IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/206707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Going full circle: the need for procedural perspectives on EU responsiveness

Author

Listed:
  • de Wilde, Pieter
  • Rauh, Christian

Abstract

Research on policy responsiveness of the European Union has adopted the systemic model from national contexts. This focusses on the static congruence or the dynamic adaptation of aggregated policy output and similarly aggregated public opinion. Approaches in this vein provide relevant insights and uncover a surprising degree of EU responsiveness. Yet, this debate contribution argues that they only insufficiently capture indirect accountability chains and the emerging challenges of public EU politicization and mediatization. We establish the need for procedural perspectives that addresses how the different EU institutions perceive and digest public opinion and subsequently influence it through communication. To further this research agenda, we sketch the contours of a procedural model by highlighting possible variation at the input, throughput and output stages. Going full circle, we suggest, allows us to better understand the responses to public opinion and their wider implications for the societal acceptance of the unfinished supranational polity.

Suggested Citation

  • de Wilde, Pieter & Rauh, Christian, 2019. "Going full circle: the need for procedural perspectives on EU responsiveness," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(11), pages 1737-1748.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:206707
    DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2019.1668043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/206707/1/Full-text-article-De-Wilde-et-al-Going-full-circle.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13501763.2019.1668043?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. Christopher J. Williams & Martijn Schoonvelde, 2018. "It Takes Three: How Mass Media Coverage Conditions Public Responsiveness to Policy Outputs in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1627-1636, November.
    2. Matthias Ecker-Ehrhardt, 2018. "Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: Why international organizations centralized public communication," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 519-546, December.
    3. Giandomenico Majone, 2000. "The Credibility Crisis of Community Regulation," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 273-302, June.
    4. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Christopher Wratil, 2019. "Territorial Representation and the Opinion–Policy Linkage: Evidence from the European Union," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(1), pages 197-211, January.
    6. Iskander De Bruycker, 2017. "Politicization and the public interest: When do the elites in Brussels address public interests in EU policy debates?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(4), pages 603-619, December.
    7. Reinout A van der Veer & Markus Haverland, 2018. "Bread and butter or bread and circuses? Politicisation and the European Commission in the European Semester," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 524-545, September.
    8. Dimiter Toshkov, 2011. "Public opinion and policy output in the European Union: A lost relationship," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 169-191, June.
    9. Christopher Wratil, 2018. "Modes of government responsiveness in the European Union: Evidence from Council negotiation positions," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(1), pages 52-74, March.
    10. Höpner, Martin & Jurczyk, Bojan, 2015. "How the eurobarometer blurs the Line between research and propaganda," MPIfG Discussion Paper 15/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Mark N. Franklin & Christopher Wlezien, 1997. "The Responsive Public," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(3), pages 347-363, July.
    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. Reinout Arthur van der Veer, 2022. "Walking the Tightrope: Politicization and the Commission's Enforcement of the SGP," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 81-100, January.
    2. David Coen & Alexander Katsaitis, 2021. "Lobbying Brexit Negotiations: Who Lobbies Michel Barnier?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 37-47.

    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. Guri Rosén, 2019. "Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 266-278.
    2. Rauh, Christian, 2019. "EU politicization and policy initiatives of the European Commission: the case of consumer policy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 344-365.
    3. Liesbet Hooghe & Tobias Lenz & Gary Marks, 2019. "Contested world order: The delegitimation of international governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 731-743, December.
    4. Rauh, Christian, 2022. "Clear messages to the European public? The language of European Commission press releases 1985–2020," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-19.
    5. Marta Migliorati, 2020. "The Post‐agencification Stage between Reforms and Crises. A Comparative Assessment of EU agencies' Budgetary Development," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1393-1412, November.
    6. Brian Burgoon & Theresa Kuhn & Francesco Nicoli & Frank Vandenbroucke, 2022. "Unemployment risk-sharing in the EU: How policy design influences citizen support for European unemployment policy," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 282-308, June.
    7. Jonas Tallberg & Michael Zürn, 2019. "The legitimacy and legitimation of international organizations: introduction and framework," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 581-606, December.
    8. Michele Scotto di Vettimo, 2022. "Measuring public support for European integration using a Bayesian item response theory model," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 171-191, June.
    9. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    10. Marco Manacorda & Guido Tabellini & Andrea Tesei, 2022. "Mobile Internet and the Rise of Political Tribalism in Europe," Working Papers 941, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    11. Soetkin Verhaegen & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2014. "European Identity and Support for European Integration: A Matter of Perceived Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 295-314, May.
    12. Rauh, Christian, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 116-138.
    13. Katjana Gattermann & Claes H De Vreese, 2017. "The role of candidate evaluations in the 2014 European Parliament elections: Towards the personalization of voting behaviour?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 447-468, September.
    14. Christopher Gandrud & Mark Hallerberg, 2015. "Does Banking Union Worsen the EU's Democratic Deficit? The Need for Greater Supervisory Data Transparency," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 769-785, July.
    15. Braun, Daniela & Grande, Edgar, 2021. "Politicizing Europe in Elections to the European Parliament (1994–2019): The Crucial Role of Mainstream Parties," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(5), pages 1124-1141.
    16. Ole Danielsen & Kutsal Yesilkagit, 2014. "The Effects of European Regulatory Networks on the Bureaucratic Autonomy of National Regulatory Authorities," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 353-371, September.
    17. Esther Ademmer & Anna Leupold & Tobias Stöhr, 2019. "Much ado about nothing? The (non-) politicisation of the European Union in social media debates on migration," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(2), pages 305-327, June.
    18. Ronja Sczepanski, 2023. "European by action: How voting reshapes nested identities," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(4), pages 751-770, December.
    19. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    20. V. Sidenko, 2017. "The crisis processes in the EU development: origins and prospects," Economy and Forecasting, Valeriy Heyets, issue 1, pages 7-30.

    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:zbw:espost:206707. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.