IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pkk/sfyr13/77-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

New Ways for Companies to Develop Effective Lobbying Strategies in the European Parliament A case study in the field of the Common Agricultural Policy

In: Proceedings of FIKUSZ '13

Author

Listed:
  • Attila Kovács

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Attila Kovács, 2013. "New Ways for Companies to Develop Effective Lobbying Strategies in the European Parliament A case study in the field of the Common Agricultural Policy," Proceedings of FIKUSZ '13, in: Pál Michelberger (ed.),Proceedings of FIKUSZ '13, pages 77-96, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:pkk:sfyr13:77-96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/sites/default/files/07_Kovacs_Attila.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amie Kreppel, 1999. "What Affects the European Parliament’s Legislative Influence? An Analysis of the Success of EP Amendments," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 521-537, September.
    2. Tsebelis, George & Garrett, Geoffrey, 2001. "The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 357-390, April.
    3. Heike Klüver, 2009. "Measuring Interest Group Influence Using Quantitative Text Analysis," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 535-549, December.
    4. Torsten J. Selck & Bernard Steunenberg, 2004. "Between Power and Luck," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 25-46, March.
    5. Christophe Crombez & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2011. "Political Institutions and Public Policy: The Co-Decision Procedure in the European Union and the Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy," LICOS Discussion Papers 28611, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    6. Tsebelis, George & Jensen, Christian B. & Kalandrakis, Anastassios & Kreppel, Amie, 2001. "Legislative Procedures in the European Union: An Empirical Analysis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 573-599, October.
    7. Rasmussen, Anne, 2003. "The Role of the European Commission in Co-decision A strategic facilitator operating in a situation of structural disadvantage," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 7, October.
    8. Tsebelis, George, 1996. "More on the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: Response to Moser," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 90(4), pages 839-844, December.
    9. Moser, Peter, 1996. "The European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: What Are the Conditions? A Critique of Tsebelis (1994)," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 90(4), pages 834-838, December.
    10. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Frans Stokman & Robert Thomson, 2004. "Winners and Losers in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-23, March.
    4. Diego Varela, 2009. "Just a Lobbyist?," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 7-34, March.
    5. Christophe Crombez & Bernard Steunenberg & Richard Corbett, 2000. "Understanding the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(3), pages 363-381, October.
    6. Christiane Kasack, 2004. "The Legislative Impact of the European Parliament Under the Revised Co-Decision Procedure," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(2), pages 241-260, June.
    7. Thomas König & Mirja Pöter, 2001. "Examining the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 329-351, October.
    8. Torsten J. Selck & Bernard Steunenberg, 2004. "Between Power and Luck," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 25-46, March.
    9. Holger Döring, 2007. "The Composition of the College of Commissioners," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(2), pages 207-228, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Christophe Crombez & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2011. "Political Institutions and Public Policy: The Co-Decision Procedure in the European Union and the Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy," LICOS Discussion Papers 28611, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    12. Mikko Mattila & Jan-Erik Lane, 2001. "Why Unanimity in the Council?," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(1), pages 31-52, February.
    13. Bjørn Høyland & Vibeke Wøien Hansen, 2014. "Issue-specific policy-positions and voting in the Council," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 59-81, March.
    14. Geoffrey Garrett & George Tsebelis, 1999. "Why Resist the Temptation to Apply Power Indices to the European Union?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 291-308, July.
    15. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    16. Dirk Junge & Thomas König, 2007. "What's Wrong With Eu Spatial Analysis?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 465-487, October.
    17. Attila Kovács, 2014. "Political Networks in the European Parliament: Network Analysis of the 2013 Common Agricultural Policy Reform," Proceedings of FIKUSZ '14, in: Pál Michelberger (ed.),Proceedings of FIKUSZ '14, pages 107-122, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    18. Charlotte Burns & Neil Carter, 2010. "Is Co‐decision Good for the Environment? An Analysis of the European Parliament's Green Credentials," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 123-142, February.
    19. Kovacs, Attila, 2014. "The Role Of The European Parliament In The Legislation Of The Common Agricultural Policy," 142nd Seminar, May 29-30, 2014, Budapest, Hungary 169396, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing
    • M37 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Advertising

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pkk:sfyr13:77-96. 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: Alexandra Vécsey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.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.