The responsiveness of legislative actors to stakeholders’ demands in the European Union

References

• Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L. and Glasgow, G. (2006) ‘Are niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of Western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976–1998’, American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 513–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyers, J. (2002) ‘Gaining and seeking access: the European adaptation of domestic interest associations’, European Journal of Political Research 41(5): 585–612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyers, J., De Bruycker, I. and Baller, I. (2015) ‘The alignment of parties and interest groups in EU legislative politics. A tale of two different worlds?’, Journal of European Public Policy 22(4): 534–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouwen, P. (2002) ‘Corporate lobbying in the European Union: the logic of access’, Journal of European Public Policy 9(3): 365–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouwen, P. (2004) ‘Exchanging access goods for access: a comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union institutions’, European Journal of Political Research 43: 337–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueno de Mesquita, B. and Stokman, F.N. (eds) (1994) European Community Decision-Making: Models, Applications, and Comparisons, New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bunea, A. (2017) ‘Designing stakeholder consultations: reinforcing or alleviating bias in the European Union system of governance?’, European Journal of Political Research 56(1): 46–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunea, A. and Thomson, R. (2015) ‘Consultations with interest groups and the empowerment of executives: evidence from the European Union’, Governance 28(4): 517–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costello, R. and Thomson, R. (2016) ‘Bicameralism, nationality and party cohesion in the European Parliament’, Party Politics 22(6): 773–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowles, M. G. (1995) ‘Setting the agenda for a New Europe: the ERT and EC 1992’, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 33(4): 501–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crombez, C. (1997) ‘Policy making and Commission appointment in the European Union’, Aussenwirtschaft 52(1–2): 63–82.
   Google Scholar
• Dür, A. and de Bièvre, D. (2007) ‘Inclusion without Influence? NGOs in European trade policy’, Journal of Public Policy 27(1): 79–101.
   Google Scholar
• Dür, A., Bernhagen, P. and Marshall, D. (2015) ‘Interest group success in the European Union: when (and why) does business lose?’, Comparative Political Studies 48(8): 951–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeberg, M. (2006) ‘Executive politics as usual: role behaviour and conflict dimensions in the College of European Commissioners’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(1): 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eising, R. (2007) ‘Institutional context, organizational resources and strategic choices: explaining interest group access in the european union’ European Union Politics 8(3): 329–62.
   Google Scholar
• Hix, S., Noury, A. and Roland, G. (2007) Democratic Politics in the European Parliament, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hooghe, L. (2005) ‘Several roads lead to international norms, but few via international socialization: a case study of the European Commission’, International Organization 59(4): 861–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klüver, H. (2013) ‘Lobbying as a collective enterprise: winners and losers of policy formulation in the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy 20(1): 59–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler-Koch, B. and Finke, B. (2007) ‘The institutional shaping of EU-society relations: a contribution to democracy via participation’, Journal of Civil Society 3(3): 205–21.
   Google Scholar
• Kreppel, A. (2002) The European Parliament and Supranational Party System, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lowery, D., et al. (2015) ‘Images of an unbiased interest system’, Journal of European Public Policy 22(8): 1212–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamadouh, V. and Raunio, T. (2003) ‘The committee system: powers, appointments and report allocation’, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 41(2): 333–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazey, S. and Richardson, J. (2006) ‘Interest groups and EU policy-making: organizational logic and venue shopping’, in J. Richardson (ed.) European Union: Power and Policy-making, Second edition, London: Routledge, pp. 247–68.
   Google Scholar
• McElroy, G. and Benoit, K. (2012) ‘Policy positioning in the European Parliament’, European Union Politics 13(1): 150–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moravcsik, A. (1997) ‘Taking preferences seriously: a liberal theory of international politics’, International Organization 51(4): 513–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollack, M.A. (1998) ‘Engines of integration? Supranational autonomy and influence in the European Union’, in W. Sandholtz and A. Stone Sweet (eds.), Supranational Governance: The Institutionalization of the European Union, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 217–49.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, A. and Alexandrova, P. (2012) ‘Foreign interests lobbying Brussels: participation of non-EU members in Commission consultations’, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 50(4): 614–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, A. and Carroll, B.J. (2014) ‘Determinants of upper-class dominance in the heavenly chorus: lessons from online consultations’, British Journal of Political Science 44(2): 445–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raunio, T. (2000) ‘Losing independence or finally gaining recognition? Contacts between MEPS and national parties’, Party Politics 6(2): 211–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. (ed) (1982) Policy Styles in Western Europe, Winchester, MA: George Allen and Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. (2012) ‘New governance or old governance? A policy style perspective’, in D. Levi-Faur (ed) The Oxford Handbook of Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 311–24.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, R. (2011) Resolving Controversy in the European Union: Legislative Decision-Making Before and After Enlargement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, R., Stokman, F.N., Achen, C.H. and König, T. (2006) The European Union Decides, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, R., et al. (2012) ‘A new dataset on decision-making in the European Union before and after the 2004 and 2007 enlargements (DEUII)’, Journal of European Public Policy 19(4): 604–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitaker, R. (2005) ‘National parties in the European Parliament: an influence in the committee system?’, European Union Politics 6(1): 5–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wonka, A. (2007) ‘Technocratic and independent? The appointment of European Commissioners and its policy implications’, Journal of European Public Policy 14(2): 169–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar