IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iamodp/14887.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Machtverteilung im Ministerrat: nach dem Vertrag von Nizza und den Konventsvorschlägen in einer erweiterten Europäischen Union

Author

Listed:
  • Borkowski, Agnieszka

Abstract

Mit dem Beitritt der zehn neuen Mitgliedsstaaten zur Europäischen Union im Mai 2004 wird sich die bestehende Machtverteilung zwischen den EU-Staaten verändern. Die Erweiterung wird sich auf die Effizienz der Entscheidungsfindung auswirken und deshalb sind weitere institutionelle Reformen innerhalb der EU notwendig. Der Vertrag von Nizza, welcher dieses Problem behandelte und auf der Regierungskonferenz im Dezember 2000 in Nizza beschlossen wurde, hat die EU nicht ausreichend auf die Erweiterung vorbereitet. Der Europäische Konvent, welcher einen ersten Entwurf einer Europäischen Verfassung erarbeitet hat, empfiehlt unter anderem weiterreichende Änderungen im institutionellem Bereich, vor allem bei den Entscheidungsverfahren im Ministerrat. Die vom Konvent vorgeschlagene neue qualifizierte Mehrheit (einfache Mehrheit der Staaten und 60 Prozent der EUBevölkerung ab 2009) würde die komplizierte dreifache Mehrheit (1. 72,27 Prozent der Stimmen im Rat der EU-25, 2. einfache Mehrheit der Staaten und 3. 62 Prozent der EU-Bevölkerung) für Beschlussfassungen im Ministerrat ersetzen, welche in Nizza vereinbart wurde und am 1. Januar 2005 in Kraft treten wird. Der Konventsvorschlag würde zwar die Entscheidungsprozedur vereinfachen, aber auch die Macht im Ministerrat zugunsten der vier größten Staaten, insbesondere Deutschlands, verlagern. Für die Analyse der Machtverteilung im Ministerrat nach der Erweiterung wurden Machtindizes angewandt. Diese ermöglichen eine Messung der Abstimmungsstärke eines Spielers/ Landes in einem Gremium mit Mehrheitsentscheidungsverfahren. Qualitative Aspekte der Macht, wie z.B. Präferenzen der Staaten, werden von diesen Maßen nicht berücksichtigt. Machtindizes dienen in dieser Analyse dazu, Veränderungen in der Abstimmungsstärke der Staaten in einer erweiterten EU zu quantifizieren sowie einige der Auswirkungen der institutionellen Reformen, die in Nizza bzw. durch den Konvent beschlossen bzw. vorgeschlagen wurden, darzustellen.

Suggested Citation

  • Borkowski, Agnieszka, 2003. "Machtverteilung im Ministerrat: nach dem Vertrag von Nizza und den Konventsvorschlägen in einer erweiterten Europäischen Union," IAMO Discussion Papers 54, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iamodp:14887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/28569/1/381693198.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heinemann, Friedrich, 2003. "The political economy of EU enlargement and the Treaty of Nice," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 17-31, March.
    2. Wolfgang Wessels, 2001. "Nice Results: The Millennium IGC in the EU's Evolution," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 197-219, June.
    3. Mika WidgrÚn & Stefan Napel, 2002. "The Power of a Spatially Inferior Player," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 19, pages 327-343.
    4. Moshé Machover & Dan S. Felsenthal, 2001. "The Treaty of Nice and qualified majority voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(3), pages 431-464.
    5. Jan-Erik Lane & Sven Berg, 1999. "Relevance of Voting Power," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 309-320, July.
    6. Annick Laruelle & Mika WidgrÚn, 2000. "Voting Power in a Sequence of Cooperative Games: The Case of EU Procedures," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 17, pages 67-84.
    7. Steven J. Brams, 1997. "Game Theory And Emotions," Rationality and Society, , vol. 9(1), pages 91-124, February.
    8. Garrett, Geoffrey & Tsebelis, George, 1996. "An institutional critique of intergovernmentalism: erratum," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 539-539, July.
    9. Geoffrey Garrett & George Tsebelis, 1999. "More Reasons to Resist the Temptation of Power Indices in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 331-338, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Garrett, Geoffrey & Tsebelis, George, 1996. "An institutional critique of intergovernmentalism," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 269-299, April.
    12. Widgren, Mika, 1994. "Voting power in the EC decision making and the consequences of two different enlargements," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 1153-1170, May.
    13. Hosli, Madeleine O., 1993. "Admission of European Free Trade Association states to the European Community: effects on voting power in the European Community Council of Ministers," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 629-643, October.
    14. Rapoport, Amnon & Cohen, Ariel, 1986. "Paradoxes of quarreling in weighted majority games," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 235-250.
    15. Pradeep Dubey & Lloyd S. Shapley, 1979. "Mathematical Properties of the Banzhaf Power Index," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 99-131, May.
    16. Jan-Erik Lane & Reinert Maeland & Sven Berg, 1995. "The Eu Parliament: Seats, States and Political Parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(3), pages 395-400, July.
    17. Shapley, L. S. & Shubik, Martin, 1954. "A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 787-792, September.
    18. Manfred Holler & Mika Widgrén, 1999. "Why Power Indices for Assessing European Union Decision-Making?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 321-330, July.
    19. R J Johnston, 1978. "On the Measurement of Power: Some Reactions to Laver," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 10(8), pages 907-914, August.
    20. Bernard Steunenberg & Dieter Schmidtchen & Christian Koboldt, 1999. "Strategic Power in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 339-366, July.
    21. Madeleine Hösli, 1994. "Der potentielle Einfluss der Schweiz im EG-Ministerrat: Eine Analyse aufgrund des Banzhaf-Machtindexes," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 130(I), pages 89-105, March.
    22. Jan-Erik Lane & Reinert Maeland, 2002. "A Note on Nice," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 123-128, January.
    23. Dan S. Felsenthal & Moshé Machover, 2001. "Myths and Meanings of Voting Power," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 13(1), pages 81-97, January.
    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. Borkowski, Agnieszka, 2003. "Machtverteilung Im Ministerrat Nach Dem Vertrag Von Nizza Und Den Konventsvorschlagen In Einer Erweiterten Europaischen Union," IAMO Discussion Papers 14887, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    2. Bernard Steunenberg & Dieter Schmidtchen & Christian Koboldt, 1999. "Strategic Power in the European Union," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 339-366, July.
    3. Dan S. Felsenthal & Moshé Machover, 2015. "The measurement of a priori voting power," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 8, pages 117-139, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "The Hoede–Bakker Index Modified to the Shapley–Shubik and Holler–Packel Indices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 543-569, November.
    5. Thomas König & Thomas Bräuninger, 1998. "The Inclusiveness of European Decision Rules," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 125-142, January.
    6. Matthew Braham & Manfred J. Holler, 2005. "The Impossibility of a Preference-Based Power Index," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 17(1), pages 137-157, January.
    7. Napel, Stefan & Widgrén, Mika, 2017. "Power measurement as sensitivity analysis: a unified approach," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 345, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    8. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgren, 2004. "Power Measurement as Sensitivity Analysis," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(4), pages 517-538, October.
    9. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2011. "Strategic versus non-strategic voting power in the EU Council of Ministers: the consultation procedure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(3), pages 511-541, September.
    10. Widgrén, Mika, 2008. "The Impact of Council Voting Rules on EU Decision-Making," Discussion Papers 1162, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    11. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    12. Madeleine O. Hosli & Běla Plechanovová & Serguei Kaniovski, 2018. "Vote Probabilities, Thresholds and Actor Preferences: Decision Capacity and the Council of the European Union," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 31-52, June.
    13. James M. Snyder Jr. & Michael M. Ting & Stephen Ansolabehere, 2005. "Legislative Bargaining under Weighted Voting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 981-1004, September.
    14. Leech, D., 2001. "Fair Reweighting of the Votes in the EU Council of Ministers and the Choice of Majority Requirement for Qualified Majority Voting during Successive Enlargements," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 587, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    15. Annick Laruelle & Ricardo Martınez & Federico Valenciano, 2006. "Success Versus Decisiveness," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 185-205, April.
    16. Yener Kandogan, 2003. "DEMOCRACY???S SPREAD: Elections and Sovereign Debt in Developing Countries," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2003-576, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    17. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2002. "Strategic Power Revisited," CESifo Working Paper Series 736, CESifo.
    18. 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.
    19. Mika Widgrén, 2008. "The Impact of Council's Internal Decision-Making Rules on the Future EU," Discussion Papers 26, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    20. Jonathan R. Strand & Kenneth J. Retzl, 2016. "Did Recent Voice Reforms Improve Good Governance within the World Bank?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 47(3), pages 415-445, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU; Entscheidungsverfahren; Erweiterung; Europäischer Konvent; Machtindex; EU; Decision-making process; Enlargement; European Convention; Power index;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    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:zbw:iamodp:14887. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iamoode.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.