The Watchdogs of Subsidiarity: National Parliaments and the Logic of Arguing in the EU*

Cooper, Ian

doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00623.x

Cited by 100 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The introduction of the 'Open Method of Coordination' (Benz, 2007;de Ruiter, 2010) and recent reforms through treaty change have opened up new areas of research (e.g. Cooper, 2006;Cooper, 2012;Raunio, 2007;Rothenberger and Vogt, 2007;Kiiver, 2011;Kiiver, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Parliaments in the post-Lisbon European Union: Bureaucratization rather than Democratization?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Parliaments in the post-Lisbon European Union: Bureaucratization rather than Democratization?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, widening -the accession of new countries to the EU -and changes in EU integration largely fuel the debate. Thus, e.g., several recent papers (Cooper 2006;Cygan 2004;Fraga 2005;Raunio 2005b) have examined the potential impact of the draft Constitution on the position of national parliaments. Similarly, the increasing importance of soft law and policy-making mechanisms such as OMC have been identified as important influences on national parliaments (Duina and Raunio 2007).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Europeanisation of national political systems: Parliaments and executives

Goetz¹,

Meyer‐Sahling²

2008

Living Rev. Euro. Gov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the by now extensive literature on the Europeanisation of the political systems of the EU-15, with an emphasis on parliaments and executives (i.e., governments and ministerial administrations). The Living Review highlights apparently contradictory effects of integration: de-parlamentarisation vs. re-parlamentarisation; bureaucratisation vs. politicisation; and centralisation vs. diffusion. These diverging assessments of the effects of integration do, in part, reflect diversity in the EU-15; in part, they are, however, also a result of differences in the specification of variables, research designs and theoretical approaches. Work that inquires into patterns of Europeanisation -across institutional domains, countries, regions and time -and which seeks to tackle the 'methodological nationalism' of the Europeanisation literature promises a clearer picture of the institutional consequences of European integration than we possess at present.This review is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Austria License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/at/

show abstract

“…In view of the findings from comparative research on jurisprudence on competence issues in federal states (Berman 1994;Thorlakson 2006) as well as from research on the European Court of Justice (de Búrca 1998; Estella de Noriega 2002), which reveals mixed results as to the role of courts in reinforcing subsidiarity, political scientists rely more on participation of lower level institutions. Therefore, the procedure of subsidiarity control by national parliaments, invented during the elaboration of the Constitutional Treaty, is mostly supported although scholars are well aware of the limits of this device (Cooper 2006).…”

Section: Subsidiarity Principle and Constitutional Delimitation Of Pomentioning

confidence: 99%

The EU’s competences: The 'vertical' perspective on the multilevel system

Benz¹,

Zimmer²

2008

Living Rev. Euro. Gov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Living Review deals with the division of competences between the EU and its member states in a multilevel political system. The article summarises research on the relations between the EU and the national and sub-national levels of the member states. It provides an overview on normative and theoretical concepts and empirical research. From the outset, European integration was about the transfer of powers from the national to the European level, which evolved as explicit bargaining among governments or as an incremental drift. This process was reframed with the competence issue entering the agenda of constitutional policy. It now concerns the shape of the European multilevel polity as a whole, in particular the way in which powers are allocated, delimited and linked between the different levels.The article is structured as follows: First of all, normative theories of a European federation are discussed. Section 2 deals with different concepts of federalism and presents approaches of the economic theory of federalism in the context of the European polity. The normative considerations conclude with a discussion of the subsidiarity principle and the constitutional allocation of competences in the European Treaties. Section 3 covers the empirical issue of how to explain the actual allocation of competences (scope and type) between levels. Integration theories are presented here only in so far as they explain the transfer of competence from the national to the European level or the limits of this centralistic dynamics.Normative and empirical theories indeed provide some general guidelines and conclusions on the allocation of competences in the EU, but they both contradict the assumption of a separation of competences. The article therefore concludes that politics and policy-making This review is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Austria License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/at/ 2 Arthur Benz and Christina Zimmer in the EU have to be regarded as multilevel governance (Section 4). The main theoretical approaches and results from empirical research on European multilevel governance are presented before the article concludes with recommendations for further discussion and research in the field (Section 5). Following Fritz Scharpf, it is recommended that research on the vertical allocation of competences and the application of shared competences in the European multilevel governance should stop searching for holistic approaches (grand theory) explaining unique features of the European political system; instead, research will best succeed when relying on a variety of simpler theories and models to describe European governance modes.Living Reviews in European Governance http://www.livingreviews.org /lreg-2008-3 How to cite this article Owing to the fact that a Living Reviews article can evolve over time, we recommend to cite the article as follows:Arthur Benz and Christina Zimmer, "The EU's competences: The 'vertical' perspective on the multilevel sy...

show abstract

The Watchdogs of Subsidiarity: National Parliaments and the Logic of Arguing in the EU*

Cited by 100 publications

References 13 publications

National Parliaments in the post-Lisbon European Union: Bureaucratization rather than Democratization?

National Parliaments in the post-Lisbon European Union: Bureaucratization rather than Democratization?

The Europeanisation of national political systems: Parliaments and executives

The EU’s competences: The 'vertical' perspective on the multilevel system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About