Critique as Routine in Eurocracy: Two Compared Ethnographic Perspectives

This article builds on two field studies, one examining trade defence and the other crisis management, to provide an ethnographic analysis of the practice of criticism within the European Commission. We identify and examine the strategies employed by EU officials to navigate the recurring tensions that define their daily work. These include the interplay between political imperatives and technical expertise, as well as the balance between crisis response and formalised regulations. Rather than characterising criticism as an isolated act of defiance or a symptom of institutional dysfunction, we reveal its pervasive role in routine institutional practices, a dimension often overlooked in scholarly accounts. By focusing on criticisms, the article offers valuable insights into both the actions and thought processes of EU bureaucrats, while simultaneously encouraging a broader reflection on their professional ethos and the challenges it regularly undergoes. To substantiate this argument, our analysis integrates three dimensions: a dialogue between rarely connected literatures, comparative findings from two field investigations, and multi-level observations drawn from interviews, participant observations, and the analysis of draft documents.