2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10657-009-9139-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The right of withdrawal in the treaty of Lisbon: a game theoretic reflection on different decision processes in the EU

Abstract: The ways of decision-making within the EU have significantly changed in the last decades: The rule of unanimity has been more and more substituted by majority voting in order to speed up decision-making processes in a Union of 27 heterogeneous member states. A third possibility is now offered by the Lisbon Treaty including a constitutional right of withdrawal. A member state encountering a loss in its benefits caused by a decision made by majority voting may now demand compensating transfers by using the right… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Hirschman regarded the state, alongside the family and the church, among those organizations where ‘the virtual unavailability of the threat of exit’ will incentivize voice (Hirschman, 1970: 97–98). Certainly, exit options are hardly readily available; few states make provision for secession in their constitutions and, even where they do, the risks associated with exit are likely to be very high (Lachapelle and Qvortrup, 2020; Lechner and Ohr, 2011). Nevertheless, in plurinational states, which house multiple nations, often with overlapping boundaries, the territorial integrity of the political community is more likely to be challenged.…”
Section: Territorial Dissatisfaction After Brexit: Voice Exit and Re-...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hirschman regarded the state, alongside the family and the church, among those organizations where ‘the virtual unavailability of the threat of exit’ will incentivize voice (Hirschman, 1970: 97–98). Certainly, exit options are hardly readily available; few states make provision for secession in their constitutions and, even where they do, the risks associated with exit are likely to be very high (Lachapelle and Qvortrup, 2020; Lechner and Ohr, 2011). Nevertheless, in plurinational states, which house multiple nations, often with overlapping boundaries, the territorial integrity of the political community is more likely to be challenged.…”
Section: Territorial Dissatisfaction After Brexit: Voice Exit and Re-...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 This important development is beginning to attract scholarly attention, particularly from economists (e.g. Eerola et al , 2004; Gradstein, 2004; Lechner and Ohr, 2011).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Susanne Lechner und Renate Ohr29 Vgl.Berthold / Neumann (2003) undBolton / Roland / Spolaore (1996).30 Vgl. im FolgendenLechner / Ohr (2008).31 Dies ist natürlich eine für die Übertragung auf die EU etwas einschränkende Annahme, da hier ja -zumeist sogar recht lange -Verhandlungen stattfinden. Zur Verdeutlichung der Grundaussage ist die Annahme jedoch zunächst akzeptabel.32 Auch diese Annahme ist für die Übertragung auf die EU nicht ganz realistisch, da ja immer wieder neue Entscheidungen anstehen, die zwischen den Mitgliedern verhandelt werden müssen, allerdings zumeist mit wechselnder Besetzung der "M1"-Position.OPEN ACCESS | Licensed under CC BY 4.0 | https://creativecommons.org/about/cclicenses/ DOI https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-53256-8 | Generated on 2023-01-16 12:26:06…”
unclassified