The role of communication for EU independent fiscal institutions in times of escape clauses

Abstract

In recent years, communication has emerged as one of the defining characteristics of Independent Fiscal Institutions (IFIs), playing an increasingly important role in their activities. This study analyses the communication of 28 IFIs from 26 EU countries in the context of the activation of the general escape clause. Four main areas are examined: the state of communication; links between the communication characteristics of IFIs and their institutional aspects, as well as fiscal performance indicators; good practices; and IFIs’ recommendations. Data for the study were collected through a survey sent to IFIs in February 2025.

The study considers institutional arrangements for communication in relation to four aspects: governance elements, research dissemination, research promotion and influence tracking. We find significant heterogeneity in IFIs' communication characteristics. However, EU IFIs largely follow similar communication practices in terms of dissemination and promotion. Most institutions use a combination of traditional and digital channels to target a variety of audiences with different types of content. They use different methods to evaluate the impact of their communication efforts, with the most common being media monitoring and website and social media analytics.

We find that more intense communication requires greater human and financial resources and leads to better media visibility and public disclosure. By running several specifications using a two-step cluster analysis to check for associations between IFIs' communication features and some fiscal policy outcomes, we find that improved communication (certain characteristics of communication in force) was associated with better fiscal outcomes regardless of the period. Additionally, considering different combinations of IFIs' communication characteristics in relation to the deviation from the deficit rule and 10-year government bond yields for both periods (before and after 2020), our results show that the communication style changed from one period to the other within clusters. We also encountered situations where a different combination of characteristics corresponds to the same average deviation scores. Both evidence reinforce the idea that there is no universal "recipe", either from one period to another or from one IFI to another. This could depend on the institutional setup of IFIs, the legislation that regulates them, their governance culture, their resources (both financial and human), and so on. Also, since cluster analysis only shows the association between IFIs' communication features and fiscal policy outcomes and not necessarily causality, there could be other factors that influence the compliance with the deficit rule.

We identify some good practices from the experience of IFIs and the lessons they learned over time. The credibility of IFIs depends on the quality of their analyses. However, without effective communication, even the most rigorous outputs risk being overlooked. By adopting good practices, IFIs can strengthen their visibility, reinforce their legitimacy and contribute more effectively to fiscal governance. We also collect recommendations for both practitioners and policymakers.