We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Edited by
Helge Jörgens, Iscte – Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Portugal,Nina Kolleck, Universität Potsdam, Germany,Mareike Well, Freie Universität Berlin
This chapter investigates how formal autonomy and informal administrative working styles of international public administrations (IPAs) are interrelated empirically. Recent research on IPAs identified a paradoxical constellation. Some IPAs with low structural autonomy, such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Secretariat, are able to compensate this restriction by developing an entrepreneurial administrative style with emphasis on initiating new policies and sound internal management (paradox of weakness). Other IPAs, such as the formally autonomous European Commission, were found to anticipate member state control and voluntarily restrict themselves to a more passive servant style (paradox of strength). This finding raises the question whether the two paradoxes are idiosyncratic features of the two cases or a more universal phenomenon of international bureaucracies. To answer this question, this chapter introduces the concepts of structural autonomy and administrative styles and lay out a strategy for their measurement. It compares the empirical pattern of autonomy and style in eight IPAs. It concludes with some propositions about potential consequence for international bureaucratic influence.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.