scholarly journals Are popular and powerful committees more representative? Evidence from the ninth European Parliament

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 205316802091445
Author(s):  
Steffen Hurka ◽  
Constantin Kaplaner

The standing committees of the European Parliament perform crucial policy-making functions and, accordingly, the question of how they are composed assumes great relevance. Unlike previous studies, which primarily looked at committee assignments from the perspective of individual MEPs, we assess the representativeness of entire committees by comparing their preference distributions with those we find in the plenary on the left/right and pro/anti EU dimension. For our analysis, we combine new data on committee memberships in the ninth European Parliament with data on policy preferences of national parties from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey. In order to assess committee representativeness, we calculate the extent to which the preference distributions of committees and the plenary overlap. We show that committee representativeness is a function of committee popularity and power. Committee popularity provides party groups with a larger pool of applicants to choose from and since popular committees are often also quite large, the formation of representative committees is facilitated. Moreover, the party groups of the European Parliament have stronger incentives to form balanced committee contingents for powerful committees, resulting in higher committee representativeness. However, this latter finding is qualified by two outliers and we only find the hypothesized relationship to hold on the pro/anti EU dimension.

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-54
Author(s):  
Duncan McDonnell ◽  
Annika Werner

This chapter first discusses in depth the book’s core concept of “radical right populist”, before examining the history of co-operation (and mostly non-cooperation) between radical right populists in the European Parliament. It sets out the main theories, in particular policy congruence, which have been used to explain why parties form groups in the European Parliament. It then looks at how these theories might apply to radical right populist parties. Finally, the chapter presents the data and methods used in the study. These include Chapel Hill Expert Survey data, EP group finance and voting behaviour data, as well as interviews conducted with representatives and officials from a wide range of radical right populist parties and their allies.


2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 1009-1025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin R. Kuehnhanss ◽  
Zuzana Murdoch ◽  
Benny Geys ◽  
Bruno Heyndels

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Rosset ◽  
Christian Stecker

AbstractThis study analyses congruence across various issues in 16 European democracies. Making use of public opinion and expert survey data, our analyses show that congruence between the policy preferences of citizens and the stances of governments is much more complex than what is revealed by studies focusing on ideology solely. Size and directions of incongruence are larger and more systematic on specific issues than on the left–right scale. On redistribution, citizens are more to the left than their governments, while popular support for European integration is systematically lower among citizens than among their representatives. Moreover, the relatively poor are particularly underrepresented on redistribution, while the preferences of the relatively lower educated are not well reflected in government preferences in relation to European integration. We interpret these results as being partly linked to a representation gap with privileged social groups enjoying higher levels of congruence with their government.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Cambardella ◽  
Brian D. Fath ◽  
Andrea Werdenigg ◽  
Christian Gulas ◽  
Harald Katzmair

AbstractCultural theory (CT) provides a framework for understanding how social dimensions shape cultural bias and social relations of individuals, including values, view of the natural world, policy preferences, and risk perceptions. The five resulting cultural solidarities are each associated with a “myth of nature”—a concept of nature that aligns with the worldview of each solidarity. When applied to the problem of climate protection policy making, the relationships and beliefs outlined by CT can shed light on how members of the different cultural solidarities perceive their relationship to climate change and associated risk. This can be used to deduce what climate change management policies may be preferred or opposed by each group. The aim of this paper is to provide a review of how CT has been used in surveys of the social aspects of climate change policy making, to assess the construct validity of these studies, and to identify ways for climate change protection policies to leverage the views of each of the cultural solidarities to develop clumsy solutions: policies that incorporate strengths from each of the cultural solidarities’ perspectives. Surveys that include measures of at least fatalism, hierarchism, individualism, and egalitarianism and their associated myths of nature as well as measures of climate change risk perceptions and policy preferences have the highest translation and predictive validity. These studies will be useful in helping environmental managers find clumsy solutions and develop resilient policy according to C.S. Holling’s adaptive cycle.


Author(s):  
Carolyn Moser

This chapter takes a look at political accountability for EU peacebuilding activities carried out under the CSDP. It starts with some reflections on parliamentary scrutiny in the domaine réservé, a policy field where parliamentary activity has traditionally been low, but becomes increasingly salient given the growing scope and impact of international policy-making. The chapter then develops a discussion of the fairly limited oversight role of national parliaments regarding EU security and defence. General patterns of parliamentary involvement and particular features of scrutiny related to EU peacebuilding activities are assessed. Afterwards, a thorough analysis of law and practice highlights the enhanced significance of the European Parliament as political forum in the CFSP/CSDP context through a range of formal and informal vehicles which, however, only marginally contribute to parliamentary scrutiny of civilian missions. Lastly, this chapter ascertains the hurdles to interparliamentary cooperation and, in its final section, underscores the significance of effective supranational parliamentary scrutiny of peacebuilding activities in the edifice of Europeanized intergovernmentalism.


2022 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 102420
Author(s):  
Seth Jolly ◽  
Ryan Bakker ◽  
Liesbet Hooghe ◽  
Gary Marks ◽  
Jonathan Polk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document