In this LSE blog post Mark Dawson and Adina Maricut-Akbik draw a distinction between ‘procedural accountability’ and ‘substantive accountability’ arguing that there should be greater attention paid to the potential trade-offs associated with each approach.
The EU is frequently criticised for lacking democratic accountability. Mark Dawson and Adina Maricut-Akbik draw a distinction between ‘procedural accountability’, which focuses on whether actors follow the correct procedural steps in reaching a decision, and ‘substantive accountability’, which assesses the value of a policy decision itself. They argue there should be greater attention paid to the potential trade-offs associated with each approach, particularly in light of the notably procedural form of accountability that has been adopted in the EU’s Economic and Monetary Union.