The European Qualifications Framework (EQF) was introduced in 2008. While termed as a neutral translation device by the Commission, the development of national qualifications frameworks has initiated debates in a number of European countries. Nevertheless, we see a process of implementation in countries both in and beyond the EU. EQF serves thus as an interesting case of policymaking in an area where the EU has little decision-making capacity and can shed light on how conflicts of interest are dealt with in a multilevel environment in an area characterized by national sensitivity. Provided that the EQF has been received with quite mixed responses, at this point leading to a near standstill in the implementation processes in some countries and partial in others, this raises questions of the content of EQF and its perceived legitimacy as an European instrument, despite the seemingly smooth consultation process. Theoretically the paper draws on a broadly institutionalist account putting focus on EU as a system of new governance. The inclusion of input from the consultation process forms the very basis of legitimacy in loosely coupled arenas where formal capacity is low. The paper will analyze the responses from the consultation process to identify patterns in relation to the parties involved. The consulted groups have different and potentially conflicting interests, can these diverging interests identified in the consultation process? What kinds of suggestions were included into the final version of EQF? What kind of role did the Commission have in this process? The empirical material for this paper consists of the documents related to EQF as well as over 120 responses received from national representatives, social partners, NGOs and other organizations.
