The Practice of Consensus in the Council of the European Union. Research Design and Preliminary Findings

In the Council of the European Union, most issues are decided without any recorded opposition, even though it is often formally possible to decide by qualified majority, not unanimity. The prevalence of consensus in the Council is unexpected, considering the diversity of member states. It can also be described as inefficient, unintended and surprisingly stable. This puzzle has received scholarly attention and a number of explanations, underpinned by various theoretical standpoints. However, while providing valuable insights, most explanations of consensus focus on general logics or mechanisms, in which the participants of the negotiation process play their prescribed roles (e.g. instruction-bound national representatives or norm-driven group members). The intention of this paper is to show how an interpretive, practice-oriented approach can contribute to this topic. By putting meaning-making at the centre of researcher’s interest, it moves towards the understanding of consensus as it is enacted by national officials. The objective is to learn: 1) how the officials make sense of their actions which ultimately result in none of them openly opposing a decision, 2) what is the contextualised meaning of their practices, and 3) whether there is any tension between what they believe to be their responsibility towards their capitals and the practice of consensus. This problem is linked to significant normative issues. Specifically, consensus could either enhance or undermine legitimacy of power at the EU level, depending on what it means in everyday decision-making. Its meaning could include the ideas of equality and cooperation, as well as perceptions of asymmetrical power relations and coercion. The paper will discuss the most important methodological assumptions of a research design meant to address these questions. Methodologically, this research is undertaken within the framework of practice tracing – the interpretive rendition of process tracing, which focuses on social practices (patterned and socially meaningful human action). It is meant to contribute to the understanding of consensus in the Council and engage extant explanations in an empirically grounded dialogue. The paper will also present preliminary findings, showing how practicing consensus depends on member state representatives’ willingness to transcend their mandates and refrain from objecting, in favour of constructive input.