scholarly journals Noncompliance risk, asymmetric power and the design of enforcement of the European economic governance

2021 ◽  
pp. 146511652110238
Author(s):  
Fabio Franchino ◽  
Camilla Mariotto
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Country Size ◽  
Power Resources ◽  
Asymmetric Power ◽  
Council Of Ministers

In the European Union, states can distribute enforcement prerogatives between a supranational agency, over which they exercise equal influence, and a Council of ministers, where power resources mostly vary by country size. What shapes attitudes towards different enforcement designs? States at greater risk of noncompliance should eschew deeper cooperation and prefer procedures over which they can exercise more influence. Employing an original data set of positions on relevant contested issues during the negotiations over fiscal governance rules from 1997 to 2012, we show that governments at greater risk of noncompliance prefer greater discretion and, if they have higher voting power, more Council involvement in enforcement. These factors only partially explain positions on Commission empowerment. Given their greater indeterminacy, attitudes are also shaped by national public opinion.

scholarly journals Where does implementation lie? Assessing the determinants of delegation and discretion in post-Maastricht European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Marta Migliorati
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Majority Voting ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Several Variables ◽  
Qualified Majority ◽  
The One ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Drawing on a principal–agent framework the article analyses the European Union (EU) politics of delegation in the post-Maastricht era. By means of statistical analysis, it tests the impact of several variables upon the selection of national and supranational agents, as well as on the discretion they enjoy, on the basis of a recently collected data set of EU laws. Findings reveal that pooling and policy complexity favour the involvement of supranational actors in the implementation of EU laws. Moreover, the degree of supranational integration of a policy affects the likelihood of choosing supranational implementers. On the one hand, the Commission enjoys higher discretion vis-à-vis national actors when qualified majority voting applies, and when higher levels of conflict in the Council of Ministers is present. On the other, conflict between the European Parliament and the Council under codecision seems associated with lower supranational discretion, although the result needs further corroboration.

scholarly journals Government Responsiveness in the European Union: Evidence From Council Voting

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 850-876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Hagemann ◽  
Sara B. Hobolt ◽  
Christopher Wratil
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Electoral Incentives ◽  
Legislative Proposals ◽  
Government Responsiveness ◽  
The Eu

Are governments responsive to public preferences when legislating in international organizations? This article demonstrates that governments respond to domestic public opinion even when acting at the international level. Specifically, we examine conflict in the European Union’s primary legislative body, the Council of the European Union (EU). We argue that domestic electoral incentives compel governments to react to public opinion. Analyzing a unique data set on all legislative decisions adopted in the Council since 1999, we show that governments are more likely to oppose legislative proposals that extend the level and scope of EU authority when their domestic electorates are skeptical about the EU. We also find that governments are more responsive when the issue of European integration is salient in domestic party politics. Our findings demonstrate that governments can use the international stage to signal their responsiveness to public concerns and that such signals resonate in the domestic political debate.

Delegation, Comitology, and the Separation of Powers in the European Union

2002 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 551-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Ballmann ◽  
David Epstein ◽  
Sharyn O'Halloran
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Theoretic Model ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Considerable Controversy ◽  
Game Theoretic ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
The Eu

Although relatively unknown outside of Europe, comitology committees are an object of considerable controversy in the European Union (EU). Controversy stems from their pivotal role in overseeing policy implementation authority delegated from the Council of Ministers (Council) to the European Commission (Commission). In this article, we employ a game-theoretic model to analyze the influence of these, committees on policy outcomes. Our analysis provides three important insights. First, we show that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, comitology committees move outcomes toward the Commission's preferred policies rather than the Council's. Second, we demonstrate that the possibility of a Council veto may also move outcomes away from Council members' policy preferences and toward the Commission's. Third, the 1999 changes to the comitology procedures, designed to enhance the Commission's autonomy in policymaking, may have had the exact opposite effect. Paradoxically, we conclude that comitology serves to enhance the Commission's role in policy implementation and thereby strengthens the separation of powers within the EU.

Whither Lomé? The Mid-Term Review and the Decline of Partnership

1996 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Crawford
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Mutual Respect ◽  
European Development Fund ◽  
Development Fund ◽  
African Caribbean ◽  
European Development ◽  
Centre Piece ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
Ongoing Dialogue

The signing in Mauritius on 4 November 1995 of the amended fourth Lomé Convention, the aid and trade co-operation agreement between the European Union (EU) and the ACP Group of 70 African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries, brought the Mid-Term Review to its formal completion after protracted negotiations. Established in 1975, Lomé has long been the centre-piece of EU development assistance. In quantitative terms, the European Development Fund, the financial instrument of Lomé, has comprised the largest single portion of EU aid, averaging almost 45 per cent of all disbursements in recent years.1 Qualitatively, Lomé has been regarded as a model of North—South cooperation, mainly due to three special features: it was founded on the principles of equality, mutual respect, and interdependence; it is a legally binding contract negotiated between two sets of countries; and it involves ongoing dialogue through three joint institutions, the ACP—EU Council of Ministers, the Committee of Ambassadors, and the ‘parliamentary’ Joint Assembly.

scholarly journals COHESION POLICY INSTRUMENTS SUPPORTING TOURISM DEVELOPMENT

2019 ◽  
Vol XXI (1) ◽  
pp. 38-46
Author(s):  
Natalia Dominiak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Financial Perspective ◽  
Interdisciplinary Character ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Programming Period ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
Empirical Material

The aim of the article is to discuss issues related to the development of tourism in the context of the possibility of financial support available from cohesion policy funds in the current financial perspective for the years 2014-2020. The particular attention was paid to the multifaceted nature of modern tourism and the directions of changes in the use of EU funds, referring to the completed programming period 2007-2013. An attempt was also made to indicate the significance of tourism in the section of the national economy of Poland and in the European Union, concentrating on its interdisciplinary character. Characteristics of cohesion policy, its goals and principles of functioning were made. The article is of a review nature, which means that the authors’ own materials and empirical material from the literature of the subject were used. The figures were obtained from reports published by the Chancellery of the Prime Minister of the Council of Ministers. It was found out that the amount of allocated funds for cohesion policy among all European Union countries in 2014-2020 is the highest for Poland and amounts to EUR 72.9 billion. There is an increase in the amount of funds allocated from the European Union to Poland, compared to the amount of allocated funds in the 2007-2013 perspective. It was also pointed out that the cohesion policy instruments mentioned above only indirectly contribute to the development of tourism, as the financing for 2014-2020 lacks programs and activities entirely dedicated to tourism.

Always One Step Behind? National Legislatures and the European Union

1999 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tapio Raunio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
One Step ◽  
Council Of Ministers

NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS ARE CENTRAL ACTORS IN THE SCRUTINY AND implementation of European Union (EU) legislation. Member state legislatures provide a channel for incorporating public opinion into the governance of the Union. Their importance has become more evident during the 1990s as debate has focused on the democratic deficit and deparliamentarization of European governance.National parliaments are involved in EU decision-making in three ways: they 1) participate in national policy formulation on Union legislation; 2) monitor the behaviour of member state representatives in the Council of Ministers and the European Council; and 3) have functions specifically regulated in the treaties, such as ratification of treaty amendments and implementation of directives. The third function differs from the first two as the treaties impose rights and duties on the national parliaments, whereas there is no EU law on national policy formulation on Union legislation or on the scrutiny of ministers. During the 1996-97 Intergovernmental Conference (ICC) the member states saw no need for such European-level regulation. Thus it is up to each national parliament – within the limits set by member state constitutions and other constraints – to decide how it deals with the challenges brought by EU membership.

Regional identity and support for integration: An EU-wide comparison of parochialists, inclusive regionalist, and pseudo-exclusivists

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Brigevich
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Multilevel Analysis ◽  
Regional Identity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Regionalism ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Impact

The rise of “new regionalism” is one of the most salient features of the post-Cold War international order. Despite the resurgence of regionalism in Europe, little consensus exists on how regional identity impacts public opinion toward the European Union. To remedy this problem, this study examines the impact of three types of individual-level regional identity on support for integration: parochialism (exclusive regionalism), inclusive regionalism, and pseudo-exclusive regionalism. Contrary to scholarly expectations, the multilevel analysis reveals that inclusive regionalists are as equally Eurosceptic as parochial regionalists. In general, regional identity depresses support for integration unless it is expressly combined with a supranational identity. This finding holds true even in minority nations, where respondents are, on the whole, less Euro-friendly.

Aspects Regarding the Structure of the Financial Audit Market in the European Union from Fees Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (164) ◽  
pp. 724-742
Author(s):  
Ovidiu Constantin Bunget ◽  
Alin-Constantin Dumitrescu ◽  
Rodica Gabriela Blidisel ◽  
Oana Alina Bogdan ◽  
Valentin Burca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Audit Market ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Financial Audit ◽  
The One ◽  
Non Audit Services

The audit market, developed out of the need to strengthen the credibility and the quality of financial reporting, has led since the 1980s to a concentration around large audit firms, the dominance effect being marked on the one hand by the auditor’s increasing reputation and notoriety, and on the other hand by the client’s association with a reputed auditor, which contributes to improving the company’s image on the market. In this context, a major issue is represented by the level of the fees charged, as they represent key elements that may affect the auditor’s independence. Moreover, a sensitive aspect is the relationship between the fee charged for financial audit services and the one for non-audit services and the compensation practices between them. The European Commission wants to facilitate competition in an overly concentrated market and also provide the opportunity for small and medium-sized audit firms to become active players in the large corporate audit market through joint audit, in which at least one of the audit firms is not part of the Big4 group. The mandatory audit firm rotation and the limitation on the non-audit services provided are the main aspects of the recent audit reform that directly influences the fee level. The main purpose of this study is to analyse whether there is a pattern of audit costs at the community level. In this context, this paper aims to assess the uniformity of audit costs, namely to determine the structure of the audit market in the European Union. The research involves data set comparison methods, by analysing a sample of 2,896 firms listed on the stock exchange in 35 different states over the period 2013-2021.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document