Article

The Domain of the Right? Explaining National Parliamentary Preferences on EU-Related Self-Empowerment

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

In the academic debate about the deficits of representative democracy in the European Union, the views of members of parliaments about their EU-oriented roles remain largely unknown. Against this background, we exploit a novel dataset from an author-designed survey conducted in seven national parliaments to unravel MPs’ preferences with regard to their EU-oriented empowerment. Our findings allow us to identify the dominant cognitive schemas mobilised among parliamentarians which attribute particular legitimacy-related meanings to proposed institutional reforms. They point to a stronger explanatory power of party ideological position over national constitutional orientations, with right-wing parties being more supportive towards parliamentary empowerment than their centre and centre-left counterparts, and mainstream parties being more sceptical of it than radical groups on both sides of the spectrum.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
The Franco-German Parliamentary Assembly (FGPA) set up in March 2019 is the result of an unprecedented collaboration between the parliaments of the two most powerful member states of the European Union (EU). While this bi-parliamentary assembly has received some attention by political think tanks, we know very little about its potential transformative effect on bilateral executive accountability as well as on the accountability and the salience of EU economic governance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on an extensive document analysis and on semi-structured interviews with FGPA members and staff, we show that to a large extent the FGPA has become a forum of transnational accountability that cuts across the traditional domestic and EU channels of executive oversight. Our findings also reveal that the pandemic has increased the FGPA’s oversight activity and allowed for the (re-)emergence of EMU matters on the shared parliamentary and executive agenda.
Article
Full-text available
This article reviews the literature on the institutional position of national parliaments in the EU. It focuses on new institutional developments, explanations, and effects discussed over the course of the last decade. Existing datasets on parliamentary oversight institutions in EU affairs and economic governance have been extended to 2020 to inform the discussion. A systematic overview of new analyses of the effects of oversight institutions in EU and domestic politics is offered as well. Cutting across the debate as to whether parliaments are multi-level or domestic players in the EU, this review concludes that the last decade has seen growing policy specialization in the institutional position of national parliaments at the European and national levels, and that the causes and consequences of this development remain largely unstudied.
Article
Full-text available
Since the Treaty of Lisbon, national parliamentary chambers in the European Union can issue reasoned opinions on legislative proposals by the European Commission. These individual reasoned opinions lead to a review if at least one third of all chambers raise such concerns. Hence, coordination among parliaments is key. Using advances in inferential network analysis, this article infers the underlying diffusion pathways among national parliaments through which chambers are related to each other in their decisions to raise subsidiarity concerns. The emerging diffusion network is characterised by a compartmentalization into communities of European Union budget net contributor and net recipient countries. This descriptive finding has implications for the institutional effectiveness and aspired democratic legitimacy of the Early Warning System. A multivariate statistical network analysis confirms that diffusion occurs among net recipient countries and that weak institutions follow the lead of strong institutions in the Early Warning System.
Article
Full-text available
Conducting quantitative research (e.g., surveys, a large number of interviews, experiments) with the participation of political elites is typically challenging. Given that a population of political elites is typically small by definition, a particular challenge is obtaining a sufficiently high number of observations and, thus, a certain response rate. This paper focuses on two questions related to this challenge: (1) What are best practices for designing the study? And (2) what are best practices for soliciting the participation of political elites? To arrive at these best practices, we ( a ) examine which factors explain the variation in response rates across surveys within and between large-scale, multi-wave survey projects by statistically analyzing a newly compiled dataset of 342 political elite surveys from eight projects, spanning 30 years and 58 countries, ( b ) integrate the typically scattered findings from the existing literature and ( c ) discuss results from an original expert survey among researchers with experience with such research ( n = 23). By compiling a comprehensive list of best practices, systematically testing some widely held believes about response rates and by providing benchmarks for response rates depending on country, survey mode and elite type, we aim to facilitate future studies where participation of political elites is required. This will contribute to our knowledge and understanding of political elites’ opinions, information processing and decision making and thereby of the functioning of representative democracies.
Chapter
Full-text available
In the early 1980s, many observers, argued that powerful organized economic interests and social democratic parties created successful mixed economies promoting economic growth, full employment, and a modicum of social equality. The present book assembles scholars with formidable expertise in the study of advanced capitalist politics and political economy to reexamine this account from the vantage point of the second half of the 1990s. The authors find that the conventional wisdom no longer adequately reflects the political and economic realities. Advanced democracies have responded in path-dependent fashion to such novel challenges as technological change, intensifying international competition, new social conflict, and the erosion of established patterns of political mobilization. The book rejects, however, the currently widespread expectation that 'internationalization' makes all democracies converge on similar political and economic institutions and power relations. Diversity among capitalist democracies persists, though in a different fashion than in the 'Golden Age' of rapid economic growth after World War II.
Article
Full-text available
In 2017, a new Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group (JPSG) was created to enable members of the national parliaments of the EU and the European Parliament to exercise joint oversight of the EU agency for police cooperation (Europol). This paper chronicles and explains the lengthy legal and political process leading up to the first meeting of the Europol JPSG in October 2017, and the establishment of its Rules of Procedure at its second meeting in March 2018. In addition, the Europol JPSG is compared to the three EU inter-parliamentary conferences (IPCs) which meet twice-yearly to discuss EU affairs, foreign policy and economic governance. While there are many similarities, the JPSG differs from these others in that it has an explicit mandate to scrutinize, and the target of its scrutiny is a specific EU agency rather than a whole policy field. The JPSG is also distinctive in a number of key respects, including a stronger legal basis, more restrictive membership and participation rules, greater continuity of membership, stronger access to EU officials and documents, a seat on the Europol Management Board and an explicit right to ask oral and written questions. Taken together, these attributes indicate that the JPSG is designed to be an oversight body, rather than merely a discussion forum. Finally, the paper considers the likely future UK role in relation to the Europol JPSG after Brexit.
Article
Full-text available
While national parliaments in the European Union have learned to internalize new opportunities for influence given to them by the Lisbon Treaty, European integration has evolved and places ever more serious demands and constraints on domestic legislatures. Following the euro crisis, key decisions about national macro-economic policies are taken in the European Council and the European Semester. These are the issues traditionally at the heart of both democratic governance and citizens’ concerns. Relating these developments to the key functions national parliaments ought to perform, we develop the normative argument that a redirection of national parliaments’ resources away from less salient matters and particularly the Early Warning Mechanism towards the European Council and European economic governance would be welcome.
Article
Full-text available
There is an on-going debate in the literature as to whether national parliaments can and do play an active role in EU policy-making. The main reason for persistent disagreement is the lack of comparative empirical data on parliamentary behaviour in EU affairs. The article aims to contribute to this debate by presenting the first comparative quantitative data on European affairs activities of national parliaments and by explaining the empirical variation. The development of a unique dataset including all 27 national parliaments allows a series of explanatory variables to be tested for the level of parliamentary activity at both the committee and the plenary levels. The analysis shows that institutional strength in EU affairs plays an important role. Overall, however, EU activities can be better explained with a mix of institutional capacities and motivational incentives. The specific combinations vary for different types of activities.
Article
Full-text available
Parliaments in the demoi-cratic system of the EU develop in co-evolution. We study why some national parliaments react to the empowerment of the European Parliament (EP) by strengthening their own competences, whereas others do not. First, we argue that national parliamentary parties take systematic positions on the powers of the EP. In particular, support for parliamentarisation at the European level decreases to the extent that parties are culturally conservative, confront Eurosceptic populations and have weak supranational office opportunities. Second, aggregate support for the EP among the party composition of national parliaments tells us whether or not national parliaments perceive the EP as a competitor and strive for stronger parliamentary competences at the national level. We present support for these arguments using quantitative and qualitative analyses of party positions on the European Parliament and of national parliaments’ oversight institutions in EU affairs.
Article
Full-text available
The Lisbon Treaty grounds the European Union (EU) in the principles of political equality and representative democracy. It also acknowledges the role national parliaments play in realising these norms within the EU's system of governance—the first time they have been mentioned in the main body of the Treaty on European Union (TEU)—and introduced the Early Warning Mechanism (EWM) as a means for national parliaments (NPs) to be involved in EU policy-making. This article analyses the normative and empirical connections between political equality and representative democracy at the domestic level, and the ways they are embodied in parliamentary elections between competing parties. It then assesses how far these links continue to operate in the domestic debate of EU affairs before undertaking a first evaluation of the use NPs have made of the Early Warning Mechanism (EWM). We argue that in many respects they have been undermined by the integration process, which has reduced the capacity of national representative institutions to perform the tasks assigned to them by the Treaty.
Article
Full-text available
How is contestation on European integration structured among national political parties? Are issues arising from European integration assimilated into existing dimensions of domestic contestation? We show that there is a strong relationship between the conventional left/right dimension and party positioning on European integration. However, the most powerful source of variation in party support is the new politics dimension, ranging from Green/alternative/libertarian to Traditional/authoritarian/nationalist.
Article
Full-text available
This article introduces the concept of the ‘Multilevel Parliamentary Field’ as a means for analysing the structure of democratic representation in the European Union (EU). This concept is warranted for several reasons. First, the multilevel configuration that makes up the EU contains two channels of democratic representation: one directly through the European Parliament, the other indirectly through the national parliaments and governments. These two channels are likely to persist side by side; hence, both the European and the national parliaments can claim to represent ‘the people’ in EU decision-making. Second, this structure of representation is in many respects without precedent; it does not fit established concepts of democratic representation derived from the nation-state or from international relations, such as a federal two-channel system or a parliamentary network. Third, the representative bodies in the EU are interlinked, also across levels. Up until now, no proper conceptual apparatus has been devised that can capture the distinctive traits of this EU multilevel representative system, and help to assess its democratic quality. The concept of the Multilevel Parliamentary Field fills both these tasks. It serves as a heuristic device to integrate the empirical analysis of the different forms of democratic representation in the EU’s multilevel system, and it provides new angles for analysing the democratic challenges that this system faces.
Article
Using data from a unique survey of members of parliaments in France, Germany and Italy in 2018, we estimate the effects of three dimensions on EU and Euro Area fiscal reform preferences: nationality, political ideology and populism. We predict and confirm that a German populist party on the right is most opposed to a more developed European fiscal union, while a non-populist politician on the political left in France or Italy is most integrationist. Furthermore, the relative position of French and Italian policymakers is issue dependent and the left dimension outweighs the German dimension in two out of seven reform issues. Finally, populism intensifies the polarizing impact of national interests.
Book
Le constat est patent : le métier de député a changé.Cherchant à analyser les effets de l'intégration européenne sur l'Assemblée nationale, Olivier Rozenberg a interrogé une soixantaine de députés sur leur conception de l’activité parlementaire.Sous la pression de l’Europe, le rapport de l’élu à son électeur, à la loi, aux ministres ou à lui-même s’est modifié. Il doit monter des dossiers de subvention, se faire le relais des griefs des électeurs, agir en lobbyiste à Bruxelles, ourdir des « coups » politiques autour des enjeux européens, etc.Ainsi, différents profils de parlementaires s’européanisent. Entrepreneurs locaux, défenseurs du terroir, souverainistes, présidentiables ou experts peuplent de « tristes hémicycles », théâtres d’une profonde transformation depuis Maastricht. Une tristesse qui doit autant aux difficultés d’adaptation des deux assemblées à l’Union européenne qu’aux émotions que les représentants mobilisent quotidiennement dans l’action. (Résumé éditeur)
Article
Au cours des années fondatrices de l’Union européenne, les acteurs politiques allemands se sont montrés régulièrement partisans du renforcement du Parlement au sein du triangle institutionnel européen. En comparant les débats parlementaires au Bundestag à l’occasion de la ratification du Traité de Maastricht et de celle du Traité de Lisbonne, et en analysant des entretiens avec des acteurs parlementaires-clefs, cet article met en lumière les changements importants intervenus dans les discours des parlementaires allemands quant à l’implication des parlements dans les décisions européennes. L’impact des idées fédéralistes diminue et le rôle quotidien des parlementaires au Bundestag devient décisif pour le cadrage des débats sur la démocratie parlementaire dans l’Union européenne.
Article
We analyze data from an author-conducted survey of members of the French and German parliaments on European Monetary Union reform preferences. We consider three potential drivers of preferences: nationality, ideology, and personal characteristics. For European Monetary Union policies like Eurobonds, the Fiscal Compact, and the European Central Bank asset purchase program we find a robust difference between parliamentarians of both countries if they belong to the same party family and controlling for individual characteristics. Based on our estimates, however, we predict agreement between German left-wingers and French conservatives even for ideological differences that are smaller than the current difference between the left and the right European party families. Our findings suggest that deeply-rooted national differences do not impose a prohibitive obstacle to a German-French parliamentary consensus on European Monetary Union policies.
Article
Scholars have written much about what national parliaments can, should and actually do in European Union (EU) governance. What they have largely disregarded so far is the actors’ perspective. Which roles do national members of parliament (MPs) themselves view as a priority and how do they assess their performance? Which factors may structure observed variation? From a strategic perspective on legislative behavior, the article conceptualizes five roles for national MPs in EU politics: Scrutinizers, Subsidiarity Watchdogs, Networkers, Communicators and Transposers. It draws on plenary debates on the Constitutional Treaty, the Lisbon Treaty and the Eurozone crisis as well as data from 66 interviews with MPs from Austria, Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom. There is a clear focus on scrutiny in EU affairs and communication to citizens. Ideological conviction and debate topics structure patterns in emphasis and assessment of these roles, while government-opposition dynamics and parliamentary strength only partially do.
Article
Have national parliaments become ‘multi-arena players’ in the field of EU affairs? Through the means of cross-country comparison of Poland and France this study probes how national parliaments juggle their activities between domestic and EU-level realms with regard to four EU-oriented arenas: ex-ante scrutiny of national governments, the Early Warning Mechanism for subsidiarity control, the political dialogue with the European Commission, and the ‘green card’ initiative. The paper detects what conditions parliamentary activity in particular arenas and to what extent domestic legislatures act autonomously within them. The findings are counterintuitive and yet clearly demonstrate that what drives parliamentary mobilization in EU affairs is not the institutional strength of a parliament in EU scrutiny, but rather Member of Parliament’s perception of their institutions’ EU-related roles.
Article
National parliaments (NPs) had long been excluded from the European integration process and were in many Member States at best kept informed and rarely involved in daily EU affairs. With the Lisbon Treaty and its introduction of the Early Warning System (EWS), as well as the Political Dialogue initiated by former Commission President Barroso, NPs have now become full actors in the EU. Through the Political Dialogue, they can express their opinion on the Commission Annual Work Programme and influence the Commission's agenda. Now, through control of the respect of the principle of subsidiarity, and provided that their reasoned opinions attain the defined thresholds, they can potentially strike down an existing proposal. However the EWS leads to NPs still being constrained to a limited, reactive role: as ‘quasi veto-players' and not one of ‘agenda-setter’. Recent developments in favour of the introduction of a ‘green card’ would change this situation profoundly as NPs would eventually be able to prompt the Commission to make legislative proposals on their behalf. This article sheds light on the evolving role of NPs in EU policymaking from the Lisbon Treaty onwards, from veto players to proactive institutions committed to the good functioning of the EU.
Book
This book provides a major empirical analysis of differing attitudes to European integration in three of Europe's most important countries: Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom. From its beginnings, the European Union has resounded with debate over whether to move toward a federal or intergovernmental system. However, Juan Díez Medrano argues that empirical analyses of support for integration--by specialists in international relations, comparative politics, and survey research--have failed to explain why some countries lean toward federalism whereas others lean toward intergovernmentalism. By applying frame analysis to a unique set of primary sources (in-depth interviews, newspaper articles, novels, history texts, political speeches, and survey data), Díez Medrano demonstrates the role of major historical events in transforming national cultures and thus creating new opportunities for political transformation. Clearly written and rigorously argued, Framing Europe explains differences in support for European integration between the three countries studied in light of the degree to which each realized its particular "supranational project" outside Western Europe. Only the United Kingdom succeeded in consolidating an empire and retaining it after World War II, while Germany and Spain each abandoned their corresponding aspirations. These differences meant that these countries' populations developed different degrees of identification as Europeans and, partly in consequence, different degrees of support for the building of a federal Europe.
Article
Over the last years, the role of national parliaments (NPs) in the European Union (EU) has been upgraded in several ways, most importantly through the Early Warning System (EWS) and a new role in Treaty revisions established by the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL). These provisions formally turn national legislatures into EU actors in their own right that can act both individually and collectively at the EU level, as well as independently of their national governments. As a result, the EU legislative process now presents them with multiple arenas in which they can be simultaneously active ? a perspective so far neglected in the literature. The aim of this research agenda is therefore threefold: to take stock of the impact of these provisions by contrasting the formal structures and the actual involvement of NPs; to propose a conceptualization of this new role of NPs in EU affairs as ?multi-arena players?; and to sketch new avenues for research.
Chapter
Belgium is usually considered one of the most ‘pro-European Union’ member states, preferring a strong supranational - And even federal - European Union (EU). This pro-EU orthodoxy can be explained by practical factors, such as the omnipresence of European institutions in Brussels; Belgium’s economy, which is largely export oriented; and its federal state structure, which makes living in a multi-level political system seem very natural in Belgium (Justaert et al., 2012). A federalist European policy has been an element of continuity in Belgium’s foreign policy since the 1970s.¹ Belgium has advocated a stronger supranational institutional framework and a considerable extension to the ‘Community method’, a strengthened role for the EU at the international level and own financial resources for the EU. Remarkably, Belgium’s federalist stance in the debate on the EU’s institutional structure sharply contrasts with its record of implementation of EU legislation. In 2013, for instance, Belgium had the fourth-worst record of all member states on the timely transposition of EU directives. Similarly, only four other member states had more infringement cases opened against them than Belgium (European Commission, 2014, pp. 4, 11). © Claudia Hefftler, Christine Neuhold, Olivier Rozenberg and Julie Smith 2015, Respective authors 2015 and Wolfgang Wessels 2015.
Book
Why have the national governments of EU member states successively endowed the European Parliament with supervisory, budgetary, and legislative powers over the past fifty years? Building Europe's Parliament sheds new light on this pivotal issue, and provides a major contribution to the study of the European Parliament. Rittberger develops a theory of delegation to representative institutions in international politics which combines elements of democratic theory and different strands of institutionalist theory. To test the plausibility of his theory, Rittberger draws on extensive archival material and offers theory-guided, in-depth case studies of three landmark decisions in the history of the European Parliament: the creation of the Common Assembly of the ECSC in 1951 and the concomitant acquisition of supervisory powers vis-à-vis the quasi-executive High Authority; the delegation of budgetary powers following the signing of the Treaty of Luxembourg in 1970; and the delegation of legislative powers resulting from the adoption of the Single European Act signed in 1986. This is followed by the charting of more recent key developments, culminating in the adoption of the Constitutional Treaty in 2004. The book provides a welcome addition to the literature on institutional design by reflecting on the conditions under which governments opt for the creation and empowerment of parliamentary institutions in international politics. It also makes a valuable contribution to the application of democratic theory to the study of the European Union by demonstrating that political elites shared the view that the new supranational polity which emerged from the debris of World War II suffered from 'democratic deficit' since its inception, thus disproving the claim that the lamented 'democratic deficit' is a recent phenomenon. Winner of the European Union Studies Association Prize for Best Dissertation 2002-2004.
Article
This article offers an overview and reconsideration of the idea of European demoicracy in the context of the current crisis. It defines ‘demoicracy’ as ‘a Union of peoples, understood both as states and as citizens, who govern together but not as one’, and argues that the concept is best understood as a third way, distinct from both national and supranational versions of single demos polities. The concept of ‘demoicracy’ can serve both as an analytical lens for the European Union‐as‐is and as a normative benchmark, but one which cannot simply be inferred from its praxis. Instead, the article deploys a ‘normative‐inductive’ approach according to which the EU's normative core – transnational non‐domination and transnational mutual recognition – is grounded on what the EU still seeks to escape. Such norms need to be protected and perfected if the EU is to live up to its demoicratic nature. The article suggests ten tentative guiding principles for the EU to continue turning these norms into practice.
Article
This article analyses the differences in institutional design in national parliamentary control over European Union affairs among EU member states. It proceeds from a preference-based perspective, drawing on the principal–agent framework, and a time-based perspective, inspired by the historical institutionalist approach. The article involves a qualitative comparative analysis of strong control and a quantitative, correlation analysis of variation in the degree of control. It argues that time-based factors provide a more persuasive overall explanation for the differences in control than preference-based factors.
Article
Since the inception of the European Community (EC)/European Union (EU), the European Commission has been the engine of European integration, but studies have failed to account for how office holders in the commission conceive authority in the EU. The author explains variation in supranationalist and intergovernmentalist views among top commission officials using 140 interviews and 106 mail questionnaires undertaken between July 1995 and May 1997. Officials' views are greatly influenced by prior state career and previous political socialization, with former state employees and nationals of large, unitary states leaning to intergovernmentalism and those without former state experience and from federal systems to supranationalism. Partial confirmation of a principal-agent logic is found in that officials in powerful commission services favor supranationalism only if prior socialization predisposes them to such views. Thus, the results support socialization theory, but they are inconclusive for principal-agent arguments.
Article
Conflicts over the shape of the European Union are usually modelled as conflicts of interests. This article argues that the development of a polity depends not only on interests but also on normative ideas about a legitimate political order (`polity-ideas'). These polity-ideas are extremely stable over time and resistant to change because they are linked to the identity and basic normative orientations of the actors involved. The article has four parts: (1) a theoretical argument how to link ideas and polity development in the EU, (2) a methodological discussion containing four ideal-typical polity-ideas about the EU, (3) a comparative analysis of the development of these ideas in France, Germany and the United Kingdom from 1950 to 1995, and (4) a summary of the empirical findings and a discussion of areas of research for which the theoretical approach and the empirical results presented here might be useful.
Article
According to the prevailing concept of 'dual legitimacy', national parliaments constitute an important source of democratic legitimacy in the EU. Reinforced parliamentary scrutiny and control of the national representatives in the Council of Ministers seem to contribute to a more democratic Europe. However, if parliaments tie the hands of their governments when they negotiate at the European level, effectiveness of policy-making is jeopardised and national interests may be defeated. Realising this dilemma, members of national parliaments develop strategies to deal with conflicting requirements of national party politics and European policy-making. These strategies and their implications for democracy are influenced by the path-dependent institutional changes in national parliamentary systems. They therefore vary considerably between member states.
Article
This paper analyses role orientations and attitudes towards European integration of members of 11 national parliaments in Europe and tries to answer three questions: how much diversity or convergence exists in the understanding of democracy and the role of parliament?; how do MPs evaluate the democracy of the EU, which kind of political order do they want to see emerging and how does this relate to their understandings of the role and function of national parliaments?; and are there trends of Europeanisation observable in contacts and orientations of MPs? Results show that there is a high degree of diversity with regard to the functions that national parliaments should perform and to the way in which European institutions should be reformed and a political order established. These orientations are very persistent and change only very slowly in the course of Europeanisation. This implies that variety across countries will not vanish quickly and raises the question whether institutional change and incentives will work fast enough to provoke adaptation of national parliaments to the danger of loss of authority, functions and relevance.
Article
Recent research on national parliamentary control of European Union affairs relies primarily on cross-sectional, contemporary data, whereas information on the nature and frequency of changes within countries and over time is currently lacking. This lack of data not only limits our substantive knowledge of the role of national parliaments in EU affairs but also constrains studies of the causes of parliamentary control. This research note offers a cross-national and longitudinal comparison of all member state parliaments from 1958 to today. Thus, it refines and updates recent measurements and provides a starting point for more conclusive analyses of cross-national and temporal variation.
Article
  This article starts from the assumption that the current process of globalization or denationalization leads to the formation of a new structural conflict in Western European countries, opposing those who benefit from this process against those who tend to lose in the course of the events. The structural opposition between globalization ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ is expected to constitute potentials for political mobilization within national political contexts, the mobilization of which is expected to give rise to two intimately related dynamics: the transformation of the basic structure of the national political space and the strategic repositioning of the political parties within the transforming space. The article presents several hypotheses with regard to these two dynamics and tests them empirically on the basis of new data concerning the supply side of electoral politics from six Western European countries (Austria, Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland). The results indicate that in all the countries, the new cleavage has become embedded into existing two-dimensional national political spaces, that the meaning of the original dimensions has been transformed, and that the configuration of the main parties has become triangular even in a country like France.
‘Parliaments in Times of Crises: Democratic Accountability in the EU Economic Governance from the Euro to the COVID Crisis’
  • Borońska-Hryniewiecka
‘The Role of National Parliaments in the European Union. Conclusions of the Working Group of the Conference of Parliamentary Bodies Specialised in European Affairs
  • COSAC
Interviews and Surveys in
  • Bailer
‘For a Just and Democratic Climate Transition’
  • Cage
  • Jancic
‘L’“eurizzazione” dell l’Europa. Dall’Emergere del Governodell’Euroallanuovapoliticaeuropea’
  • Sacriste