Pub Date : 2022-08-29DOI: 10.1177/14651165221121739
David Steinecke
In light of secluded decision-making and early agreements, a binding mandate for the European Parliament’s negotiation team is essential to prevent agency loss in trilogue negotiations. In this article, I investigate the influence of the often-overlooked shadow rapporteurs on this mandate. Shadow rapporteurs are their party group’s representatives and act as checks on the rapporteur. Drawing on novel insights from network analysis, I expect shadow rapporteurs and their stance on EU integration to affect the success of amendments they are sponsoring. I draw on a novel dataset of 1524 committee amendments and employ three-level multinomial logistic regression to test these expectations. I find shadow rapporteurs to be influential policy leaders who successfully shape the committee report and, therefore, mitigate the risk of agency loss in potential trilogues. Shadow rapporteurs can successfully check the rapporteur and thereby influence the content of EU legislation.
{"title":"Shadows as leaders? The amendment success of shadow rapporteurs in the European Parliament","authors":"David Steinecke","doi":"10.1177/14651165221121739","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221121739","url":null,"abstract":"In light of secluded decision-making and early agreements, a binding mandate for the European Parliament’s negotiation team is essential to prevent agency loss in trilogue negotiations. In this article, I investigate the influence of the often-overlooked shadow rapporteurs on this mandate. Shadow rapporteurs are their party group’s representatives and act as checks on the rapporteur. Drawing on novel insights from network analysis, I expect shadow rapporteurs and their stance on EU integration to affect the success of amendments they are sponsoring. I draw on a novel dataset of 1524 committee amendments and employ three-level multinomial logistic regression to test these expectations. I find shadow rapporteurs to be influential policy leaders who successfully shape the committee report and, therefore, mitigate the risk of agency loss in potential trilogues. Shadow rapporteurs can successfully check the rapporteur and thereby influence the content of EU legislation.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"700 - 720"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41556758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-28DOI: 10.1177/14651165221120773
Sara Hagemann
Data from leading scholarly journals and publishing houses show that the gender gap in academic publishing is deep and persistent. This has considerable consequences for individual careers and for academic knowledge across disciplines. As European political science journals have started to publish their gender data for submissions and publication processes, this article evaluates this trend and the conclusions from a recent symposium on ‘The gendered distribution of authors and reviewers in major European political science journals’. It summarises a list of ‘key gender data’ that journal editors are encouraged to publish on an annual basis to achieve a more accurate and comprehensive picture for individual journals and across the discipline. It also includes suggestions for editors to ensure better citations of female scholars in their journals.
{"title":"Why does gender inequality in academic publishing persist? Lessons and recommendations","authors":"Sara Hagemann","doi":"10.1177/14651165221120773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221120773","url":null,"abstract":"Data from leading scholarly journals and publishing houses show that the gender gap in academic publishing is deep and persistent. This has considerable consequences for individual careers and for academic knowledge across disciplines. As European political science journals have started to publish their gender data for submissions and publication processes, this article evaluates this trend and the conclusions from a recent symposium on ‘The gendered distribution of authors and reviewers in major European political science journals’. It summarises a list of ‘key gender data’ that journal editors are encouraged to publish on an annual basis to achieve a more accurate and comprehensive picture for individual journals and across the discipline. It also includes suggestions for editors to ensure better citations of female scholars in their journals.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"729 - 740"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45205804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-22DOI: 10.1177/14651165221120370
M. Gilli, P. Tedeschi
There are two main categories of counterterrorism policies: proactive and defensive measures. Proactive policies directly target terrorists and, by weakening their ability, share public good features. Defensive measures, on the other hand, seek to protect a potential target. Unilateral defensive measures may induce terrorists to replace one target with another, possibly a foreign one, as confirmed by the succession of terrorist attacks in the European Union over the last 20 years. We analyse different institutional frameworks to determine the best one for interstate cooperation considering the externationalites of various counterterrorism measures. This article highlights the combined effect of voter propensity towards defensive policies, certain intelligence policies and different institutional scenarios on the (in)efficient strategic choice of counterterrorism defensive policies in democratic countries, where efficiency means maximising the joint welfare of countries. We consider four different institutional scenarios: decentralisation, intelligence cooperation, unanimous political cooperation and full political union. We model these situations as a three-stage signalling game and show that, surprisingly, intelligence cooperation increases the probability of efficient defensive policies more than unanimous political cooperation.
{"title":"European Union, transnational terrorism and the strategic choice of counterterrorism policies in democratic countries","authors":"M. Gilli, P. Tedeschi","doi":"10.1177/14651165221120370","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221120370","url":null,"abstract":"There are two main categories of counterterrorism policies: proactive and defensive measures. Proactive policies directly target terrorists and, by weakening their ability, share public good features. Defensive measures, on the other hand, seek to protect a potential target. Unilateral defensive measures may induce terrorists to replace one target with another, possibly a foreign one, as confirmed by the succession of terrorist attacks in the European Union over the last 20 years. We analyse different institutional frameworks to determine the best one for interstate cooperation considering the externationalites of various counterterrorism measures. This article highlights the combined effect of voter propensity towards defensive policies, certain intelligence policies and different institutional scenarios on the (in)efficient strategic choice of counterterrorism defensive policies in democratic countries, where efficiency means maximising the joint welfare of countries. We consider four different institutional scenarios: decentralisation, intelligence cooperation, unanimous political cooperation and full political union. We model these situations as a three-stage signalling game and show that, surprisingly, intelligence cooperation increases the probability of efficient defensive policies more than unanimous political cooperation.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"612 - 638"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48899993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-22DOI: 10.1177/14651165221121720
F. Schimmelfennig, Thomas Winzen
Do integration crises reinforce legal differentiation in European integration? Are differentiated EU policies under stress prone to cascading opt-outs? We argue that integration crises as such are unlikely to cause further fragmentation in already differentiated EU regimes. If the EU decides to adopt new treaties and laws in response to the crises, however, these are likely to reproduce and extend pre-existing patterns of differentiation. Empirically, this study offers within-case counterfactual analyses of differentiation in the Euro and the migration crises. Whereas the Euro crisis triggered a major institutional change in the Eurozone, the member states could not agree on a thorough reform of the asylum system. Correspondingly, we observe excess differentiation in the Euro crisis but stable differentiation in the migration crisis.
{"title":"Cascading opt-outs? The effect of the Euro and migration crises on differentiated integration in the European Union","authors":"F. Schimmelfennig, Thomas Winzen","doi":"10.1177/14651165221121720","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221121720","url":null,"abstract":"Do integration crises reinforce legal differentiation in European integration? Are differentiated EU policies under stress prone to cascading opt-outs? We argue that integration crises as such are unlikely to cause further fragmentation in already differentiated EU regimes. If the EU decides to adopt new treaties and laws in response to the crises, however, these are likely to reproduce and extend pre-existing patterns of differentiation. Empirically, this study offers within-case counterfactual analyses of differentiation in the Euro and the migration crises. Whereas the Euro crisis triggered a major institutional change in the Eurozone, the member states could not agree on a thorough reform of the asylum system. Correspondingly, we observe excess differentiation in the Euro crisis but stable differentiation in the migration crisis.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"24 1","pages":"21 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65744702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-15DOI: 10.1177/14651165221119083
F. Schimmelfennig, Dirk Leuffen, Catherine E. De Vries
Research on differentiated integration (DI) in the European Union (EU) has focused on the causes, conditions, and patterns of differentiation in European integration. By contrast, we know less about its effects on institutional outcomes and public support; moreover, alternatives to de jure DI in providing flexibility are still rarely accounted for. This introduction to the special issue takes stock of, and discusses omissions, in the current literature on DI. We propose an analytical framework, centering on efficiency and legitimacy, to study the effects of different types of DI. We use this framework to motivate the choice and assess the contributions of the articles selected for this special issue.
{"title":"Differentiated integration in the European Union: Institutional effects, public opinion, and alternative flexibility arrangements","authors":"F. Schimmelfennig, Dirk Leuffen, Catherine E. De Vries","doi":"10.1177/14651165221119083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221119083","url":null,"abstract":"Research on differentiated integration (DI) in the European Union (EU) has focused on the causes, conditions, and patterns of differentiation in European integration. By contrast, we know less about its effects on institutional outcomes and public support; moreover, alternatives to de jure DI in providing flexibility are still rarely accounted for. This introduction to the special issue takes stock of, and discusses omissions, in the current literature on DI. We propose an analytical framework, centering on efficiency and legitimacy, to study the effects of different types of DI. We use this framework to motivate the choice and assess the contributions of the articles selected for this special issue.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"24 1","pages":"3 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43171292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-20DOI: 10.1177/14651165221096801
{"title":"EUP Referees 1 January 2020– 31 March 2022","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/14651165221096801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221096801","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"560 - 563"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43105514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-15DOI: 10.1177/14651165221111985
Bartolomeo Cappellina, Anne Ausfelder, Adam Eick, Romain Mespoulet, M. Hartlapp, Sabine Saurugger, Fabien Terpan
What characterizes European Union soft law and what are its implications for the EU multilevel system? What is the proportion of hard and soft law in EU policy? Which types of soft law act are adopted in different policy sectors? This article introduces the conceptual and analytical framework that encompasses the EfSoLaw dataset and explains its methodology, advantages, and limitations. This dataset unites information on thousands of EU hard and soft law acts from seven different policy sectors, drawn from over fifteen years (2004–2019) and from various sources (EUR-Lex, DGs, agencies). We present implementation options of the dataset making it exploitable for other scholars and we propose hypotheses to explain the variation in the adoption of soft law in different policy sectors.
{"title":"Ever more soft law? A dataset to compare binding and non-binding EU law across policy areas and over time (2004–2019)","authors":"Bartolomeo Cappellina, Anne Ausfelder, Adam Eick, Romain Mespoulet, M. Hartlapp, Sabine Saurugger, Fabien Terpan","doi":"10.1177/14651165221111985","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221111985","url":null,"abstract":"What characterizes European Union soft law and what are its implications for the EU multilevel system? What is the proportion of hard and soft law in EU policy? Which types of soft law act are adopted in different policy sectors? This article introduces the conceptual and analytical framework that encompasses the EfSoLaw dataset and explains its methodology, advantages, and limitations. This dataset unites information on thousands of EU hard and soft law acts from seven different policy sectors, drawn from over fifteen years (2004–2019) and from various sources (EUR-Lex, DGs, agencies). We present implementation options of the dataset making it exploitable for other scholars and we propose hypotheses to explain the variation in the adoption of soft law in different policy sectors.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"741 - 757"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45554348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1177/14651165221107100
I. Jurado
This article analyses the effect of economic assessments on attitudes towards the European Union. The literature has mostly studied this question with observational data (which does not allow to establish a causal link), and has not explored how different countries's experiences during economic hardship shape opinions about the European Union. To account for this, I run a survey vignette experiment in Germany – a creditor countries's during the Great Recession – and Spain – a debtor country. I find that having worse perceptions about the impact of the crisis erodes attitudes towards the European Union. The mechanism is, however, different across countries. In Germany, worse economic evaluations reduce the perception that the European Union is a beneficial project. Conversely, in Spain, negative assessments about the financial crisis are linked to beliefs that democratic representation is limited in the European Union. These results are relevant to understand the conditions and mechanisms by which attitudes towards the European Union are worsened.
{"title":"Economic perceptions and attitudes towards the European Union: A survey experiment","authors":"I. Jurado","doi":"10.1177/14651165221107100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221107100","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the effect of economic assessments on attitudes towards the European Union. The literature has mostly studied this question with observational data (which does not allow to establish a causal link), and has not explored how different countries's experiences during economic hardship shape opinions about the European Union. To account for this, I run a survey vignette experiment in Germany – a creditor countries's during the Great Recession – and Spain – a debtor country. I find that having worse perceptions about the impact of the crisis erodes attitudes towards the European Union. The mechanism is, however, different across countries. In Germany, worse economic evaluations reduce the perception that the European Union is a beneficial project. Conversely, in Spain, negative assessments about the financial crisis are linked to beliefs that democratic representation is limited in the European Union. These results are relevant to understand the conditions and mechanisms by which attitudes towards the European Union are worsened.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"721 - 728"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42110334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-19DOI: 10.1177/14651165221098501
Michele Fenzl, Jonathan B. Slapin, Samuel Wilhelm
This study examines the effect of voters’ ideological extremism on turnout in European national and European Parliament elections. Using data from recent European Election Studies, the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, and other national election studies, we find that, relative to centrists, ideological extremists (measured by self-placement on the left–right scales) are more likely to vote in European Parliament elections (2014 and 2019) but not national elections. We argue that these differences stem from the fact that European Parliament elections are second-order races. The results help to explain why the European Parliament has become more polarized, even in the absence of significant changes in overall attitudes among the European public, and why extreme parties have been more successful in recent European Parliament than national elections.
{"title":"From polarization of the public to polarization of the electorate: European Parliament elections as the preferred race for ideologues","authors":"Michele Fenzl, Jonathan B. Slapin, Samuel Wilhelm","doi":"10.1177/14651165221098501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221098501","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the effect of voters’ ideological extremism on turnout in European national and European Parliament elections. Using data from recent European Election Studies, the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, and other national election studies, we find that, relative to centrists, ideological extremists (measured by self-placement on the left–right scales) are more likely to vote in European Parliament elections (2014 and 2019) but not national elections. We argue that these differences stem from the fact that European Parliament elections are second-order races. The results help to explain why the European Parliament has become more polarized, even in the absence of significant changes in overall attitudes among the European public, and why extreme parties have been more successful in recent European Parliament than national elections.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"590 - 611"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45103285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-14DOI: 10.1177/14651165221103026
Konstantin Gavras, M. Mader, Harald Schoen
Since the end of the Cold War, the EU aims to advance to a relevant and autonomous actor in international politics—especially concerning security and defense politics. Scholars interested in whether the EU member states actually converge in their security and defense preferences often analyze strategy papers qualitatively, focusing on selected countries at specific points in time. In this article, we propose a dictionary approach for analyzing the development of security and defense preferences within the EU over the last three decades using quantitative text analysis. We make use of 163 strategy papers, published by all EU member states and the EU itself since 1994. The findings show that EU member states react similarly to international events, but do not converge substantially in their preferences. Furthermore, there is no substantial convergence to the position of the EU itself. We finally discuss usefulness and validity of quantitative text analysis in comparative research more broadly.
{"title":"Convergence of European security and defense preferences? A quantitative text analysis of strategy papers, 1994–2018","authors":"Konstantin Gavras, M. Mader, Harald Schoen","doi":"10.1177/14651165221103026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221103026","url":null,"abstract":"Since the end of the Cold War, the EU aims to advance to a relevant and autonomous actor in international politics—especially concerning security and defense politics. Scholars interested in whether the EU member states actually converge in their security and defense preferences often analyze strategy papers qualitatively, focusing on selected countries at specific points in time. In this article, we propose a dictionary approach for analyzing the development of security and defense preferences within the EU over the last three decades using quantitative text analysis. We make use of 163 strategy papers, published by all EU member states and the EU itself since 1994. The findings show that EU member states react similarly to international events, but do not converge substantially in their preferences. Furthermore, there is no substantial convergence to the position of the EU itself. We finally discuss usefulness and validity of quantitative text analysis in comparative research more broadly.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"662 - 679"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46458444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：