{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025720620842572064, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004434589800443459, 'mean_word_length': 5.064516129032258, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Commentary: Europeanization and the Third Sector—A Process without Contours and Direction?

The article of Jeremy Kendall—and alongside it the work of the research network it builds on—is a remarkable step in the debate about the third sector in Europe. First of all, it is a study on sensitive awareness because it shows that the changes concerning the roles and images of third sector organizations (TSOs) can only be understood if one looks at different time points and scenes: the present and history, national heritages and the existence of EU institutions that interact with them, national and EC levels, and above all, various interactions of these and more elements that he sketches. The future faces of TSOs are influenced, but not determined, by ‘decisions from Brussels’. The second merit of Kendall’s contribution is the introduction of an important differentiation—what he calls the difference between ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ policies. The latter dimension, i.e. the vertical one, is made up by the mostly implicit side-effects of policy-making in various fields: welfare, health, culture and the environment. The horizontal element (the one Kendall is focussing on) shows up wherever politics raises issues about the third sector at large, across policy fields, concerning its role in the institutional architecture of modern democracies and welfare states. Further studies on the third sector will be insufficient if they fail to differentiate between these two different dimensions. The third strength of Kendall’s contribution is the fact that this may be the first time that one gets a comprehensive overview about the various aspects of embeddedness of the third sector in EC-Europe. We are reminded of the important role of path dependency in terms of the existence of a long history of concepts of stateand society-building with their respective effects on the third sector. These are histories that are deeply rooted and differ as well within the famous regime-clusters that Esping-Andersen once analysed; conservative regimes may entail different institutional places and various ways to think about the third sector. It is very instructive when Kendall shows that in the Journal of Civil Society Vol. 6, No. 1, 67–70, June 2010