IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v62y2008i01p131-162_08.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bargaining Power at Europe's Intergovernmental Conferences: Testing Institutional and Intergovernmental Theories

Author

Listed:
  • Slapin, Jonathan B.

Abstract

This article examines how European Union member states make choices about political institutions at intergovernmental conferences, the grand negotiations where many key institutional changes are made. Using data on member-state preferences from the intergovernmental conference leading to the Treaty of Amsterdam, I test competing bargaining theories, institutionalism, and intergovernmentalism, and present strong evidence that institutionalism better captures negotiations compared to intergovernmentalism. I present a formal model to discern between these competing theories of bargaining power, derive a statistical model directly from this formal model, and then use data from the European Union's Treaty of Amsterdam to test these theories and corresponding power sources. Veto power associated with institutional models better explains intergovernmental conference outcomes compared to power from size and economic might, often associated with intergovernmental analyses.I would like to thank Kathy Bawn, Julia Gray, Tim Groseclose, James Honaker, Joe Jupille, Thomas König, Jeff Lewis, Sven-Oliver Proksch, George Tsebelis, and the participants in UCLA's graduate student formal theory and statistical methods workshops for their insightful comments on various drafts of this article. I am also grateful for the comments from several anonymous reviewers and the editors at International Organization. An earlier version of this article was presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 2006. Data and replication material are available at 〈http://faculty.unlv.edu/jslapin〉.

Suggested Citation

  • Slapin, Jonathan B., 2008. "Bargaining Power at Europe's Intergovernmental Conferences: Testing Institutional and Intergovernmental Theories," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 131-162, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:62:y:2008:i:01:p:131-162_08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818308080053/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. Daniel F. Schulz & Thomas Henökl, 2020. "New Alliances in Post-Brexit Europe: Does the New Hanseatic League Revive Nordic Political Cooperation?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 409-419.
    2. Fabio Franchino, 2013. "Challenges to liberal intergovernmentalism," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(2), pages 324-337, June.
    3. Christina J. Schneider & Johannes Urpelainen, 2014. "Partisan Heterogeneity and International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 58(1), pages 120-142, February.
    4. Martijn Mos, 2014. "Of Gay Rights and Christmas Ornaments: The Political History of Sexual Orientation Non-discrimination in the Treaty of Amsterdam," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 632-649, May.
    5. Andreas H Hvidsten & Jon Hovi, 2015. "Why no twin-track Europe? Unity, discontent, and differentiation in European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 3-22, March.
    6. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    7. Christophe Crombez & Pieterjan Vangerven, 2014. "Procedural models of European Union politics: Contributions and suggestions for improvement," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 289-308, June.
    8. Sommerer, Thomas & Squatrito, Theresa & Tallberg, Jonas & Lundgren, Magnus, 2021. "Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111834, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Thomas Malang & Katharina Holzinger, 2020. "The political economy of differentiated integration: The case of common agricultural policy," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 741-766, July.
    10. Daniel F. Schulz & Thomas Henökl, 2020. "New Alliances in Post-Brexit Europe: Does the New Hanseatic League Revive Nordic Political Cooperation?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 78-88.
    11. Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito & Jonas Tallberg & Magnus Lundgren, 2022. "Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 815-845, October.
    12. José Luis Castro-Montero & Edwin Alblas & Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2018. "The Court of Justice and treaty revision: A case of strategic leniency?," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 570-596, December.
    13. Diana Panke, 2017. "Speech is silver, silence is golden? Examining state activity in international negotiations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 121-146, March.
    14. Jonathan B. Slapin, 2009. "Exit, Voice, and Cooperation: Bargaining Power in International Organizations and Federal Systems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 187-211, April.
    15. von Malmborg, Fredrik, 2022. "Theorising member state lobbying on European Union policy on energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Diana Panke, 2020. "Regional cooperation through the lenses of states: Why do states nurture regional integration?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 475-504, April.

    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:intorg:v:62:y:2008:i:01:p:131-162_08. 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/ino .

    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.