The methods of community in EU decision-making and administrative rivalry in the Council's infrastructure

Lewis, Jeff

doi:10.1080/135017600343197

Cited by 103 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential for socialisation to occur is assumed positively related to the duration and the intensity of interaction amongst the organisational members (Berger and Luckmann 1966: 150;Checkel 2001: 26). This claim rests on socialisation theory that emphasises a positive relationship between the intensity of participation within a collective group and the extent to which members of this group take the world for granted (Meyer and Rowan 1991), become victims of 'group think' (Janis 1982), or develop particular perceptions of 'community methods' (Lewis 2000). Socialisation is s a dynamic process whereby individuals are induced into the norms and rules of a given community.…”

Section: Socialisation Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing at the frontier of the European commission: The case of seconded national officials

Trondal¹

2006

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of executive institutions have largely dealt separately with national and international executive institutions (IEIs). This study unpacks and repacks four conflicting decision-making dynamics that unfolds at the frontier of IEIs -that is, at the institutional rim where national and international executive institutions meet, interact and collide. The empirical laboratory utilised is seconded national experts in the European Commission. The survey and interview data presented demonstrates that the decision-making behaviour of seconded national experts includes a mix of departmental (portfolio), epistemic (expert) and supranational behaviour. The suspicion early voiced by Coombes (1970) that seconded national experts to the European Commission are highly conscious of their national background and that they represent domestic Trojan horses into the European Commission is severally challenged by this study. Arguably, the decision-making dynamics observed at the frontier of the Commission seem less affected by the member-state administrations and the international organisation in which the Commission is embedded, and strongly by organisational characteristics of the Commission itself.

show abstract

Section: Socialisation Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing at the frontier of the European commission: The case of seconded national officials

Trondal¹

2006

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the consequences of this intersection are at best imperfectly captured by the existing literature. Most current work focuses either on decision-making within Parliament or Council (Lewis 2000), paying little attention to relations between them, or else purely on relations between Parliament and Council, treating internal decision-making processes as exogenous, or as at most a constraining factor (Crombez 1997;Hix 2002;Garrett and Tsebelis 2000;Farrell and Héritier forthcoming). Thus, there is a dearth of ways to conceptualize how relations between these bodies affect relations within them, and vice versa.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interorganizational Cooperation and Intraorganizational Power: Early Agreements Under Codecision and Their Impact on the Parliament and the Council

Farrell¹,

Héritier

2002

SSRN Journal

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current research on the main bodies of the European Union (Council, Commission, Parliament) tends to concentrate either on relations within these bodies, or on relations between them. The result is that little attention is paid to how these two intersect; that is, to how changes in relations between bodies can affect relations among them, and vice versa. In this article, we examine the effects of the introduction of the codecision procedure on relations between the Council and the Parliament. We show that the changes in informal and formal relations between Council and Parliament associated with codecision have affected power relations within Council and Parliament in important ways. In a second stage of development, actors who have been disadvantaged by these changes have sought to redefine relations yet again in order to restore their power over legislative outcomes. *We are grateful to Christoph Engel and Henri Tjiong for their critical and helpful comments.2

show abstract

“…Both students of EU institutions and students of mass opinion conclude that actors tend to develop multiple identities, and that supranational, national and professional identities supplement each other. Different roles are activated in different situations, and they become partly meshed and blended into each other over time (Lewis, 2000;Risse and Maier, 2003;Trondal, 2004).…”

Section: H4: Organizational Affiliationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-discovering International Executive Institutions

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The methods of community in EU decision-making and administrative rivalry in the Council's infrastructure

Cited by 103 publications

References 13 publications

Governing at the frontier of the European commission: The case of seconded national officials

Governing at the frontier of the European commission: The case of seconded national officials

Interorganizational Cooperation and Intraorganizational Power: Early Agreements Under Codecision and Their Impact on the Parliament and the Council

Re-discovering International Executive Institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About