According to this article written several weeks before the actual voting process, Amsterdam (the winner) was already among the favorite cities to host EMA:

A survey by the EMA asked staff to give their thoughts on the 19 candidate cities that applied to host the health agency after Britain’s withdrawal from the EU in March 2019.

The candidates range from Dublin, Amsterdam and Stockholm, which are among the favourites, to Bucharest, Warsaw and Zagreb, which are regarded as outsiders.

The results revealed that, in the case of the eight least popular possible new locations, staff retention rates could be significantly lower than 30% and as low as 6% in the case of one of the unnamed cities.

As indicated by the article, there was a serious concern related to staff retention rate based on the new location. Some analysts [citation needed] argued that the expertise required for EMA employees is quite hard to find, thus retention rate after relocation is very important.

Question: Was the new location the result of a pure democratic process (votes only) or was it combined with some technical aspects (e.g. employees opinions, cities capacity to accommodate such an institution).


According to the link you provide, the selection took place in the margins of the General Affairs Council (Article 50), in accordance with the procedure endorsed by the EU 27 heads of State and Government on 22 June 2017. Looking at the published archive of the outcome of the meeting on the 22nd we find a document detailing the procedure to be followed. This specified a multi-round approach with the 27 non-UK member nations of the EU each receiving equal votes. There appears to be reasonable evidence that this is what happened, although the results of each individual round don't seem to have been announced anywhere.

|improve this answer|||||
  • So, it seems to be decided based on votes only. However, referenced document also specifies some criteria (such as offices availability, accessibility, access to labor market). It is not clear how these criteria are applied (i.e. are they only informative?). – Alexei Nov 23 '17 at 21:45
  • 1
    @Alexei: The voting member states applied these criteria (and presumably others) when deciding what to vote for. – chirlu Nov 23 '17 at 22:40
  • @Alexei The key line is on page 9, "All offers, except for any withdrawn by the Member States concerned, will be submitted to the vote." so the criteria only informed the assessment the commission was to produce (which should be publicly available, but I haven't found yet), and even an offer found to critically fail all criteria will have been voted on. – origimbo Nov 23 '17 at 22:43
  • Found it: ec.europa.eu/info/about-european-union/… – origimbo Nov 24 '17 at 0:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .