IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v12y2000i2p155-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Commission's Executive Discretion, Information and Comitology

Author

Listed:
  • Fabio Franchino

Abstract

This article examines the determinants of the European Commission's executive discretion and the impact of comitology when policy authority is delegated by member states and the Parliament (i.e. principals) and all actors are uninformed about future contingencies. In such context, the Commission always prefers complete discretion while principals have to trade off the risk of agency losses against the need to give enough latitude to the Commission to deal with unexpected events. The analysis reveals a general trade-off in the institutional design of the European Union. On the one hand, the Commission can enjoy high and stable discretion, differing across legislative procedures, degree of uncertainty and of preference convergence, because of its monopoly proposal power. On the other hand, comitology procedures impose burdensome constraints on the Commission's autonomy and can be explained as a price for legislative intervention paid by the Commission. Finally, comitology procedures also increase the conflict across principals over the degree of discretion to grant to the Commission because the trade-off between ex ante discretion and ex post control can disappear with multiple principals.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabio Franchino, 2000. "The Commission's Executive Discretion, Information and Comitology," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 155-181, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:12:y:2000:i:2:p:155-181
    DOI: 10.1177/0951692800012002002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692800012002002
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951692800012002002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crombez, Christophe, 1996. "Legislative Procedures in the European Community," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 199-228, April.
    2. Lohmann, Susanne & O'Halloran, Sharyn, 1994. "Divided government and U.S. trade policy: theory and evidence," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 595-632, October.
    3. John Fitzmaurice, 1988. "An Analysis of the European Community's Co‐operation Procedure," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 389-400, June.
    4. Steunenberg, Bernard & Koboldt, Christian & Schmidtchen, Dieter, 1996. "Policymaking, comitology, and the balance of power in the European Union," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 329-344, September.
    5. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    6. Thomas Romer & Howard Rosenthal, 1978. "Political resource allocation, controlled agendas, and the status quo," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 27-43, December.
    7. Pollack, Mark A., 1997. "Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 99-134, January.
    8. Tsebelis, George, 1994. "The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 128-142, March.
    9. Steunenberg, Bernard, 1996. "Agent Discretion, Regulatory Policymaking, and Different Institutional Arrangements," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 86(3-4), pages 309-339, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2008. "The European Commission–Appointment, preferences, and institutional relations," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 21-41, October.
    2. Jens Blom-Hansen & Gijs Jan Brandsma, 2009. "The EU Comitology System: Intergovernmental Bargaining "and" Deliberative Supranationalism?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47, pages 719-740, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
    2. Fabio Franchino, 2000. "Control of the Commission's Executive Functions," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 63-92, February.
    3. Bernard Steunenberg & Dieter Schmidtchen & Christian Koboldt, 1999. "Strategic Power in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 339-366, July.
    4. Steunenberg, Bernard & Schmidtchen, Dieter, 2000. "The Comitology Game: European Policymaking with Parliamentary Involvement," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2000-05, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    5. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    6. Dieter Schmidtchen & Bernard Steunenberg, "undated". "European Policymaking: An Agency-Theoretic Analysis of the Issue," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2002-1-1040, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    7. Frank M. Häge, 2007. "Committee Decision-making in the Council of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 299-328, September.
    8. Christophe Crombez & Pieterjan Vangerven, 2014. "Procedural models of European Union politics: Contributions and suggestions for improvement," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 289-308, June.
    9. Thomas Konig & Jonathan Slapin, 2004. "Bringing Parliaments Back in," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 357-394, July.
    10. van Gruisen, Philippe & Crombez, Christophe, 2021. "The Commission and the Council Presidency in the European Union: Strategic interactions and legislative powers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Serra Boranbay-Akan & Thomas König & Moritz Osnabrügge, 2017. "The imperfect agenda-setter: Why do legislative proposals fail in the EU decision-making process?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 168-187, June.
    12. Christophe Crombez, 2000. "Institutional Reform and Co-Decision in the European Union," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 41-57, March.
    13. Crombez, Christophe & Groseclose, Timothy J. & Krehbiel, Keith, 2005. "Gatekeeping," Research Papers 1861r1, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    14. Mat McCubbins & Roger Noll & Barry Weingast, 2005. "The Political Economy of Law: Decision-Making by Judicial, Legislative, Executive and Administrative Agencies," Discussion Papers 04-035, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    15. Diego Varela, 2009. "Just a Lobbyist?," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 7-34, March.
    16. Thomas Doleys, 2009. "Incomplete Contracting, Commission Discretion and the Origins of EU Merger Control," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47, pages 483-506, June.
    17. Abdul Ghafar Noury & Gérard Roland, 2002. "More power to the European Parliament?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7760, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Thomas König & Daniel Finke, 2007. "Reforming the equilibrium? Veto players and policy change in the European constitution-building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 153-176, June.
    19. Trofimov, Ivan D., 2017. "Political economy of trade protection and liberalization: in search of agency-based and holistic framework of policy change," MPRA Paper 79504, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Thomas König & Mirja Pöter, 2001. "Examining the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 329-351, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:12:y:2000:i:2:p:155-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.