Getting your House in Order for EU Negotiations: When Domestic Constraints Condition Italy's Performance at the EU Level*

Author(s):  
Marianna Lovato
Keyword(s):  

2002 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Hug ◽  
Thomas König

The bargaining product of the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference—the Amsterdam Treaty—dwindled down the draft proposal to a consensus set of all fifteen member states of the European Union (EU). Using the two-level concept of international bargains, we provide a thorough analysis of how this consensus set was reached by issue subtraction with respect to domestic ratification constraints. Drawing on data sets covering the positions of all negotiating actors and ratifying national political parties, we first highlight the differences in the Amsterdam ratification procedures in the fifteen member states of the EU. This analysis allows us to compare the varying ratification difficulties in each country. Second, our empirical analysis of the treaty negotiations shows that member states excluded half of the Amsterdam bargaining issues to secure a smooth ratification. Because member states with higher domestic ratification constraints performed better in eliminating uncomfortable issues at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference, issue subtraction can be explained by the extent to which the negotiators were constrained by domestic interests.



2006 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas König ◽  
Jonathan B. Slapin

In spite of the recent failure of two referendums, the drafting of a constitution for the second biggest economic power in the world, the European Union (EU), remains a major event in the history of European integration. Whether the constitution or a revised version of it will come into force or not, several important questions emerge. How did an increased number of twentyfive member states reach a conclusion, whereas a lower number of fifteen had failed at previous intergovernmental attempts? In particular, how did the constitutional convention differ from previous intergovernmental conferences (iGCs) at which the EU exclusively bargained its treaty documents in the past? How can one explain the outcomes of the convention, which proposes redistribution of power and resources among twenty-five or more member states? This article uses the positions of the delegates of the EU's constitutional convention to examine bargaining in a setting with few formal rules. The authors use theoretical insights from a spatial model and new survey data to determine the implicit voting rule used at the convention. They find that the convention differed from previous IGCs because the convention was governed by consensus, whereas previous EU bargains on treaties had always required unanimous support. The level of consensus was higher than simple majority rule but lower than unanimity. Since this threshold impacted who won and who lost at the convention, the authors also examine the sources of bargaining power, such as delegates' distance to the status quo, distance to the median, population size, and domestic constraints. The results confirm several findings in the EU bargaining and two-level game literature, for example, that actors closer to the status quo hold a stronger bargaining position and that actors from larger member states are neither more likely nor less likely to win at the negotiating table than are actors from smaller states. The findings on the irrelevance of domestic constraints also indicate why the popular votes in France and the Netherlands failed.



2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens Ankersmit
Keyword(s):  


2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rinus van Schendelen
Keyword(s):  


Author(s):  
Frank Schimmelfennig
Keyword(s):  




2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Wilpert

The paper presents an inside evaluation of the EuroPsyT project, funded by the EU Leonardo Program in 1999-2001. While standard research usually neglects to reflect on the internal and external constraints and opportunities under which research results are achieved, the paper stresses exactly those aspects: starting from a brief description of the overall objectives of the 11 countries project, the paper proceeds to describe the macro-context and the internal strengths and weaknesses of the project team, the internal procedures of cooperation,. and obstacles encountered during the research process. It winds up in noting some of the project's achievements and with a look towards future research.



2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Gracia ◽  
Marisol Lila ◽  
Faraj A. Santirso

Abstract. Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) are increasingly recognized as central to understanding of this major social and public health problem, and guide the development of more effective prevention efforts. However, to date this area of research is underdeveloped in western societies, and in particular in the EU. The present study aims to provide a systematic review of quantitative studies addressing attitudes toward IPVAW conducted in the EU. The review was conducted through Web of Science, PsychINFO, Medline, EMBASE, PUBMED, and the Cochrane Library, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. This review aimed to identify empirical studies conducted in the EU, published in English in peer-reviewed journals from 2000 to 2018, and analyzing attitudes toward IPVAW. A total of 62 of 176 eligible articles were selected according to inclusion criteria. Four sets of attitudes toward IPVAW were identified as the main focus of the studies: legitimation, acceptability, attitudes toward intervention, and perceived severity. Four main research themes regarding attitudes toward IPVAW emerged: correlates of attitudes, attitudes as predictors, validation of scales, and attitude change interventions. Although interest in this research area has been growing in recent years, the systematic review revealed important gaps in current knowledge on attitudes toward IPVAW in the EU that limits its potential to inform public policy. The review outlines directions for future study and suggests that to better inform policy making, these future research efforts would benefit from an EU-level perspective.





Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document