IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v56y2018i6p1446-1461.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Participation Bias in the European Commission's Online Consultations: The Struggle for Policy Gain without too Much Pain

Author

Listed:
  • Maiken Røed
  • Vibeke Wøien Hansen

Abstract

This article investigates participation bias in the European Commission's online consultations by focusing on issue characteristics and using a cost–benefit framework. The main assumption is that a group will choose not to participate when their participation costs exceed the expected benefits. This leads to a more biased participation pattern. We expect this to hold when the proposal discussed in a consultation is more complex, whereas the opposite is the case if the proposal is more salient. Furthermore, we expect there to be an interaction effect between complexity and salience. We test and find support for these expectations in an analysis of more than 350 consultations held between 2001 and 2012.

Suggested Citation

  • Maiken Røed & Vibeke Wøien Hansen, 2018. "Explaining Participation Bias in the European Commission's Online Consultations: The Struggle for Policy Gain without too Much Pain," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(6), pages 1446-1461, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:56:y:2018:i:6:p:1446-1461
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12754
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12754
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.12754?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bert Fraussen & Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun, 2020. "Conceptualizing consultation approaches: identifying combinations of consultation tools and analyzing their implications for stakeholder diversity," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 473-493, September.
    2. Jonas Tallberg & Magnus Lundgren & Johannes Geith, 2023. "AI Regulation in the European Union: Examining Non-State Actor Preferences," Papers 2305.11523, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    3. Idunn Nørbech, 2024. "Does policy context matter for citizen engagement in policymaking? Evidence from the European Commission's public consultation regime," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(1), pages 130-150, March.

    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:bla:jcmkts:v:56:y:2018:i:6:p:1446-1461. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    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.