Parliamentary Institutions in Regional and International Governance

Cofelice, Andrea

doi:10.4324/9780429452215

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most recent research into such International Parliamentary Institutions (IPIs) has focused on their origins, institutional arrangements, roles and functions (see for instance Cofelice, 2019; Verdoes, 2020; Rocabert et al ., 2018; Costa et al ., 2013; Šabič, 2008). Existing literature on the IPC CFSP/CSDP has taken a similar approach (see for instance Butler, 2015; Wouters and Raube, 2016; Raube and Fonck, 2018; Schade, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attendance at the Interparliamentary Conference on the CFSP/CSDP: Fostering the Emergence of a Parliamentary Epistemic Community in the EU?

Schade

Stavridis

2021

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been a gradual consolidation of interparliamentary cooperation over EU foreign and security policies (CFSP/CSDP). This has culminated in the setting up of a dedicated interparliamentary conference (IPC) on the CFSP/CSDP. This paper considers whether IPC gatherings in their current form help foster the creation of a transnational epistemic community of parliamentarians in foreign and security affairs and thereby aid the empowerment of parliamentary actors in the EU. To this end, IPC attendance patterns are analysed. The article finds that attendance at IPCs' diverges between EU parliaments. This and the fact that few parliamentarians choose to participate again reduces the IPC's utility to facilitate regular interparliamentary contacts. The article then explores structural and individual determinants of these patterns. The findings are relevant for the larger literature on parliamentary participation, as well as on interparliamentary cooperation in general.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attendance at the Interparliamentary Conference on the CFSP/CSDP: Fostering the Emergence of a Parliamentary Epistemic Community in the EU?

Schade

Stavridis

2021

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Cutler, 2001: 209, bullet points omitted) It is common to distinguish between two main categories of IPIs: free-standing 'international parliamentary associations' that have no formal links with IGOs; and 'international parliamentary organs', which are formally attached to an IGO and possess various degrees of authority vis-à-vis its other organs. In turn, international parliamentary organs differ in relation to various dimensions of institutional design, such as the selection modes of IPI members, the distribution of seats among member states, and their oversight, legislative and budgetary powers (Cofelice, 2018;Habegger, 2005;Winzen and Rocabert, 2021).…”

Section: The Influence Of Ipis: Who How and Whatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, scholars have greatly improved our understanding of three important aspects of international parliamentary institutions (IPIs), that is, the regular and structured forums for interparliamentary dialogue that go beyond episodic meetings and exchanges. First, much is now known about which IPIs exist and about the similarities and differences in their institutional design (Alger and Kille, 2014;Cofelice, 2015Cofelice, , 2018Cutler, 2001;De Puig, 2008;Habegger, 2005;Kissling, 2014;Winzen and Rocabert, 2021). Second, recent studies have given us in-depth knowledge of the reasons why IPIs are created and empowered (Cofelice, 2018;Grigorescu, 2015;Lenz, 2019;Lenz et al, 2019;Rocabert et al, 2019;Schimmelfennig et al, 2020;Verdoes, 2020;Winzen and Rocabert, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, much is now known about which IPIs exist and about the similarities and differences in their institutional design (Alger and Kille, 2014;Cofelice, 2015Cofelice, , 2018Cutler, 2001;De Puig, 2008;Habegger, 2005;Kissling, 2014;Winzen and Rocabert, 2021). Second, recent studies have given us in-depth knowledge of the reasons why IPIs are created and empowered (Cofelice, 2018;Grigorescu, 2015;Lenz, 2019;Lenz et al, 2019;Rocabert et al, 2019;Schimmelfennig et al, 2020;Verdoes, 2020;Winzen and Rocabert, 2021). Third, there are systematic explanations of why individual members of national parliaments engage with IPIs (Lipps, 2021;Malang, 2019;Wagner, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do international parliaments matter? An empirical analysis of influences on foreign policy and civil rights

Koenig‐Archibugi

Bareis

2022

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International parliamentary institutions (IPIs), which give parliamentarians regular opportunities to communicate with their foreign counterparts, have become a common feature in global governance. Recent research has shed light on why IPIs are created, on the similarities and differences in their institutional design, and on the reasons that lead members of national parliaments to engage with them. By contrast, there is little systematic empirical research on whether and how IPIs affect global politics. This article addresses this question by assessing their ability to influence states in relation to the position they take on issues of global concern and to how they treat their own citizens. The study identifies several mechanisms of IPI influence, leading to the hypothesis that more frequent opportunities for parliamentarians to interact with their foreign counterparts within IPIs leads in time to greater similarity in the foreign policy positions expressed by their governments and affects how those governments protect the civil rights of their citizens. A statistical analysis spanning multiple international organizations, member states, and decades indicates that IPIs offer a distinct contribution to convergence in foreign policy. By contrast, participation in IPIs is not robustly associated with civil rights protections. The finding that IPIs can be consequential on which policies governments promote internationally even though such institutions typically lack substantial authority may be encouraging for advocates of further international parliamentarization and specifically the creation of a United Nations parliamentary assembly.

show abstract

“…When a research agenda on IPIs began to emerge, authors explored new questions such as the role of IPIs in regional politics (Sabic 2008;Stravidis and Pace 2011) or the relationships between the EP and other IPIs (Grabendorff 1992;Cofelice and Kingah 2012). However, most contributions still focused on the emergence of IPIs, from a comparative perspective (Kebles 1990;Cutler 2013;Lenz 2013;Cofelice 2018;Rocabert et al 2019), or within a specific case or region (Rittberger 2005;Dri 2010;Navarro 2010;Mumford 2018;Jancic 2019;Verdoes 2020).…”

Section: Representational Design and International Parliamentary Instmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen-centred or state-centred? The representational design of International Parliamentary Institutions

Winzen

Rocabert

2020

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a result of the spread of International Parliamentary Institutions (IPIs), international organisations face crucial questions of representational design. We introduce a distinction between citizen-centred and state-centred IPIs in international organisations (IO). Drawing on original data, we show that, even though parliaments might seem likely to foster citizen representation in the international realm, they in fact often follow state-centred representational designs. We further find that citizen-centred IPIs are a near exclusive phenomenon of a few, democratic regional integration projects. Given the prevalence of state-centred representational designs, we conclude that IPIs’ potential to represent different cross-border communities, concerns, and conflict lines than intergovernmental IO bodies remains institutionally limited. IPIs are thus unlikely to challenge these bodies in similar ways as often observed in the relationship between the European Parliament and the European Union's Council of Ministers.

show abstract

Parliamentary Institutions in Regional and International Governance

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Attendance at the Interparliamentary Conference on the CFSP/CSDP: Fostering the Emergence of a Parliamentary Epistemic Community in the EU?

Attendance at the Interparliamentary Conference on the CFSP/CSDP: Fostering the Emergence of a Parliamentary Epistemic Community in the EU?

Do international parliaments matter? An empirical analysis of influences on foreign policy and civil rights

Citizen-centred or state-centred? The representational design of International Parliamentary Institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About