rn societies, governance usually takes place in a rather stable institutional context. Both formal and informal institutions such as government, parliament, intermediary institutions, democracy, rule of law, the welfare state, as well as the relationship between rulers and ruled are more or less stable. This situation changes only in cases of intentional reform (e.g. federalization in Belgium) or in cases of severe system crises (e.g. Italy). The European Union on the other hand is characterized by a decade-long process of institutional change, which is both incremental and deep. This process of change does not only concern the institutions of the EU but also those of the member states. This transformation also concerns institutions in a broader sense, e.g. the particular national versions of the welfare state, democracy, rule of law and labor relations. Examples include the competencies of the German constitutional court, the central role of the British parliament and the financing of the Danish welfare state. The problem is not that the EU is abolishing these institutions. Eventually the intended or unintended pressure exerted by the integration process leads to modifications in these institutions. This does not have to be bad as such; it may also help to overcome long-established impasses and blockades of reformTransfer of authority to private or semi-public institutions on the European level is another element in this general process of institutional change. Depending on the political preferences of the respective government or on national traditions, governance by private or semi-public institutions can also be found in member-states. This tendency is favored by the structure of the EU, because it takes issues defined as technical ones out of the difficult process of consensus formation in the Council of Ministers. (Weiler 1994; Joerges/Neyer 1996). Further development leads to creations of regulatory agencies. Although the emerge...
