IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v26y2006i03p279-299_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taking Actors' Preferences and the Institutional Setting Seriously: the EU Common Fisheries Policy

Author

Listed:
  • DA CONCEIÇÃO-HELDT, EUGÉNIA

Abstract

The recent bifurcation of European studies into state-centric and new institutionalist camps has resulted in a sterile theoretical debate that says little about an empirical world where bargaining outcomes cover both member states' preferences and the institutional setting. This article is an attempt to move beyond the theoretical debate. It juxtaposes a conceptual framework for analyzing EU negotiations with an analysis of the bargaining process on the settlement of the European Union's Common Fisheries Policy. The conceptual framework will identify a set of variables that can explain the bargaining outcome: preferences of national government representatives, preferences of the European Commission, and the institutional setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Da Conceiã‡Ãƒo-Heldt, Eugã‰Nia, 2006. "Taking Actors' Preferences and the Institutional Setting Seriously: the EU Common Fisheries Policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 279-299, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:26:y:2006:i:03:p:279-299_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X06000572/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:26:y:2006:i:03:p:279-299_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.