IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v10y2009i4p482-506.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Domestic Politics and European Treaty Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Finke

    (University of Heidelberg, Germany, daniel.finke@uni-heidelberg.de)

Abstract

This article analyses the extent to which governmental positions on European integration originate from domestic politics. In contrast to previous studies, I apply a longitudinal research design that allows for an empirical analysis of the domestic dynamics that govern position formation. I use advanced statistical measurement techniques to compare national positions across time. Member states’ economic characteristics define a corridor for governmental positions. However, the political dynamics of the domestic arena determine the final position governments adopt at any particular Intergovernmental Conference (IGC). In particular, when formulating the national position, the short-term trend in public opinion limits governmental discretion. This effect is especially strong if the government announced ratification by referendum and in countries with a system of strong parliamentary scrutiny.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Finke, 2009. "Domestic Politics and European Treaty Reform," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 482-506, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:10:y:2009:i:4:p:482-506
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116509346385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116509346385
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116509346385?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. Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, 2004. "Explaining Government Preferences for Institutional Change in EU Foreign and Security Policy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 137-174, February.
    2. Andreas Follesdal & Simon Hix, 2006. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 533-562, September.
    3. Aspinwall, Mark, 2007. "Government Preferences on European Integration: An Empirical Test of Five Theories," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 89-114, January.
    4. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    5. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:44:y:2006:i::p:533-562 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Martin, Lanny W. & Vanberg, Georg, 2005. "Coalition Policymaking and Legislative Review," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 93-106, February.
    7. Lupia,Arthur & McCubbins,Mathew D., 1998. "The Democratic Dilemma," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521585934, Enero.
    8. Hug, Simon & König, Thomas, 2002. "In View of Ratification: Governmental Preferences and Domestic Constraints at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(2), pages 447-476, April.
    9. Michael A. Bailey, 2007. "Comparable Preference Estimates across Time and Institutions for the Court, Congress, and Presidency," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 433-448, July.
    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. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2013. "Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority," TranState Working Papers 171, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    2. Grégoire Rota Graziosi, 2009. "On the Strategic Use of Representative Democracy in International Agreements," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 11(2), pages 281-296, April.
    3. Nicholas Clark & Timothy Hellwig, 2012. "Information effects and mass support for EU policy control," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 535-557, December.
    4. Thomas König & Bernd Luig, 2014. "Ministerial gatekeeping and parliamentary involvement in the implementation process of EU directives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 501-519, September.
    5. Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2015. "Forecasting the decisions of the US Supreme Court: lessons from the ‘affordable care act’ judgment," Journal of Prediction Markets, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 9(1), pages 64-78.
    6. Thomas Winzen, 2013. "European integration and national parliamentary oversight institutions," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(2), pages 297-323, June.
    7. Daniel Lee, 2014. "Third-party threat and the dimensionality of major-party roll call voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 515-531, June.
    8. Christopher Brough & Li‐Yin Liu & Yao‐Yuan Yeh, 2024. "Judicial reasoning, individual cultural types, and support for COVID‐19 vaccine mandates," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 41(3), pages 448-470, May.
    9. Michael A. Bailey & Anton Strezhnev & Erik Voeten, 2017. "Estimating Dynamic State Preferences from United Nations Voting Data," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(2), pages 430-456, February.
    10. Richard F. Potthoff, 2018. "Estimating Ideal Points from Roll-Call Data: Explore Principal Components Analysis, Especially for More Than One Dimension?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, January.
    11. Lucia Dalla Pellegrina & Nuno Garoupa & Marian Gili, 2020. "Estimating Judicial Ideal Points in Bi‐Dimensional Courts: Evidence from Catalonia," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 383-415, June.
    12. Spruk, Rok & Kovac, Mitja, 2019. "Replicating and extending Martin-Quinn scores," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    13. Mindock, Maxwell R. & Waddell, Glen R., 2019. "Vote Influence in Group Decision-Making: The Changing Role of Justices' Peers on the Supreme Court," IZA Discussion Papers 12317, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Joshua B. Fischman, 2015. "Do the Justices Vote Like Policy Makers? Evidence from Scaling the Supreme Court with Interest Groups," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 269-293.
    15. Achim Kemmerling, 2008. "When `No' Means `Yes, But'," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(3), pages 283-309, August.
    16. Patrick Bernhagen & Hermann Schmitt, 2014. "Deliberation, political knowledge and vote choice: Results from an experiment with second-order elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 352-371, September.
    17. Niblett, Anthony & Yoon, Albert H., 2015. "Judicial disharmony: A study of dissent," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 60-71.
    18. Joshua B. Fischman, 2011. "Estimating Preferences of Circuit Judges: A Model of Consensus Voting," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 781-809.
    19. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    20. Lisanne de Blok & Max Heermann & Julian Schuessler & Dirk Leuffen & Catherine E. de Vries, 2024. "All on board? The role of institutional design for public support for differentiated integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 593-604, September.

    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:eeupol:v:10:y:2009:i:4:p:482-506. 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.