Is Quantitative Research on EU Decision-Making Too Confident in EU Transparency?

The aim of this paper is to draw attention to the shortcomings of scientific research on EU decision-making that is increasingly based on quantitative data, and to question the quality of EU transparency in this domain. Our own study of the EU decision-making process through a unique dataset on EU legislative acts and an extensive covering of EU-provided sources (1999-2012) has led us to raise the following question: to what extent can scholars rely on EU-provided datasets when studying EU decision-making? As a matter of fact, firstly, the reliability of data provided by the Commission, the EP and the Council is questionable. Cross-checking data by using four different sources (the Prelex, Celex and OEIL databases, as well as the monthly summaries of Council acts) has shown problematic, recurrent errors and inconsistencies (eg the procedure codes in the Celex database), as well as missing values (eg the written/oral adoption of proposals in the Prelex database). Secondly, the technical use of this data by the research community is made difficult by the structure of web pages, their changing aspect and restrictions on direct access to the datasets. These observations have driven us to suggest practical solutions in order to address such shortcomings and compensate for a lack of cooperation between EU institutions in this respect. More generally speaking, these findings shed a new light on EU transparency. They have led us to reflect on an innovative distinction between an over-emphasized quantitative transparency and an over-shadowed qualitative transparency that could restrict EU accountability.