When Disclosure Is Not Enough: A Comparative Policy Analysis of Institutional Design in EU Whistleblowing Regimes

Directive (EU) 2019/1937 has expanded formal whistleblower protection across the European Union, yet stronger legal architectures do not consistently translate disclosure into public-integrity outcomes. Combining fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of the 27 EU Member States with structured comparison of Denmark, Ireland, and Slovakia, this article examines how institutional design shapes that relationship. By examining how different state resources are mobilised, it shows that public-integrity activation depends on whether disclosure remains connected to protection, investigation, and enforcement across the governance system. Administrative capacity, coordination, sectoral and organisational conditions, and rule-of-law safeguards shape whether formal protection enables authoritative action on reported wrongdoing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2026.2747336
Primary Topic
Administrative Law and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When Disclosure Is Not Enough: A Comparative Policy Analysis of Institutional Design in EU Whistleblowing Regimes

Alejandro Hernández-Luis, Kate M. Kenny, Taymi Milán, John K. Devitt
1 links
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice
Administrative Law and Governance
article

When Disclosure Is Not Enough: A Comparative Policy Analysis of Institutional Design in EU Whistleblowing Regimes

Alejandro Hernández-Luis, Kate M. Kenny, Taymi Milán, John K. Devitt
article en

Abstract

Directive (EU) 2019/1937 has expanded formal whistleblower protection across the European Union, yet stronger legal architectures do not consistently translate disclosure into public-integrity outcomes. Combining fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of the 27 EU Member States with structured comparison of Denmark, Ireland, and Slovakia, this article examines how institutional design shapes that relationship. By examining how different state resources are mobilised, it shows that public-integrity activation depends on whether disclosure remains connected to protection, investigation, and enforcement across the governance system. Administrative capacity, coordination, sectoral and organisational conditions, and rule-of-law safeguards shape whether formal protection enables authoritative action on reported wrongdoing.

Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice
Transparency International (CZ), Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE), Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Ecuador (EC)
University of Galway
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Administrative Law and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon