Institutional change in parliament through cross-border partisan emulation

References

• André, Audrey, Sam Depauw, and Shane Martin (2016). ‘“Trust Is Good, Control Is Better”: Multiparty Government and Legislative Organization’, Political Research Quarterly, 69:1, 108–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anselin, Luc (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Auel, Katrin, Olivier Rozenberg, and Angela Tacea (2015). ‘To Scrutinise or Not to Scrutinise? Explaining Variation in EU-Related Activities in National Parliaments’, West European Politics, 38:2, 282–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, Nathaniel, Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, and Kyle Beardsley (2006). ‘Space Is More than Geography: Using Spatial Econometrics in the Study of Political Economy’, International Studies Quarterly, 50:1, 27–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergman, Torbjørn (1997). ‘National Parliaments and EU Affairs Committees: Notes on Empirical Variation and Competing Explanations’, Journal of European Public Policy, 4:3, 373–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergman, Torbjørn, Wolfgang C. Müller, Kaare Strøm, and Magnus Blomgren (2003). ‘Democratic Delegation and Accountability: Cross-National Patterns’, in Kaare Strøm, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Torbjørn Bergman (eds.), Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 109–220.
   Google Scholar
• Binder, Sarah A. (1996). ‘The Partisan Basis of Procedural Choice: Allocating Parliamentary Rights in the House, 1789–1990’, American Political Science Review, 90:1, 8–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blom-Hansen, Jens, and Ingvild Olsen (2015). ‘National Parliamentary Control of EU Policy: The Challenge of Supranational Institutional Development’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 21:2, 125–143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böhmelt, Tobias, Lawrence Ezrow, Roni Lehrer, and Hugh Ward (2016). ‘Party Policy Diffusion’, American Political Science Review, 110:2, 397–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bormann, Niels-Christian, and Thomas Winzen (2016). ‘The Contingent Diffusion of Parliamentary Oversight Institutions in the European Union’, European Journal of Political Research, 55:3, 589–608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, Daniel M., Craig Volden, Adam M. Dynes, and Boris Shor (2017). ‘Ideology, Learning, and Policy Diffusion: Experimental Evidence’, American Journal of Political Science, 61:1, 37–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buzogány, Aron (2013). ‘Learning from the Best? Interparliamentary Networks and the Parliamentary Scrutiny of EU Decision-Making’, in Ben Crum and Fossum John Erik (eds.), Practices of Inter-Parliamentary Coordination in International Politics. Colchester: ECPR Press, 17–32.
   Google Scholar
• Darmofal, David (2015). Spatial Analysis for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Döring, Herbert (2001). ‘Parliamentary Agenda Control and Legislative Outcomes in Western Europe’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 26:1, 145–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franzese, Robert J., and Jude C. Hayes (2008). ‘Empirical Models of Spatial Dependence’, in Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, and David Collier (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 570–604.
   Google Scholar
• Franzese, Robert J., and Jude C. Hays (2007). ‘Spatial Econometric Models of Cross-Sectional Interdependence in Political Science Panel and Time-Series-Cross-Section Data’, Political Analysis 15:2, 140–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franzese, Robert J., and Jude C. Hays (2008). ‘Interdependence in Comparative Politics – Substance, Theory, Empirics, Substance’, Comparative Political Studies, 41:4–5, 742–780.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilardi, Fabrizio (2010). ‘Who Learns from What in Policy Diffusion Processes?’ American Journal of Political Science, 54:3, 650–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossback, Lawrence J., Sean Nicholson-Crotty, and David A. M. Peterson (2004). ‘Ideology and Learning in Policy Diffusion’, American Politics Research, 32:5, 521–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guinaudeau, Isabelle, and Tinette Schnatterer (2017). ‘Measuring Public Support for European Integration across Time and Countries: The “European Mood” Indicator’, British Journal of Political Science, 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamerly, Ivy (2012). ‘Christian Democratic Parties and the Domestic Parliamentary Response to European Integration’, Journal of Church and State, 54:2, 214–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbers, Imke, and Matthew C. Ingram (2017). ‘Incorporating Space in Multimethod Research: Combining Spatial Analysis with Case-Study Research’, PS: Political Science & Politics, 50:4, 1032–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hefftler, Claudia, Christine Neuhold, Olivier Rozenberg, and Julie Smith (eds.), (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Héritier, Adrienne (2006). Explaining Institutional Change in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jungar, Ann-Cathrine (2010). ‘The Choice of Parliamentary EU Scrutiny Mechanisms in the New Member States’, in Bengt Jacobsson (ed.), The European Union and the Baltic States: Changing Forms of Governance. London: Routledge, 121–42.
   Google Scholar
• Karlas, Jan (2012). ‘National Parliamentary Control of EU Affairs: Institutional Design after Enlargement’, West European Politics, 35:5, 1095–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, Richard S., and Bernhard Wessels eds. (1999). The European Parliament, National Parliaments, and European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• King, Gary, Michael Tomz, and Jason Wittenberg (2000). ‘Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation’, American Journal of Political Science, 44:2, 341–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeSage, James, and R. Kelley Pace eds. (1998). Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
   Google Scholar
• Malang, Thomas, Laurence Brandenberger, and Philip Leifeld (2017). ‘Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics’, British Journal of Political Science, 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Marks, Gary, and Liesbet Hooghe (2000). ‘Optimality and Authority: A Critique of Neoclassical Theory’, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 38:5, 795–816.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maurer, Andreas, and Wolfgang Wessels (2001). National Parliaments after Amsterdam: Losers or Latecomers? Baden-Baden: Nomos.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, Wolfgang C., and Ulrich Sieberer (2014). ‘Procedure and Rules in Legislatures’, in Shane Martin, Thomas Saalfeld, and Kaare W. Strøm (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Legislative Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 311–31.
   Google Scholar
• Neumayer, Eric, and Thomas Plümper (2012). ‘Conditional Spatial Policy Dependence: Theory and Model Specification’, Comparative Political Studies, 45:7, 819–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumayer, Eric, and Thomas Plümper (2016). ‘W’, Political Science Research and Methods, 4:1, 175–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, Philip, ed. (1996). National Parliaments and the European Union. London: Frank Cass.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brennan, John, and Tapio Raunio (2007). National Parliaments within the Enlarged European Union: From Victims of Integration to Competitive Actors? London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Plümper, Thomas, and Eric Neumayer (2010). ‘Model Specification in the Analysis of Spatial Dependence’, European Journal of Political Research, 49:3, 418–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rae, Douglas, and Michael Taylor (1971). ‘Decision Rules and Policy Outcomes’, British Journal of Political Science, 1:1, 71–90.
   Google Scholar
• Raunio, Tapio (2005). ‘Holding Governments Accountable in European Affairs: Explaining Cross-National Variation’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 11:3–4, 319–42.
   Google Scholar
• Raunio, Tapio (2009). ‘National Parliaments and European Integration: What We Know and Agenda for Future Research’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 15:4, 317–34.
   Google Scholar
• Raunio, Tapio (2011). ‘The Gatekeepers of European Integration? The Function of National Parliaments in the EU Political System’, Journal of European Integration, 33:3, 303–21.
   Google Scholar
• Seki, Katsunori, and Laron K. Williams (2014). ‘Updating the Party Government Data Set’, Electoral Studies, 34:1, 270–79.
   Google Scholar
• Shipan, Charles R., and Craig Volden (2012). ‘Policy Diffusion: Seven Lessons for Scholars and Practitioners’, Public Administration Review, 72:6, 788–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sieberer, Ulrich, Peter Meißner, Julia F. Keh, and Wolfgang C. Müller (2016). ‘Mapping and Explaining Parliamentary Rule Changes in Europe: A Research Program’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 41:1, 61–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strøm, Kaare, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Torbjörn Bergman (2003). ‘Introduction’, in Kaare Strøm, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Torbjörn Bergman (eds.), Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3–32.
   Google Scholar
• Toubeau, Simon, and Markus Wagner (2015). ‘Explaining Party Positions on Decentralization’, British Journal of Political Science, 45:1, 97–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsebelis, George (1990). Nested Games. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tsebelis, George (2002). Veto Player: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, Michael D., and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, eds. (2008). Spatial Regression Models. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkins, Arjun S. (2017). ‘To Lag or Not to Lag?: Re-Evaluating the Use of Lagged Dependent Variables in Regression Analysis’, Political Science Research and Methods, 6:2, 393–411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winzen, Thomas (2010). ‘Political Integration and National Parliaments in Europe’, Living Reviews in Democracy, 2, 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Winzen, Thomas (2012). ‘National Parliamentary Control of European Union Affairs: A Cross-National and Longitudinal Comparison’, West European Politics, 35:3, 657–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winzen, Thomas (2013). ‘European Integration and National Parliamentary Oversight Institutions’, European Union Politics, 14:2, 297–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winzen, Thomas (2017). Constitutional Preferences and Parliamentary Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar