IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v45y2015i03p477-499_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legislative Activity and Gridlock in the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Crombez, Christophe
  • Hix, Simon

Abstract

This article develops a game-theoretical model of European Union (EU) policy making that suggests that the amount of legislative activity depends on the size of the gridlock interval. This is consistent with Krehbiel's study of US politics. This interval depends on two factors: (1) the preference configuration of the political actors and (2) the legislative procedures used in a particular period. Actors’ preferences and procedures are not expected to have any effect beyond their impact on the gridlock interval. The study predicts smaller gridlock intervals, and thus more legislative activity, under the co-decision (consultation) procedure when the pivotal member states and the European Parliament (Commission) are closer to each other. More activity is expected under qualified majority voting in the Council than under unanimity. The results find support for these propositions in an empirical analysis of EU legislative activity between 1979 and 2009.

Suggested Citation

  • Crombez, Christophe & Hix, Simon, 2015. "Legislative Activity and Gridlock in the European Union," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 477-499, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:45:y:2015:i:03:p:477-499_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123413000380/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Philippe van Gruisen, 2019. "The Trio Presidency and the Efficiency of Council Decision‐Making: An Empirical Study," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 692-709, July.
    2. Christopher J Williams & Shaun Bevan, 2019. "The effect of public attitudes toward the European Union on European Commission policy activity," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 608-628, December.
    3. Thomas König & Bernd Luig, 2017. "The impact of EU decision-making on national parties’ attitudes towards European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 362-381, September.
    4. Serra Boranbay-Akan & Thomas König & Moritz Osnabrügge, 2017. "The imperfect agenda-setter: Why do legislative proposals fail in the EU decision-making process?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 168-187, June.
    5. Ana Mar Fernández Pasarín & Nuria Font, 2022. "Unveiling Inconsistency: Consensus and Contestation along the Council–Comitology Cycle of EU Policy‐Making," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 427-444, March.
    6. Martin Gross & Marc Debus, 2018. "Gaining new insights by going local: determinants of coalition formation in mixed democratic polities," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 61-80, January.
    7. Jørgen Bølstad & James P. Cross, 2016. "Not all Treaties are Created Equal: The Effects of Treaty Changes on Legislative Efficiency in the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 793-808, July.
    8. Daniel Finke, 2020. "At loggerheads over state aid: Why the Commission rejects aid and governments comply," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 474-496, September.
    9. Christophe Crombez & Martijn Huysmans & Wim Van Gestel, 2017. "Choosing an informative agenda setter: The appointment of the Commission in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 145-167, June.
    10. Snorre Sylvester Frid-Nielsen, 2018. "Human rights or security? Positions on asylum in European Parliament speeches," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 344-362, June.
    11. M. Huysmans, 2018. "Enlargement and Exit:: The Origins of Article 50," Working Papers 18-09, Utrecht School of Economics.
    12. Philippe van Gruisen & Martijn Huysmans, 2020. "The Early Warning System and policymaking in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 451-473, September.
    13. Jonathan Golub, 2024. "EUPROPS: A new dataset on policymaking in the European Union from 1958 to 2021," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(1), pages 197-217, March.
    14. Martijn Huysmans, 2019. "Enlargement and exit: The origins of Article 50," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(2), pages 155-175, June.
    15. Philipp Broniecki, 2020. "Power and transparency in political negotiations," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 109-129, 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:cup:bjposi:v:45:y:2015:i:03:p:477-499_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    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.