ABSTRACT
Studies explaining the timeliness and correctness of the transposition of EU directives into national legislation have provided rather inconclusive findings. They do not offer a clear-cut prediction concerning the transposition of the patients’ rights directive, which is one of the first that concerns the organisation and financing of national healthcare systems. This article applies the perspective of bounded rationality to explain (irregularities in) the timely and correct transposition of EU directives. The cognitive and organisational constraints long posited by the bounded rationality perspective may affect the commonly employed explanatory factors of administrative capacities, misfit and the heterogeneity of preferences among veto players. To prevent retrospective rationalisation of the transposition process, this paper traces this process as it unfolded in Denmark and the Netherlands. As bounded rationality is apparent in the transposition processes in these relatively well-organised countries, future transposition studies should devote greater consideration to the bounded rationality perspective.
