IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v5y2004i2p241-260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Legislative Impact of the European Parliament Under the Revised Co-Decision Procedure

Author

Listed:
  • Christiane Kasack

Abstract

This study analyses the legislative impact of the European Parliament (EP) under the revised co-decision procedure. I develop a model with adoption by Council and Commission as dependent variables and relative amendment importance, time of adoption, the amendment’s position in the legislation and internal parliamentary unity as independent variables. The results of my logistic regression question the common expectation that Co-decision II has increased the EP’s power. On the contrary, the rate of amendment adoption remains unchanged. The Commission’s influence during the second reading has, however, diminished. Furthermore, the study shows that the chance of an amendment made in the first reading being reintroduced increases in line with its adoption by the Commission and its non-adoption by the Council.

Suggested Citation

  • Christiane Kasack, 2004. "The Legislative Impact of the European Parliament Under the Revised Co-Decision Procedure," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(2), pages 241-260, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:5:y:2004:i:2:p:241-260
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116504038138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116504038138
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116504038138?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christophe Crombez & Bernard Steunenberg & Richard Corbett, 2000. "Understanding the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(3), pages 363-381, October.
    2. Amie Kreppel, 1999. "What Affects the European Parliament’s Legislative Influence? An Analysis of the Success of EP Amendments," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 521-537, September.
    3. Tsebelis, George & Jensen, Christian B. & Kalandrakis, Anastassios & Kreppel, Amie, 2001. "Legislative Procedures in the European Union: An Empirical Analysis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 573-599, October.
    4. Claudia Hubschmid & Peter Moser, 1997. "The Co‐operation Procedure in the EU: Why was the European Parliament Influential in the Decision on Car Emission Standards?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 225-242, June.
    5. Moser, Peter, 1996. "The European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: What Are the Conditions? A Critique of Tsebelis (1994)," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 90(4), pages 834-838, December.
    6. Tsebelis, George, 1994. "The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 128-142, March.
    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. 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.
    2. Thomas König & Mirja Pöter, 2001. "Examining the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 329-351, October.
    3. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    4. Torsten J. Selck & Bernard Steunenberg, 2004. "Between Power and Luck," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 25-46, March.
    5. Attila Kovács, 2013. "New Ways for Companies to Develop Effective Lobbying Strategies in the European Parliament A case study in the field of the Common Agricultural Policy," Proceedings of FIKUSZ '13, in: Pál Michelberger (ed.),Proceedings of FIKUSZ '13, pages 77-96, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    6. Christophe Crombez & Bernard Steunenberg & Richard Corbett, 2000. "Understanding the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(3), pages 363-381, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Frans Stokman & Robert Thomson, 2004. "Winners and Losers in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-23, March.
    9. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
    10. Charlotte Burns & Neil Carter, 2010. "Is Co‐decision Good for the Environment? An Analysis of the European Parliament's Green Credentials," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 123-142, February.
    11. repec:lic:licosd:28611 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Procedural Politics Revisited: Institutional Incentives and Jurisdictional Ambiguity in EU Competence Disputes," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1381-1399, November.
    13. Nicola Maaser & Alexander Mayer, 2016. "Codecision in context: implications for the balance of power in the EU," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 213-237, January.
    14. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    15. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:811-833 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Holger Döring, 2007. "The Composition of the College of Commissioners," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(2), pages 207-228, June.
    17. A Jones & J R A Clark, 1999. "The European Parliament: Agenda Territories and Agri-Environment Policymaking," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 17(2), pages 127-144, April.
    18. Robert Pahre, 2001. "Divided Government and International Cooperation in Austria-Hungary, Sweden-Norway and the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(2), pages 131-162, June.
    19. Dirk Junge & Thomas König, 2007. "What's Wrong With Eu Spatial Analysis?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 465-487, October.
    20. Attila Kovács, 2014. "Political Networks in the European Parliament: Network Analysis of the 2013 Common Agricultural Policy Reform," Proceedings of FIKUSZ '14, in: Pál Michelberger (ed.),Proceedings of FIKUSZ '14, pages 107-122, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    21. Christophe Crombez, 2002. "Information, Lobbying and the Legislative Process in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 3(1), pages 7-32, March.
    22. Esther Lopatin, 2013. "The Changing Position of the European Parliament on Irregular Migration and Asylum under Co-decision," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 740-755, July.

    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:sae:eeupol:v:5:y:2004:i:2:p:241-260. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.