Is EASA as a Regulator an Ally, Threat or Obstacle to a NAA Inspector?

Abstract: Aviation in Europe has undergone an enormous change from national rulemaking to common European rulemaking. Behind this change is the European Union’s decision to delegate some policy implementation functions to decentralised agencies. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is one of these EU agencies and has specific authorisation to implement decisions that directly impact individuals, Member States and state authorities. This EU decision has meant that the position of the National Aviation Authority (NAA) in Finland has changed from that of an independent decision-maker in national aviation matters to that of a distant operative arm of the EASA in European matters in its own country. For the NAA inspector, this has meant being at a ‘distance’ from rulemaking. The new common European rules also introduced a set of new or changed regulations for inspectors to deal with. The transition from national rules to common European rules has not been easy for either the operators or the NAA inspectors. This qualitative study was limited to NAA inspectors working with small helicopter organisations in special operations (SPO) in Europe under EASA rules. It attempted to show how the NAA inspectors see their position in this European regulatory system, how they see the EASA from this position, and how they see their work between small organisations and the EASA. The study began with a literature review of the history of aviation regulation in Europe, the regulatory burden, the bureaucratisation of safety, and the flip side of regulation. After this, the study data was collected by interviewing ten NAA inspectors from eight European countries. The conclusions drawn after the analysis are that the ways in which inspectors experience and interpret regulator and regulations in their daily work with small helicopter SPO operators visibly vary. From the inspectors’ perspective, as a regulator, the EASA can be an ally, a threat, or an obstacle. Furthermore, in practice, inspectors’ work is not always what it is imagined or described to be by the regulatory system. To keep these small organisations compliant and safe, help in different forms is needed from inspectors. In providing this help, informal work can create better results than formal work, especially when the connection with an organisation is good. Through this informal work, inspectors also compensate for the adverse effects and deficiencies in the regulatory system created by bureaucracy.