The green and red lights of the nw regulation on Europol

This paper investigates whether the 2016 regulation on the functioning of Europol can best be explained by either of two major conflicting theories of European integration: neofunctionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism. The explanatory power of each theory is tested through a congruence analysis. This analysis is based on the rigorous development and operationalization of the paradigms that each theory presents. The results indicate that neofunctionalism wields a superior degree of explanatory power over the case of the Europol regulation. Specifically, the observations made through this analysis show that neofunctionalism offers accurate predictions of institutional behavior across national and supranational arenas. It successfully accounts for the active role of the European Commission in policymaking, as well as the evolving behavior of the most interested national actors, such as national law enforcement authorities. Neofunctionalism also displays a strong ability to analyze inter-institutional relations, successfully accounting for the role of the European Parliament. Furthermore, this research sheds light on the so-far unexplored role that non-political EU agencies, in this case Europol, take in promoting their own interests in the policy process. The analysis also reflects on the relative potential that liberal intergovernmentalist theory has in analyzing the present case, and comments on what conclusions can be made in terms of the contemporary evolution of EU internal security policy in the post-Lisbon period.