and views from the work-floor5.2. Ethics as "common sense"5.3. Discussing about ethics5.4. ConclusionConclusionSummary of findingsThe limits of ethics managementThe European Commission after ethics reformsOutlookFinal remarks