IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/233952.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

'Business as usual': The Treaty of Lisbon and transnational party manifestos
[Business as usual: el Tratado de Lisboa y los programas de los europartidos]

Author

Listed:
  • Ares, Cristina
  • Volkens, Andrea

Abstract

The Treaty of Lisbon was a milestone in the enduring process of empowerment of the European Parliament and its connections to the European Commission. This latest reform of the Treaties, in force since December 2009, placed the only supranational institution whose members are directly elected by all citizens of the EU (since 1979) on an equal footing with the Council as a co-legislator in around thirty additional policy areas. The Treaty of Lisbon also strengthened the European Parliament in terms of the annual and multiannual budgetary decisions, and it granted it the right to elect the President of the European Commission according to the results of the European elections. This article examines various possible effects of this major boost of the European Parliament, along with links to the European Commission in the manifestos issued by five European parties: the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), European Free Alliance (EFA), European Green Party (European Greens or EGP), European People’s Party (EPP), and Party of European Socialists (PES). It studies variations from 2004 onwards in the scope of the programmatic proposals regarding EU domains of power, the footprint in the manifestos of the transnational party organisations themselves, and eventually also of their candidates for the presidency of the European Commission. To do so, the twenty manifestos issued by the abovementioned parties for the 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019 European elections were content analysed. The results point to the lasting distance between these transnational parties and the European elections, despite the reinforcement of the role of the European Parliament over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Ares, Cristina & Volkens, Andrea, 2021. "'Business as usual': The Treaty of Lisbon and transnational party manifestos [Business as usual: el Tratado de Lisboa y los programas de los europartidos]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 1-1.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:233952
    DOI: 10.5209/poso.74092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/233952/1/Full-text-article-Ares-et-al-Business-as-usual.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5209/poso.74092?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. Vivien A. Schmidt, 2018. "Rethinking EU Governance: From ‘Old’ to ‘New’ Approaches to Who Steers Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(7), pages 1544-1561, November.
    2. Desmond Dinan, 2016. "Governance and Institutions: A More Political Commission," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54, pages 101-116, September.
    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. Gabriele Abels & Joyce M. Mushaben, 2020. "Great Expectations, Structural Limitations: Ursula von der Leyen and the Commission's New Equality Agenda," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(S1), pages 121-132, September.
    2. Thomas Laloux & Lara Panning, 2021. "Why Defend Something I Don’t Agree with? Conflicts within the Commission and Legislative Amendments in Trilogues," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 40-51.
    3. Pamela Pansardi & Pier Domenico Tortola, 2022. "A “More Political” Commission? Reassessing EC Politicization through Language," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 1047-1068, July.
    4. Muireann O'Dwyer, 2022. "Gender and Crises in European Economic Governance: Is this Time Different?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 152-169, January.
    5. Bernhard Zeilinger, 2021. "Die Wirkmächtigkeit des Europäischen Semesters und ihre Auswirkung auf die Interessensvertretung durch Arbeitnehmer:innenverbände," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 231, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    6. Hasselbalch, Jacob Adam, 2017. "Innovation assessment: governing through periods of disruptive technological change," SocArXiv 3rj94, Center for Open Science.
    7. Víctor Mercader & Esthela Galván-Vela & Rafael Ravina-Ripoll & Cristina Raluca Gh. Popescu, 2021. "A Focus on Ethical Value under the Vision of Leadership, Teamwork, Effective Communication and Productivity," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-32, November.
    8. Desmond Dinan, 2017. "Governance and Institutions: The Insidious Effect of Chronic Crisis," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55, pages 73-87, September.
    9. Leonard August Schuette, 2021. "Forging Unity: European Commission Leadership in the Brexit Negotiations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1142-1159, September.
    10. Dermot Hodson, 2019. "The New Intergovernmentalism and the Euro Crisis: A Painful Case?," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 145, European Institute, LSE.

    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:zbw:espost:233952. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.