Cover of book: Voice(s) in the European Parliament
Buy in shop
, to see if you have full access to this publication.
Book Titles No access

Voice(s) in the European Parliament

Deliberation and Negotiation in EP Committees
Authors:
Publisher:
 2016

Summary

Die Studie analysiert die Deliberations- und Verhandlungsprozesse im Europäischen Parlament. Der Band nimmt die Akteure der Entscheidung in den Blick: Wie gelangen Abgeordnete unterschiedlicher Nationen und Parteien zu einer gemeinsamen Entscheidung? Anhand ausgewählter Gesetzestexte untersucht der Band parlamentarische Verhandlungsprozesse vergleichend in Ausschussdebatten und in informellen Arenen. In einem Parlament ohne Mehrheit zählen überzeugende Argumente; am Ende der Verhandlungen steht ein Kompromiss.

Die Stärke des EPs im Institutionensetting liegt in der Einigkeit seiner Akteure begründet – diese zu erzielen gelingt den Akteuren in deliberativen Verhandlungen. Die Studie konzeptualisiert Entscheidungsprozesse, indem sie deliberative Ansätze und Rollenkonzepte kombiniert. Die theoretischen Annahmen überprüft sie empirisch in einer vergleichenden Diskursanalyse der Ausschussdebatten und in Interviews mit den Entscheidungsträgern.

Die Autorin forscht zu Parlamenten, Parteien und Öffentlichkeit in der Europäischen Union.

Bibliographic data

Copyright year
2016
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-1496-4
ISBN-Online
978-3-8452-5538-5
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series
Studien zum Parlamentarismus
Volume
28
Language
English
Pages
323
Product type
Book Titles

Table of contents

ChapterPages
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access 1 - 16
  2. Why study deliberation in European Parliament committees? No access 17 - 30
      1. Parliamentary committees No access
      2. Plenary session No access
      3. Political group meetings & Informal forums of deliberation No access
    2. Compromising within the European Parliament No access
      1. The foundations of deliberative democracy No access
      2. The pluralistic challenge: criticism toward deliberation No access
      1. Extended deliberation: integratin No access
      2. Avoiding concept-stretching: a typology of discourses No access
      3. Adopting a sequentialized approach No access
      1. Impact on decision-making No access
      2. Time constraints No access
      3. Pressures for agreement No access
      4. Ordinary legislative procedure: the impact of institutionalvariables No access
    2. Stages of the deliberative process: the temporal variable No access
      1. Topic-related variables No access
      2. Veto-Players No access
      3. Publicity No access
      4. External pressures No access
      1. Representational role orientations No access
      2. Purposive role orientations No access
      3. Role-choice of representatives No access
    2. Role sets in the European Parliament No access
    1. Assessing the situation of decision-making No access
    2. Analyzing MEPs role orientations No access
      1. Analyzing deliberation – adopting a multidimensional approach No access
    4. Case selection No access
      1. The Rapporteurs at the heart of the negotiations No access
      1. Political groups and national delegations in the decision-makingprocess No access
      2. Achieving an agreement: compromising in European Parliamentcommittees No access
    3. The situational dimension: the impact of situational variables onthe debates No access
    4. Role orientations of the representatives No access
      1. Topic of debate No access
      2. Publicity No access
      3. Veto-players No access
      4. Influence of external actors on the decision-making process No access
    2. Role orientations of the MEPs: party orientations No access
      1. Steps of decision-making No access
      2. Temporal dimension of the ECON debates No access
      3. Situational dimension of the ECON debates No access
      1. Topic of debate No access
      2. Publicity No access
      3. Veto-players No access
      4. Influence of external actors on the decision-making process No access
    2. Role orientations of the MEPs: European orientation No access
      1. Steps of decision-making No access
      2. Temporal dimension of the FEMM/LIBE debates No access
      3. Situational dimension of the LIBE/FEMM debates No access
      1. Topic of debate No access
      2. Publicity No access
      3. Veto-players No access
      4. Influence of external actors on the decision-making process No access
    2. Role orientations of the MEPs: regional orie No access
      1. Steps of decision-making No access
      2. Temporal dimension of the REGI debates No access
      3. Situational dimension of the REGI debates No access
    1. The situation of decision-making and the role orientations of MEPs No access
    2. Role performances of MEPs and discourse styles No access
  13. Arguments do matter: how the European Parliament comes toits position No access 267 - 280
    1. Discourse Quality Index No access
      1. Qualitative questionnaire No access
      2. List of qualitative interviews No access
  15. References No access 311 - 323

Bibliography (218)

  1. 14 References Open Google Scholar
  2. Alpert, E. J. (1979), »A Reconceptualization of Representational Role Theory«, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 4/4: 587–603. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/439406
  3. Andeweg, R. B., and Thomassen, J. J. (2005), »Modes of Political Representation. Toward a New Typology«, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30/4: 507–528. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3162/036298005X201653
  4. Aristotle (1994), Politics. Politics 1253a. Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vol. 21, translated by H. Rackham (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd). Open Google Scholar
  5. Aubenque, P. (2009), La prudence chez Aristote, 5e édition (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France). Open Google Scholar
  6. Bächtiger, A., and Hangartner, D. (2007), Institutions, Culture, and Deliberative Ideals: A Theoretical and Empirical Inquiry, Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 30-September 2 (Chicago). Open Google Scholar
  7. —— (2010), »When Deliberative Theory Meets Empirical Political Science. Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Political Deliberation.«, Political Studies, 58: 609–629. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00835.x
  8. Bächtiger, A., Niemeyer, S., Neblo, M. et al. (2010a), »Toward More Realistic Models of Deliberative Democracy. Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities«, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18/1: 32–63. Open Google Scholar
  9. Bächtiger, A., Pedrini, S., and Ryser, M. (2010b), »Prozessanalyse politischer Entscheidungen. Deliberative Standards, Diskurstypen und Sequenzialisierung«, in J. Benke, T. Bräuninger, and S. Shikano (eds.), Jahrbuch für Handlungs- und Entscheidungstheorie, Band 6: Schwerpunkt Neuere Entwicklungen des Konzepts der Rationalität und ihrer Anwendung (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag), 193–223. Open Google Scholar
  10. Bächtiger, A., Shikano, S., Pedrini, S. et al. (2010c), Measuring Deliberation 2.0: Standards, Discourse Types, and Sequentialization (Manuscript). Open Google Scholar
  11. Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M., Steenbergen, M. R. et al. (2005), »The Deliberative Dimensions of Legislatures«, Acta politica, 40: 225–238. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500103
  12. Bailer, S. (2011), Parliamentary Party Group Discipline in Comparison. Paper prepared for the 1st Annual General Conference on the European Political Science Association, June 16-18 (Dublin). Open Google Scholar
  13. Bailer, S., Schulz, T., and Selb, P. (2009), »What Role for the Party Group Leader? A Latent Variable Approach to Leadership Effects on Party Group Cohesion in the European Parliament«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 15/4: 355–378. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572330903302455
  14. Barabas, J. (2004), »How Deliberation Affects Policy Opinions«, The American Political Science Review, 98/4: 687–701. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404041425
  15. Bendjaballah, S. (2011), »La formation des consensus au Parlement européen et à la Chambre des représentants américaine (1999-2009)«, Dissertation (Paris, SciencesPo). Open Google Scholar
  16. Bendor, J., Glazer, A., and Hammond, T. (2001), »Theories of Delegation«, Annual Review of Political Science, 4: 235–269. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.235
  17. Benedetto, G. (2005), »Rapporteurs as legislative entrepreneurs: the dynamics of the codecision procedure in Europe's Parliament«, Journal of European Public Policy, 12/1: 67–88. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000311916
  18. Berg, H.-J. (1982), Der Verteidigungsausschuss des Deutsches Bundestages: Kontrollorgan zwischen Macht und Ohnmacht (München: Bernhard & Graefe). Open Google Scholar
  19. Bessette, J. M. (1994), The Mild Voice of Reasons. Deliberative Democracy and American National Government (Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press). Open Google Scholar
  20. Biddle, B. J., and Edwin, T. J. (1966), Role Theory: Concepts and Research (New York, London, Sydney: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.). Open Google Scholar
  21. Blomgren, M., and Rozenberg, O. (2012a), »Legislative roles and legislative studies: the neo-institutionalist turning point?«, in M. Blomgren and O. Rozenberg (eds.), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures (Abingdon: Routledge), 8–36. Open Google Scholar
  22. —— (2012b) »Introduction«, in M. Blomgren and O. Rozenberg (eds.), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures (Abingdon: Routledge), 1–7. Open Google Scholar
  23. —— (2012) (eds.), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures (Abingdon: Routledge). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.7202/1013198ar
  24. Bogaards, M., and Crepaz, M. M. (2002), »Forum section Consociational interpretations of the European Union«, European Union Politics, 3/3: 357–381. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116502003003004
  25. Bohman, J. (1996), Public Deliberation. Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy (Cambridge, Mass., London: The MIT Press). Open Google Scholar
  26. —— (1998), »Survey Artivle. The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy«, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 6/4: 400–425. Open Google Scholar
  27. Bohman, J., and Rehg, W. (1997) (eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics (Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press). Open Google Scholar
  28. Bowler, S., and Farrell, D. M. (1995), »The Organizing of the European Parliament. Committees, Specialization and Co-ordination«, British Journal of Political Science, 25/219-243. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007158
  29. Button, M., and Kevin, M. (1999), »Deliberative Democracy in Practice: Challenges and Prospects for Civic Deliberation«, Polity, XXXI/4: 609–637. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/3235238
  30. Carruba, C., Gabel, M., Murrah, L. et al. (2006), »Off the Record. Unrecorded Legislative Votes, Selection Bias and Roll-Call Vote Analysis«, British Journal of Political Science, 36/4: 691–704. Open Google Scholar
  31. Chambers, S. (2004), »Behind Closed Doors. Publicity, Secrecy, and the Quality of Deliberation«, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 12/4: 389–410. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2004.00206.x
  32. Chryssochoou, D. N. (1994), »Democracy and symbiosis in the European Union. Toward a confederal consociation?«, West European Politics, 17/4: 1–14. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/01402389408425040
  33. Cohen, J. (1989), »Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy«, in A. Hamlin and P. Pettit (eds.), The Good Polity. Normative Analysis of the State (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing), 17–34. Open Google Scholar
  34. —— (1997), »Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy«, in J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds.), Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics (London: MIT Press), 67–91. Open Google Scholar
  35. Converse, P. E., and Pierce, R. (1986), Political Representation in France (Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press). Open Google Scholar
  36. Corbett, R., Jacobs, F., and Shackleton, M. (2011), The European Parliament (8th edition, London: John Harper Publishing). Open Google Scholar
  37. Costa, O. (2001), Le Parlement européen, assemblée délibérante (Bruxelles: les éditions de l'Université de Bruxelles). Open Google Scholar
  38. —— (2009), »Le Parlement européen dans le système décisionnel de l'Union européenne: la puissance au prix de l'illisibilité«, politique européenne, 28/printemps: 137–163. Open Google Scholar
  39. —— (2013), »La parlementarisation de l'Union: pour une approche dynamique du régime politique européen«, Mémoire pour l'Habilitation à Diriger les Recherches en Science politique (Bordeaux, Sciences Po Bordeaux). Open Google Scholar
  40. Costa, O., Brack, N., and Dri, C. (2011a), How is working the EP?: Procedural evolution in Europe and in the US. Paper prepared for the AFSP 11th Conference, August 31-September 2 (Strasbourg). Open Google Scholar
  41. Costa, O., Dehousse, R., and Trakalová, A. (2011b), »Codecision and »early agreements« «, Studies & Research, No. 84. Open Google Scholar
  42. Costa, O., and Kerrouche, E. (2007), Qui sont les députés français?: Enquête sur des élites inconnues (Paris: Presses de Sciences Po). Open Google Scholar
  43. Costa, O., and Magnette, P. (2003), »The European Union as a consociation? A methodological assessment«, West European Politics, 26/3: 1–18. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/01402380312331280568
  44. Costello, R., and Thomson, R. (2010), »The policy impact of leadership in committees. Rapporteurs’ influence on the European Parliament's opinions«, European Union Politics, 11/2: 219–240. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116510353459
  45. —— (2011), »The nexus of bicameralism. Rapporteurs’ impact on decision outcomes in the European Union«, European Union Politics, 12/3: 337–357. Open Google Scholar
  46. Curato, N. (2012), »A sequential analysis of democratic deliberation«, Acta politica, 47/4: 423–442. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/ap.2012.15
  47. Dahl, R. A. (1989), Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press). Open Google Scholar
  48. Dahrendorf, R. (2006), Homo Sociologicus. Ein Versuch zur Geschichte, Bedeutung und Kritik der Kategorie der sozialen Rolle (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90216-6_1
  49. Damgaard, E. (1997), »The political roles of Danish MPs«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 3/1: 79–90. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572339708420500
  50. Deitelhoff, N., and Müller, H. (2005), »Theoretical paradise - empricially lost? Arguing with Habermas«, Review of International Studies, 31: 167–179. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0260210505006364
  51. Delli Carpini, M. X., Cook, F. L., and Jacobs, L. R. (2004), »Public Deliberation, Discursive Participation, and Citizen Engagement. A Review of the Empirical Literature«, Annual Review of Political Science, 7/1: 315–344. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.121003.091630
  52. Dryzek, J. S. (2000), Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  53. —— (2006), Deliberative Global Politics. Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World (reprinted 2008, Cambridge, Malden: Polity Press). Open Google Scholar
  54. —— (2010), »Rhetoric in Democracy. A systemic Appreciation«, Political Theory, 38/3: 319–339. Open Google Scholar
  55. Dryzek, J. S., and Braithwaite, V. (2000), »On the Prospects for Democratic Deliberation. Values Analysis Applied to Australian Politics«, Political Psychology, 21/2: 241–266. Open Google Scholar
  56. Dryzek, J. S., and Niemeyer, S. (2006), »Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals«, American Journal of Political Science, 50/3: 634–649. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00206.x
  57. Elster, J. (1994), »Argumenter et négocier dans deux Assemblées constituantes.«, Revue francaise de science politique, 44/2: 187–256. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3406/rfsp.1994.394826
  58. —— (1998a), »Introduction«, in J. Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press), 1–18. Open Google Scholar
  59. —— (1998b), »Deliberation and Constitution Making«, in J. Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press), 97–122. Open Google Scholar
  60. —— (1998) (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar
  61. —— (2000), »Arguing and Bargaining in Two Constituent Assemblies«, Journal of Constitutional Law, 2/2: 345–421. Open Google Scholar
  62. Esaiasson, P., and Holmberg, S. (1996), Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden (Farnham, Burlington: Ashgate Dartmouth). Open Google Scholar
  63. Estlund, D. (1997), »Beyond fairness and Deliberation. The epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority«, in J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds.), Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press), 173–204. Open Google Scholar
  64. Eulau, H., Wahlke, J. C., Buchanan, W. et al. (1959), »The Role of Representative. Some Empirical Observations on the Theory of Edmund Burke«, The American Political Science Review, 53/3: 742–756. Open Google Scholar
  65. Farrell, D. M., Hix, S., and Scully, R. (2011), EPRG MEP Survey Dataset: 2011 Release (http://www2.lse.ac.uk/government/research/resgroups/EPRG/MEPsurvey Data.aspx). Open Google Scholar
  66. Farrell, H., and Héritier, A. (2004), »Interorganizational Negotiation and Intraorganizational Power in Shared Decision Making. Early Agreements Under Codecision and Their Impact on the European Parliament and Council«, Comparative Political Studies, 37/10: 1184–1212. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0010414004269833
  67. Fearon, J. D. (1998), »Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation«, International Organization, 52/2: 269–305. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1162/002081898753162820
  68. Fenno, Richard F. (J.R.) (1973), Congressmen in Committees (Reprinted 1995, Berkeley: University of California). Open Google Scholar
  69. —— (2003 (1978)), Home Style. House Members in Their Districts (New York, San Francisco, Boston: Longman). Open Google Scholar
  70. Fishkin, J. S. (2009), When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  71. Fishkin, J. S., and Luskin, R. C. (2005), »Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion«, Acta politica, 40: 284–298. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500121
  72. Fung, A. (2007), »Minipublics. Deliberative Designs and their Consequences«, in S. W. Rosenberg (ed.), Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave McMillan), 159–83. Open Google Scholar
  73. Gabel, M. T. (1998), »The Endurance of Supranational Governance: A Consociational Interpretation of the European Union«, Comparative Politics, 30/4: 463–475. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/422334
  74. Goodin, R. E. (2000), »Democratic Deliberation Within«, Philosphy & Public Affairs, 29/1: 81–109. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2000.00081.x
  75. —— (2005), »Sequencing Deliberative Moments«, Acta politica, 40/2: 182–196. Open Google Scholar
  76. —— (2008), Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice After the Deliberative Turn. (New York: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  77. Grünefelder, R., and Bächtiger, A. (2007), Gendered Deliberation? How Men and Women Deliberate in Legislatures. Paper to be presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions, May 7-12 (Helsinki). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/9780230591080_5
  78. Gutmann, A., and Thompson, D. (1996), Democracy and Disagreement (Cambridge, Mass., London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press). Open Google Scholar
  79. Habermas, J. (1994), »Three normative models of democracy«, Constellations, 1/1. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8675.1994.tb00001.x
  80. —— (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (second printing, Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press). Open Google Scholar
  81. —— (1999), Die Einbeziehung des Anderen - Studien zur politischen Theorie (Frankfurt am Main). Open Google Scholar
  82. —— (2005), »Concluding comments on empirical approaches to deliberative politics.«, Acta politica, 2005: 348–392. Open Google Scholar
  83. Hangartner, D., Bächtiger, A., Grünefelder, R. et al. (2007), »Mixing Habermas with Bayes. Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Study of Deliberation«, Swiss Political Science Review, 13/4: 607–644. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00091.x
  84. Hix, S. (2002a), »Constitutional Agenda-Setting Through Discretion Rule Interpretation. Why the European Parliament Won at Amsterdam«, British Journal of Political Science, 32: 259–280. Open Google Scholar
  85. —— (2002b), »Parliamentary Behavior with Two Principals. Preferences, Parties, and Voting in the European Parliament«, American Journal of Political Science, 46/3: 688–698. Open Google Scholar
  86. Hix, S., Kreppel, A., and Noury, R. (2003), »The Party System in the European Parliament. Collusive or Competitive?«, Journal of Common Market Studies, 41/2: 309–331. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00424
  87. Hix, S., and Noury, A. (2009), »After Enlargement. Voting Patterns in the Sixth European Parliament«, Legislative Studies Quarterly, XXXIV/2: 159–174. Open Google Scholar
  88. Hix, S., Noury, A. G., and Roland, G. (2006), »Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament«, American Journal of Political Science, 50/2: 494–511. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00198.x
  89. Hix, S., Noury, A. G., and Roland, G. (2007), Democratic Politics in the European Parliament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491955
  90. Holzinger, K. (2001), »Verhandeln statt Argumentieren oder Verhandeln durch Argumentieren? Eine empirische Analyse auf Basis der Sprechakttheorie«, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 42/3: 414–446. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s11615-001-0073-2
  91. —— (2004), »Bargaining Through Arguing: An Empirical Analysis Based on Speech Act Theory«, Political Communication, 21/2: 195–222. Open Google Scholar
  92. Høyland, B. (2006a), »Allocation of Codecision Reports in the Fifth European Parliament«, European Union Politics, 7/1: 30–50. Open Google Scholar
  93. —— (2006b), Left-right and institutional preferences? EP roll-call votes in the codecision procedure. Paper prepared for the Pan-European Conference on EU politics, September 20-23 (Istanbul). Open Google Scholar
  94. Jensen, T., and Winzen, T. (2012), »Legislative negotiations in the European Parliament«, European Union Politics, 13/1: 118–149. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116511419982
  95. Judge, D., and Earnshaw, D. (2008), The European Parliament (2nd edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave Mcmillan). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199535026.003.0014
  96. Kaeding, M. (2004), »Rapporteurship Allocation in the European Parliament. Information or Distribution?«, European Union Politics, 5/3: 353–371. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116504045157
  97. Kanra, B. (2009), Binary Deliberation - Enhancing the role of social learning in deliberative democracy (Canberra: The Australian National University). Open Google Scholar
  98. —— (2012), »Binary Deliberation: The Role of Social Learning in Divided Societies«, Journal of Public Deliberation, 8/1: Article 1. Open Google Scholar
  99. Katz, R. S. (1997), »Representational roles«, European Journal of Political Research, 32: 211–226. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00339
  100. Kelle, U. (2008), Die Integration qualitativer und quanitativer Methoden in der empirischen Sozialforschung. Theoretische Grundlagen und methodologische Konzepte, 2nd edition (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91174-8
  101. Kielhorn, A. (2001), »Rollenorientierungen von Abgeordneten in Europa. Eine empirische Analyse von Bestimmungsgründen und Konsequenzen der Repräsentationsrolle von Parlamentariern in elf EU-Ländern«, Dissertation (Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin). Open Google Scholar
  102. Kies, R., and Nanz, P. (2013) (eds.), Is Europe Listening To Us?: Sucesses and Failures of EU Citizen Consultations (Farnham, Burlington: Ashgate). Open Google Scholar
  103. Kreppel, A. (2002a), »Rules, Ideology and Coalition Formation in the European Parliament. Past, Present and Future«, European Union Politics, 1/3: 340–362. Open Google Scholar
  104. —— (2002b), »Moving Beyond Procedure. An Empirical Analysis of European Parliament Legislative Influence«, Comparative Political Studies, 35: 784–813. Open Google Scholar
  105. Kreppel, A., and Hix, S. (2003), »From »Grand Coalition« To Left-Right Confrontation. Explaining the Shifting Structure of Party Competition in the European Parliament«, Comparative Political Studies, 36 (1/2): 75-96. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0010414002239372
  106. Kreppel, A., and Tsebelis, G. (1999), »Coalition Formation in the European Parliament«, Comparative Political Studies, 32/8: 933–966. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0010414099032008002
  107. Landwehr, C. (2010), »Discourse and Coordination. Modes of Interaction and their Roles in Political Decision-Making«, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18/1: 101–122. Open Google Scholar
  108. Lascher, E. L. (1996), »Assessing Legislative Deliberation: A Preface to Empirical Analysis«, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 21/4: 501–519. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/440459
  109. Leibholz, G. (1929), »Das Wesen der Repräsentation«, in L. Gerhard (ed.), Das Wesen der Repräsentation und der Gestaltwandel der Demokratie im 20. Jahrhundert (Berlin: de Gruyter), 13–210. Open Google Scholar
  110. Leite Viegas, J. M., and Carvalho, S. I. (2013), »Democratic Deliberation: The attitudes of deputies and citizens«, in A. Freire and J. M. Leite Viegas (eds.), Election, Leadership and Political Representation in Portugal: Essays on Parliament, Media, Voluntary Associations, Parties, Politics, and Voting (Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press). Open Google Scholar
  111. Lindberg, B., Rasmussen, A., and Warntjen, A. (2008), »Party politics as usual? The role of political parties in EU legislative decision-making«, Journal of European Public Policy, 15/8: 1107–1126. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13501760802407623
  112. Linton, R. (1936), The Study of Man (New York: D. Appleton Century). Open Google Scholar
  113. —— (1945), The Cultural Background of Personality (New York: D. Appleton Century). Open Google Scholar
  114. Lord, C. (2008), »Still in Democratic Deficit«, Intereconomics, 43/6: 316–320. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s10272-008-0266-7
  115. Lord, C., and Tamvaki, D. (2011), »The Politics of Justification? Applying the »Discourse Quality Index« to the Study of the European Parliament«, RECON Online Working Paper, 2011/03. Open Google Scholar
  116. Lupia, A., and McCubbins, M. D. (2000), »Representation or abdication? How citizens use institutions to help delegation suceed«, European Journal of Political Research, 37: 291–307. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00514
  117. Macedo, S. (1999) (ed.), Deliberative Politics. Essays on Democracy and Disagreement (New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  118. Magnette, P., and Papadopoulos, Y. (2008), »On the politicization of the European consociation: A middle way between Hix and Bartolini«, European Governance Papers EUROGOV N. C-08-01. Open Google Scholar
  119. Mair, P. (2007), »Political Opposition and the European Union«, Government and Opposition, 42/1: 1–17. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2007.00209.x
  120. Majone, G. (1994), »Décisions publiques et délibération«, Revue francaise de science politique, 44/4: 579–598. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3406/rfsp.1994.396230
  121. —— (1998), »Europe‘s »Democratic Deficit«. The Questions of Standards«, European Law Journal, 4/1: 5–28. Open Google Scholar
  122. Mamadouh, V., and Raunio, T. (2003), »The Committee System. Powers, Appointments and Report Allocation«, Journal of Common Market Studies, 41/2: 333-351. Open Google Scholar
  123. Manin, B. (1987), »On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation«, Political Theory, 15/3: 338–368. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0090591787015003005
  124. —— (1995), Principes du gouvernement représentatif (Paris: Calmann-Lévy). Open Google Scholar
  125. Mansbridge, J. (1999), »Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent »Yes« «, The Journal of Politics, 61/3: 626–657. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/2647821
  126. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S. et al. (2010), »The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy«, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18/1. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00344.x
  127. Martì, J. L. (2006), »The Epistemic Conception of Deliberative Democracy Defended«, in S. Besson and J. L. Martí (eds.), Deliberative Democracy and its Discontens (Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited), 27–56. Open Google Scholar
  128. Mayring, P. (2008), Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (Weinheim: Beltz). Open Google Scholar
  129. McElroy, G. (2001), »Committees and Party Cohesion in the European Parliament«, EPRG Working Paper No.8, Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 30 (San Francisco). Open Google Scholar
  130. —— (2006), »Committee Representation in the European Parliament«, European Union Politics, 7/1: 5–29. Open Google Scholar
  131. —— (2008), »Committees and Party Cohesion in the European Parliament«, Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft (ÖZP), 37/3: 357–373. Open Google Scholar
  132. McElroy, G., and Benoit, K. (2010), »Party Policy and Group Affiliation in the European Parliament«, British Journal of Political Science, 40/2: 377–398. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990469
  133. Mead, G. H. (1934), Mind, Self an Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). Open Google Scholar
  134. Mendelberg, T. (2002), »The Deliberative Citizen. Theory and Evidence.«, in M. X. Delli Carpini, L. Huddy, and R. Y. Shapiro (eds.), Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press), 151–93. Open Google Scholar
  135. Miller, G. J. (2005), »The Political Evolution of Principal-Agent Models«, Annual Review of Political Science, 8: 203–225. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104840
  136. Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E. (1963), »Constituency Influence in Congress«, The American Political Science Review, 57/1: 45–56. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/1952717
  137. Moravcsik, A. (2008), »The Myth of Europe‘s »Democratic Deficit« «, Intereconomics, 43/6: 331–340. Open Google Scholar
  138. Mouffe, C. (1999), »Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism«, Social Research, 66/3: 745–758. Open Google Scholar
  139. Müller, W. C. (2000), »Political parties in parliamentary democracies. Making delegation and accountability work«, European Journal of Political Research, 37: 309–333. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00515
  140. Nastasi, B. K., Hitchcok, J. H., and Brown, L. M. (2010), »An Inclusive Framework for Conceptualizing Mixed Methods Design Typlogogies«, in A. C. Tashakkori (ed.), SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods & Behavioral Research, 2nd edition (Los Angeles: SAGE), 305–338. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n13
  141. Naurin, D. (2009), »Most Common When Least Important. Deliberation in the European Union Council of Ministers«, British Journal of Political Science, 40: 31–50. Open Google Scholar
  142. Navarro, J. (2007), »Les députés européens et leur rôle: analyse sociologique de la représentation«, Dissertation (Bordeaux, Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Bordeaux). Open Google Scholar
  143. —— (2009), »Les rôles au Parlement européen. Une typologie des pratiques de représentation«, Revue française de science politique, 59/3: 479–506. Open Google Scholar
  144. Neuhold, C. (2001), »The »Legislative Backbone« keeping the Institution upright?«, European Integration online Paper (EIoP), 5/10 <http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2001-010a.htm>. Open Google Scholar
  145. Noury, A., and Roland, G. (2000), »Comment vote-t-on au Parlement européen? Premiers résultats«, in P. Magnette and E. Remacle (eds.), Le nouveau modèle européen. Volume 1, Institutions et gouvernance (Bruxelles: Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles), 67–77. Open Google Scholar
  146. Noury, A. G. (2002), »Ideology, Nationality and Euro-Parliamentarians«, European Union Politics, 3/1: 33–58. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116502003001003
  147. Parkinson, J., and Mansbridge, J. (2013), Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar
  148. Parsons, T. (1951), The Social System (Clencoe, III: The Free Press). Open Google Scholar
  149. Patzelt, W. J. (1991), »Neuere Repräsentationstheorie und das Repräsentationsverständnis von Abgeordneten«, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 38/2: 166–199. Open Google Scholar
  150. —— (1997), »German MPs and their roles«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 3/1: 55–78. Open Google Scholar
  151. Pedrini, S., and Bächtiger, A. (2010), Deliberative Inclusion of Minorities: Equality and Reciprocity among Linguistic Groups in Switzerland: Paper to be presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 2-5 (Washington). Open Google Scholar
  152. Petty, R., and Krosnick, J. (1995), The Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences (Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates). Open Google Scholar
  153. Pitkin, H. F. (1967 (1972)), The Concept of Representation, 2nd edition (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press), first pub. 1967. Open Google Scholar
  154. Proksch, S.-O., and Slapin, J. B. (2010), »Position Taking in European Parliament Speeches«, British Journal of Political Science, 40/3: 587–611. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990299
  155. Rasmussen, A. (2008), »Party soldiers in a non-partisan community? Party linkage in the European Parliament«, Journal of European Public Policy, 15/8: 1164–1183. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13501760802407672
  156. Reif, K., and Schmitt, H. (1980), »Nine second-order national elections - a conceptual framework for the anlaysis of European election results«, European Journal of Political Research, 8: 3–44. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1980.tb00737.x
  157. Ringe, N. (2010), Who Decides, and How?: Preferences, Uncertainty, and Policy Choice in the European Parliament (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  158. Risse, T. (1999), »International Norms and Domestic Change: Arguing and Communicative Behavior in the Human Rights Area«, Politics & Governance, 27/4: 529–559. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0032329299027004004
  159. —— (2004), »Global Governance and Communicative Action«, Government and Opposition, 39/2: 288–313. Open Google Scholar
  160. Roger, L. (2010), Assessing deliberation in European Parliament - Building up an extended measurement instrument. Paper to be presented at the International Conference Making Parliament Speaks, October 13-14 (Paris). Open Google Scholar
  161. —— (2012a), Analyzing parliamentary communication: The impact of role orientations on MEPs' discursive behavior in committee debates. Paper to be presented at the Inaugural Conference of the ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments, June 24-27 (Dublin). Open Google Scholar
  162. —— (2012b), Trustee versus Delegate - investigating the role performance of Members of the European Parliament. Paper to be presented at the ECPR Joint Session, April 10-15 (Antwerp). Open Google Scholar
  163. —— (2013a), MEPs and their voters: Analyzing the impact of interests on MEPs discursive behavior in committee debates. Paper to be presented at the 7th ECPR General Conference, September 4-7 (Bordeaux). Open Google Scholar
  164. —— (2013b), »The Deliberative Quality of the Agora«, in R. Kies and P. Nanz (eds.), Is Europe Listening To Us? Sucesses and Failures of EU Citizen Consultations (Farnham, Burlington: Ashgate), 173–97. Open Google Scholar
  165. —— (2014), »Deliberation im Europäischen Parlament. Der Einfluss von Rollenorientierungen auf das Kommunikationsverhalten von Abgeordneten«, in A. Bächtiger, B. Kittel, and E. Linhart (eds.), Jahrbuch für Handlungs- und Entscheidungstheorie, Band 9, Räumliche Modelle der Politik (Im Erscheinen). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05008-5_1
  166. Roger, L., and Schaal, G. S. (2013), »The Quality of Deliberation in Two Committees of the European Parliament. The Neglected Influence of the Situational Context and the Policymaking Stage«, Politics & Governance, 1/2: 151–169. Open Google Scholar
  167. Roger, L., and Winzen, T. (2015), »Party groups and committee negotiations in the European Parliament: outside attention and the anticipation of plenary conflict«, Journal of European Public Policy, 22/3: 391–408. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.941379
  168. Ryfe, D. M. (2005), »Does Deliberative Democracy Work?«, American Political Science Review, 2005: 49–71. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.032904.154633
  169. Saalfeld, T. (1997), »Professionalisation of Parliamentary Roles in Germany: An Aggregate-level Analysis, 1949-94«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 3/1: 32–54. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572339708420498
  170. Saalfeld, T., and Müller, W. C. (1997), »Roles in legislative studies: A theoretical introduction«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 3/1: 1–16. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572339708420496
  171. Saldaña, J. (2013), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications). Open Google Scholar
  172. Sanders, L. M. (1997), »Against Deliberation«, Political Theory, 25/3: 347–376. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0090591797025003002
  173. Sartori, G. (1970), »Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics«, The American Political Science Review, 64/4: 1033–1053. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/1958356
  174. Scarrow, S. E. (1997), »Political Career Paths and the European Parliament«, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 22/2: 253–263. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/440385
  175. Schimank, U. (2000), Handeln und Strukturen: Einführung in die akteurtheoretische Soziologie (Weinheim, München: Juventa). Open Google Scholar
  176. Schwarzmeier, M. (2001), Parlamentarische Mitsteuerung: Strukturen und Prozesse informalen Einflusses im deutschen Bundestag. (Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80388-7_3
  177. Scully, R., and Farrell, D. M. (2003), »MEPs as Representatives. Individual and Institutional Roles«, Journal of Common Market Studies, 41/2: 269–288. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00422
  178. —— (2007), Representing Europe's Citizens?: Electoral Institutions and the Failure of Parliamentary Representation (New York: Oxford University Press). Open Google Scholar
  179. Searing, D. W. (1994), Westminster´s World. Understanding Political Roles (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press). Open Google Scholar
  180. Searle, J. R. (1969), Speech acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar
  181. Settembri, P., and Neuhold, C. (2009), »Achieving Consensus Through Committees. Does the European Parliament Manage?«, Journal of Common Market Studies, 47/1: 127–151. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2008.01835.x
  182. Sieberer, U. (2006), »Party unity in parliamentary democracies. A comparative analysis«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 12/2: 150–178. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572330600739413
  183. Slapin, J. B., and Proksch, S.-O. (2010), »Look who's talking. Parliamentary debate in the European Union«, European Union Politics, 11/3: 333–357. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116510369266
  184. Squires, J. (2006), »Deliberation and decision making: discontinuity in the two-track model«, in M. Passerin d'Entrèves (ed.), Democracy as Public Deliberation (New Jersey: Manchester University Press), 133–56. Open Google Scholar
  185. Steenbergen, M. R., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. et al. (2003), »Measuring Political Deliberation. A Discourse Quality Index«, Comparative European Politics, 1: 21–48. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110002
  186. Steenbergen, M.R., Bächtiger, A., Steiner, J. (2004), Toward a Political Psychology of Deliberation. Paper presented at the Conference on Empirical Approaches to Deliberative Politics, European University Institute, May 21-22 (Florence). Open Google Scholar
  187. Steiner, J. (2008), »Concept Stretching: The Case of Deliberation«, European Political Science Review, 7: 186–190. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210186
  188. —— (2010), The Foundations of Deliberative Democracy: Empirical Research and Normative Implications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar
  189. Steiner, J., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. et al. (2004), Deliberative Politics in Action. Analysing Parliamentary Discourse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar
  190. Stie, A. E. (2010), »Decision-making Void of Democratic Qualities? An Evaluation of the EU’s Second Pillar Decision-making Procedure«, in S. Vanhoonacker, H. Dijkstra, and H. Maurer (eds.), Understanding the Role of Bureaucracy in the European Security and Defence Policy. European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 14 (1), Article 1. Open Google Scholar
  191. Strecker, D., and Schaal, G. S. (2006), »Die politische Theorie der Deliberation: Jürgen Habermas«, in A. Brodocz and G. S. Schaal (eds.), Politische Theorien der Gegenwart. Eine Einführung, 2., erweiterte und aktualisierte Auflage (Opladen, Farmington Hills: Verlag Barbara Budrich), 99–148. Open Google Scholar
  192. Strøm, K. (1997), »Rules, Reasons, and Routines: Legislative Roles in Parliamentary Democracies«, Journal of Legislative Studies, 3/1: 155–174. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13572339708420504
  193. —— (2000), »Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies’, in R. Bellamy and A. Palumbo (eds.), Political Accountability (Farnham: Ashgate). Open Google Scholar
  194. —— (2012), »Roles as strategies: toward a logic of legislative behavior«, in M. Blomgren and O. Rozenberg (eds.), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures (Abingdon: Routledge), 85–100. Open Google Scholar
  195. Stromer-Galley, J. (2007), »Measuring Deliberation's Content. A Coding Scheme«, Journal of Public Deliberation, 3/1: Article 12. Open Google Scholar
  196. Sunstein, C. (2003), »The Law of Group Polarization«, in J. S. Fishkin and P. Laslett (eds.), Debating Deliberative Democracy (Malden, Oxford, Carlton: Blackwell Publishing Ltd), 80–101. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1002/9780470690734.ch4
  197. Tetlock, P., and Kim, J. I. (1987), »Accountability and Judgment Processes in a Personality Prediction Task«, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52/4: 700–709. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.700
  198. Tetlock, P. E. (1985), »A Social Check on the Fundamental Attribution Error«, Social Psychology Quarterly, 48/3: 227–236. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/3033683
  199. Thiem, J. (2009), Nationale Parteien im Europäischen Parlament. Delegation, Kontrolle und politischer Einfluss. (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91357-5
  200. Thompson, D. F. (2008), »Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science«, Annual Review of Political Science, 11/June: 497–520. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070555
  201. Tsebelis, G. (1994), »The Power of the European Parliament as the Conditional Agenda Setter«, The American Political Science Review, 88/1: 128–142. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/2944886
  202. —— (1995), »Decision Making in Political Systems. Veto Player in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism«, British Journal of Politcal Science, 25/3: 289–325. Open Google Scholar
  203. Tsebelis, G., and Garrett, G. (2000), »Legislative Politics in the European Union«, European Union Politics, 1/1: 9–36. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116500001001002
  204. Turner, R. H. (1962), »Role Taking: Process versus Conformity«, in A. Rose (ed.), Human Behavior and Social Processes (Boston: Houghton-Mifflin), 20–40. Open Google Scholar
  205. Ulbert, C., and Risse, T. (2005), »Deliberately Changing the Discourse. What Does Make Arguing Effectively?«, Acta politica, 40/3: 351–367. Open Google Scholar
  206. Urfalino, P. (2005), »La délibération n'est pas une conversation - délibération, décision collective et négociation«, Négociations, 2/4: 99–114. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3917/neg.004.0099
  207. von Beyme, K. (1997), Der Gesetzgeber. Der Bundestag als Entscheidungszentrum. (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-90189-7_15
  208. Wahlke, J. C., Eulau, H., Buchanan, W. et al. (1962), The Legislative System. Explorations in Legislative Behavior. (New York, London: John Wiley and Sons). Open Google Scholar
  209. Warren, M. E. (2012), When, Where and Why Do We Need Deliberation, Voting and Other Means of Organizing Democracy? A Problem-Based Approach to Democratic Systems. Paper for delivery at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 30-September 2 (New Orleans). Open Google Scholar
  210. Warren, M. E., and Pearse, H. (2008), Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens' Assembly (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491177
  211. Whitaker, R. (2001), »Party Control in a Committee-Based Legislature? The Case of the European Parliament«, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 7/4: 63–88. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/714003891
  212. —— (2011), The European Parliament's Committees. National party influence and legislative empowerment (Abingdon: Routledge). Open Google Scholar
  213. Williams, M. S. (2000), »The Uneasy Alliance of Group Representation and Deliberative Democracy«, in W. Kymlicka and W. Norman (eds.), Citizenship in Diverse Societies (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 124–52. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/019829770X.003.0005
  214. Yack, B. (2006), »Rhetoric and Public Reasoning. An Aristotelian Understanding of Political Deliberation«, Political Theory, 34/4: 417–438. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0090591706288232
  215. Yordanova, N. (2009), Legislative Power of the European Parliament Committees: Plenary Adoption of Committee Reports. Paper prepared for the 11th Biannual Conference of the European Union Studies Association, April 23-25 (Los Angeles, California). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/1465116509103377
  216. —— (2010), Plenary »Amendments« to Committee Reports: Legislative Powers of the European Parliament Committees, Unpublished Manuscript. Open Google Scholar
  217. —— (2011), »Inter-institutional Rules and Division of Power in the European Parliament. Allocation of Consultatin and Co-decision Reports«, West European Politics, 34/1: 97–121. Open Google Scholar
  218. Young, I. M. (2001), »Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy«, Political Theory, 29/5: 670–690. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/0090591701029005004

Similar publications

from the topics "European Politics & European Union"
Cover of book: Europa
Book Titles No access
Hans Jörg Schrötter
Europa
Cover of book: Le sanzioni dell’UE nei confronti della Russia tra sicurezza internazionale e diritti umani
Edited Book No access
Antonino Alì
Le sanzioni dell’UE nei confronti della Russia tra sicurezza internazionale e diritti umani
Cover of book: The Multipolar Turn
Book Titles No access
Carla Fetcas, Martin Kreutner
The Multipolar Turn
Cover of book: European Union, How Comes?
Book Titles No access
Hartmut Marhold
European Union, How Comes?
Cover of book: Understanding the Emergence of Joint Debt Issuance on the EU Agenda
Book Titles No access
Sara Arezes
Understanding the Emergence of Joint Debt Issuance on the EU Agenda

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Give feedback

We welcome your feedback on content and features. Your message helps us to continuously improve our service.

Rating
Attach images
or drag and drop
PNG or JPG (max. 3 MB)

Login

Forgotten your password?
Login via Open Athens
Don't have an account yet?
Register now

Cite publication

Download: RIS BibTex