Multi-Level Reasoning: Multi-Level Governance and the Quest for Coherence

In Europe, public administrations at different levels of authority are involved in the process of implementing legal acts. Multi-level governance has long been established as a concept to describe this phenomenon. However, the term is inherently linked with normative assessment and it depends on attitudes of a certain type. This article develops the concept of multi-level reasoning embodying two attitudes towards inter-institutional challenges: conciliation and deference. The conceptual framework is needed to capture standards for dealing with interlinkages and interdependencies as well as the need to ensure coherence in interdependent administrations. The multi-level structure is not supposed to be a finished pecking order but one in which different levels have a legitimate role to play. Analysing the two scandals of welfare administration in Norway and the Netherlands, it becomes clear that the cases cannot be reduced to lack of competence or opportunity. There was a lack of will to constructive conciliation that could pave the way for well-placed deference. The explanatory force of these attitudinal components gives the framework of multi-level reasoning an advantage compared to established perspectives that are focused on inertia and external pressure rather than on reflection and active choice.