Why do international institutions promote emotional norms? In order to answer this question, the article, first, maps the legitimizing arguments put forward by the Members of the European... Show moreWhy do international institutions promote emotional norms? In order to answer this question, the article, first, maps the legitimizing arguments put forward by the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in promoting an emotionally loaded norm vis-à-vis Turkey, i.e., the recognition of the Armenian genocide. Second, the paper explores the reasons behind the promotion of this emotional norm by the European Parliament (EP) as justified by the MEPs. The article theoretically draws on the IR literature on emotions, and empirically, it relies on the data generated from the interventions by the MEPs at the plenary on the centenary of the Armenian genocide on 15 April 2015. Through claims analysis, it is demonstrated that the condemnation of genocide is a shared norm within the EP, which transcends national and ideological differences. Consequently, the MEPs aspire to render it an essential constitutive element of the emotional community at the EU level. Show less
The EP plays a crucial role in defining the power of implementing agencies in the EU. In this article, we move beyond the 'unitary actor' approach to the EP and examine the influence of intra... Show moreThe EP plays a crucial role in defining the power of implementing agencies in the EU. In this article, we move beyond the 'unitary actor' approach to the EP and examine the influence of intra-parliamentary dynamics on the delegation patterns in the Union. We maintain that party polarization as well as the level of policy salience shape delegation patterns in the EU. Reflecting the differences between political elites, increasing party polarization motivates the EP to curtail the prospect of bureaucratic drift when delegating power. Lacking effective control mechanisms over the supranational agency, the EP hinders the extent of delegated power if the Commission oversees the policy. In contrast to the extant literature, we do not find policy salience to be influential for the EP's delegation decisions. We test these conjunctions using data from the Euromanifesto project and the dataset on delegation dynamic in the Union. Show less
Drawing on a new dataset the article investigates a case study of the population of interest representatives lobbying the European Parliament. It examines the role of economic and cultural... Show moreDrawing on a new dataset the article investigates a case study of the population of interest representatives lobbying the European Parliament. It examines the role of economic and cultural resources to account for the representation of organised interests from different EU member states. It adds to the existing literature on the density of organised interests by showing that in addition to economic resources, cultural capital plays a significant role in stimulating the activity of organised interests. Whether countries have a high number of organised interests in the parliament’s interest group community depends on both whether they are economically prosperous and how large a share of their citizens participate in associational life. In addition, the findings demonstrate how the ranking of countries in the population of organised interests lobbying the parliament depends on the benchmark used to measure density. Show less
Wensink, W.; Warmenhoven, B.; Haasnoot, R.; Wesselink, R.; Ginkel, B. van; Wittendorp, S.; ... ; Rijken, T. 2017
This edited Working Paper addresses three fundamental questions concerning EU External Action after the Lisbon Treaty: the institutional position and allegiance of the newly-established European... Show moreThis edited Working Paper addresses three fundamental questions concerning EU External Action after the Lisbon Treaty: the institutional position and allegiance of the newly-established European External Action Service, the future of the ‘left out’ Directorate-General for Trade and the Common Commercial Policy, and the protection of EU citizens abroad. These enquires are prompted by both an institutional innovation – the launch of the EEAS – as well as by a number of substantive changes to the legal framework of EU External Action. An ambitious agenda has been inserted into the primary law, around which the Union institutions and Member States are to rally. It is in turn the raison d’être of the EEAS to foster the ensuing need for consistency, as well as to provide impetus to the EU’s external action. Structurally, it is in itself a sui generis institution composed of officials from the Commission, the Council and the Member States. This raises a number of fundamental questions that go well beyond those concerning which person is going to be the new EU ambassador in Washington or Beijing. Above all, can these substantive and institutional innovations live up to the grand ambitions of the peculiar entity that is the EU? What old problems does it purport to solve, and what are the new problems it is likely to create? Essentially, to which extent does bundling the external objectives in the Treaties as well as pooling together the institutional resources in Brussels and the delegations actually render the EU an ‘ever-closer’ actor in the world? Show less
