How institutions shape their reports: The cases of the French Economic, Social, and Environmental Council and the Court of Audit

This article shows the institutional work that underlies the life of public reports, from their production to their reception. Based on a sociology of institutions, it focuses on the French Economic, Social, and Environmental Council (Conseil économique, social et environnemental, CESE) and the Court of Audit (Cour des comptes). The comparison reveals two different styles of reports and two institutional identities: Whereas the Court of Audit presents itself as a bureaucratic organization of top civil servants, CESE appears to be a “parliament of organized civil society.” Secondly, since they do not have coercive power and sometimes receive criticism for inefficiency or bias, both institutions have to give a clear meaning to their reports, guide the reception by their various audiences, and convince the latter about the usefulness of these reports. Furthermore, they always have to demonstrate the legitimacy of their findings and proposals. The article lastly focuses on struggles within institutions and constraints on the actors in defining their roles. It concludes that members agree on relatively few acceptable practices. As a result, institutional rules and identities impact the shape, the style, the frame, and the content of reports.