Upsetting the agenda: the clout of external focusing events in the European Council

Abstract

: Focusing events are sudden, striking large-scale occurrences that attract political attention. However, not all potential focusing events appear on the agenda. Combining data from multiple sources, this study conducts an analysis of the determinants of prioritisation of external focusing events in the European Council over a period longer than two decades. The results demonstrate that decisions regarding the placement of crises on the agenda are underscored by exogenous (humanitarian) and endogenous (geopolitical interest) considerations. Those events with a higher likelihood of agenda access include manmade incidents (versus natural disasters), events with larger death tolls and crises in the neighbourhood. Stronger competition between potential focusing events across time and space reduces the chances of access. The level of attention each event receives depends on purely strategic interests. Focusing events in neighbouring countries gain a higher portion of attention, as do occurrences in states having a larger trade exchange with the European Union.

Contrasting between Focusing, Real-world and Significant Events in Agenda-Setting: Introducing a New Typology of “Anchor” Events

“…Finally, Alexandrova [23] distinguishes between potential and effective focusing events, noting that not all potential focusing events are likely to enter the agenda-setting prominence as applied to the context of the European Council but only those that meet specific characteristics, such as being manmade incidents, involving large numbers of deaths, or crises that occur in EU's neighboring nations. Other types of potential focusing events largely appear to be constrained by competition [23], the notion which often characterizes the nature of agenda-setting [25].…”

“…the impact of major reforms on subsequent policy changes etc. Next, taking the approach Alexandrova [23] adopted in her study, further research should empirically establish what types of potential focusing events possess greater likelihood of gaining prominence at the agenda-setting stage of the policy process across different nations and contrasting the local versus national levels of government policymaking. Furthermore, as this paper suggests, further studies might analyze in greater detail the varying levels of categories of anchor events present in different jurisdictions.…”

“…First, with regard to the importance of focusing event theory to academia, these events appear to play a vital role in the policy cycle due to their influence in setting policy agenda [1,3,4,7,23]. As suggested earlier, first Kingdon [2][3][4] and then Birkland [1,7] set the ground for academic discourse on the role of focusing events in agenda-setting.…”

“…Furthermore, Birkland [1] clearly demonstrates the impact of 9/11 on US federal policymaking, which again raises implications to policy practitioners in terms of the magnitude such events might entail for agenda-setting in areas such as aviation safety. Next, as Alexandrova [23] finds, only specific types of potential focusing events appear to have strong agenda-setting influence in the EU context. Finally, the new typology of anchor events this paper presents should be quite useful.…”

“…As suggested earlier, first Kingdon [2][3][4] and then Birkland [1,7] set the ground for academic discourse on the role of focusing events in agenda-setting. Furthermore, in an analysis of the role of focusing events in setting policy agendas in the context of the European Council, Alexandrova [23] notes the importance of focusing events although only a limited number of potential focusing events appear on European policy agenda. In particular, she notes that the agenda-setting likelihood of focusing events increases if these are manmade incidents (as contrasted to natural disasters), events with greater numbers of fatalities caused, and crises that occur in (EU) neighboring nations.…”