IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/erp/arenax/p0294.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

National parliaments and European integration

Author

Listed:
  • Tapio Raunio

Abstract

The role of national legislatures in European integration first received serious attention in the mid-1990s in connection with debates on the EU’s democratic deficit. After that, both academics and politicians have entered a lively debate on how to best involve national parliaments in EU affairs. The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the state of the research on the role of national parliaments in European integration and to suggest avenues for further research. The main argument is that through focusing almost exclusively on scrutiny of European affairs, the literature has failed to acknowledge the multiple constraints that impact on legislatures. There is a demand for more theory-driven analyses of actual behaviour that extend beyond describing formal procedures and organizational choices. Future research should also pay more attention to the strategies of political parties and to the incentives of individual MPs to become involved in European affairs.

Suggested Citation

  • Tapio Raunio, 2009. "National parliaments and European integration," ARENA Working Papers 9, ARENA.
    • Handle: RePEc:erp:arenax:p0294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sv.uio.no/arena/english/research/publications/arena-publications/workingpapers/working-papers2009/WP02_09.xml
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Katrin Auel & Oliver Höing, 2014. "Parliaments in the Euro Crisis: Can the Losers of Integration Still Fight Back?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(6), pages 1184-1193, November.
    2. Anna-Lena Högenauer, 2019. "The Politicisation of the European Central Bank and the Bundestag," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 291-302.
    3. Jorge Núñez Ferrer & Jacques Le Cacheux & Giacomo Benedetto & Mathieu Saunier & Fabien Candau & Claude Emonnot & Florence Lachet-Touya & Jorgen Mortensen & Aymeric Potteau & Igor Taranic, 2016. "Study on the potential and limitations of reforming the financing of the EU budget [Perspectives et limites pour réformer le financement du budget de l’UE]," Working Papers hal-01848029, HAL.
    4. Roman Senninger, 2017. "Issue expansion and selective scrutiny – how opposition parties used parliamentary questions about the European Union in the national arena from 1973 to 2013," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 283-306, June.
    5. Maatsch, Aleksandra, 2017. "Effectiveness of the European semester: Explaining domestic consent and contestation," MPIfG Discussion Paper 17/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    6. Niels Gheyle, 2019. "Conceptualizing the Parliamentarization and Politicization of European Policies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 227-236.
    7. 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.
    8. Ivana Skazlic, 2021. "Routine or Rare Activity? A Quantitative Assessment of Parliamentary Scrutiny in the European Semester," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 112-123.
    9. Nora Dörrenbächer & Ellen Mastenbroek & Dimiter D. Toshkov, 2015. "National Parliaments and Transposition of EU Law: A Matter of Coalition Conflict?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 1010-1026, September.
    10. Isabelle Guinaudeau & Olivier Costa, 2022. "Issue Politicization in the European Parliament. An Analysis of Parliamentary Questions for Oral Answer (2004–19)," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 507-525, May.
    11. Martin Kuta & Jan Němec, 2015. "The Character of Membership as a Determinant of Different Performance? An Exploratory Analysis of European Affairs Committees of the Czech Parliament [Charakter členství jako determinant odlišného ," Současná Evropa, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(1), pages 67-84.
    12. Rik de Ruiter, 2013. "Full disclosure? The Open Method of Coordination, parliamentary debates and media coverage," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 95-114, March.
    13. Jorge Núñez Ferrer & Jacques Le Cacheux & Giacomo Benedetto & Mathieu Saunier & Fabien Candau & Claude Emonnot & Florence Lachet-Touya & Jorgen Mortensen & Aymeric Potteau & Igor Taranic, 2016. "Study on the potential and limitations of reforming the financing of the EU budget
      [Perspectives et limites pour réformer le financement du budget de l’UE]      ," Working Papers hal-01848029, HAL.
    14. Thomas Winzen, 2013. "European integration and national parliamentary oversight institutions," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(2), pages 297-323, June.
    15. Thomas Malang, 2019. "Why national parliamentarians join international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 407-430, September.
    16. Christian Rauh, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 116-138, March.
    17. Thomas Winzen & Rik de Ruiter & Jofre Rocabert, 2018. "Is parliamentary attention to the EU strongest when it is needed the most? National parliaments and the selective debate of EU policies," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 481-501, September.
    18. Anna-Lena Högenauer, 2021. "Scrutiny or Complacency? Banking Union in the Bundestag and the Assemblée Nationale," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 219-229.
    19. Carlos Closa & Aleksandra Maatsch, 2014. "In a Spirit of Solidarity? Justifying the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) in National Parliamentary Debates," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 826-842, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    nationality; political science;

    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:erp:arenax:p0294. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sindre Eikrem Hervig (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.arena.uio.no/ .

    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.