IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sap/wpaper/wp114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reforming the EU budgetary procedure: is Codecision a step forward?

Author

Listed:
  • Luisa Giuriato

Abstract

Codecision is the main EU legislative procedure and the 2007 Reform Treaty draft has adopted it to improve the budgetary process. However, at close examination, codecision and the current budgetary process show an identical structure. Both are designed as non-cooperative alternating offers bargaining games between institutions and both, although in different measure, have gone through periods of interinstitutional deadlocks and conflicts, which can be ascribed to the insufficiency of the non-cooperative bargaining setup with respect to the task of providing for joint decision making by the Parliament and the Council of Ministers: in particular, the opportunistic interpretation of the Treaty provisions by the Parliament in the 1980s was one of the consequences of the strict bargaining design. The lacking elements for joint decision-making have been gradually inserted in the procedures by means of informal negotiation institutions, which are not only mechanisms for equilibrium selection but also corrective devices to strict non-cooperative procedures. In the change from the current budgetary procedure to the one designed in the Reform Treaty, the Parliament does not seem to gain a formal ‘dominant position’, whereas the Commission improves its scope for action and the Council consolidates its role.

Suggested Citation

  • Luisa Giuriato, 2008. "Reforming the EU budgetary procedure: is Codecision a step forward?," Working Papers 114, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Public Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sap:wpaper:wp114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.dipecodir.it/upload/wp/pdf/wp114.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2006. "The Inter-Institutional Distribution of Power in EU Codecision," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(1), pages 129-154, August.
    2. Alesina, Alberto & Hausmann, Ricardo & Hommes, Rudolf & Stein, Ernesto, 1999. "Budget institutions and fiscal performance in Latin America," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 253-273, August.
    3. Alberto Alesina & Roberto Perotti, 1994. "The Political Economy of Budget Deficits," NBER Working Papers 4637, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Henrik Enderlein & Johannes Lindner & Oscar Calvo-Gonzalez & Raymond Ritter, 2005. "The EU budget – how much scope for institutional reform?," Public Economics 0509005, EconWPA.
    5. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2003. "Bargaining and Distribution of Power in the EU's Conciliation Committee," CESifo Working Paper Series 1029, CESifo Group Munich.
    6. repec:cup:apsrev:v:88:y:1994:i:01:p:128-142_09 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Andreas Sachs, 2013. "Governance Structures in Europe," WWWforEurope Deliverables series 2, WWWforEurope.
    2. Bas van Aarle, 2013. "Surveillance and Control of Fiscal Consolidation on a Supranational Level," WWWforEurope Working Papers series 46, WWWforEurope.
    3. Jenny Helstroffer & Marie Obidzinski, 2014. "Codecision procedure biais: the European legislation game," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 29-46, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU’s finances; legislative codecision; budgetary procedure; 2007 Reform Treaty.;

    JEL classification:

    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism

    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:sap:wpaper:wp114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Luisa Giuriato). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dprosit.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.