Aberbach, J. D. 1990. Keeping a Watchful Eye: the Politics of Congressional Oversight. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar

Alesina, A. and Wacziarg, R. 1999. Is Europe going too far? Carnegie–Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 51: 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, D. 1996a. Cohesion and structural adjustment. In Policy-Making in the European Union, ed. Wallace, H. and Wallace, W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–33.Google Scholar

Allen, D. 1996b. Competition policy: policing the single market. In Policy-Making in the European Union, ed. Wallace, H. and Wallace., W.Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 157–83.Google Scholar

Armstrong, H. W. 1989. Community regional policy. In The European Community and the Challenge of the Future, ed. Lodge, J.. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar

Arregui, J., Stokman, F. and Thomson, R. 2004. Bargaining in the European Union and shifts in actors' policy positions. European Union Politics 5: 47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aspinwall, M. 2002. Preferring Europe: ideology and national preferences on European integration. European Union Politics 3: 81–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aspinwall, M. D. and Schneider, G. 2000. Same menu, separate tables: the institutionalist turn in political science and the study of European integration. European Journal of Political Research 38: 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Attinà, F. 1990. The voting behaviour of the European Parliament members and the problem of the Europarties. European Journal of Political Research 18: 557–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Attinà, F. 1992. Il Sistema Politico della Comunità Europea. Milan: Giuffrè.Google Scholar

Axelrod, R. 1984. The Evolution of Co-Operation. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Axelrod, R. and Keohane R. O. 1986. Achieving cooperation under anarchy: strategies and institutions. In Cooperation under Anarchy, ed. Oye, K. A.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bache, I. 1998. Politics of European Union Regional Policy: Multi-level Governance or Flexible Gatekeeping?London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bailer, S. 2004. Bargaining success in the European Union: the impact of exogenous and endogenous power resources. European Union Politics 5: 99–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balla, S. J. 1998. Administrative procedures and political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review 92: 663–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balla, S. J. and Wright, J. R. 2001. Interest groups, advisory committees, and congressional control of the bureaucracy. American Journal of Political Science 45: 799–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ballmann, A., Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 2002. Delegation, comitology, and the separation of powers in the European Union. International Organization 56: 551–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Banks, J. S. and Weingast, B. R. 1992. The political control of bureaucracies under asymmetric information. American Journal of Political Science 36: 509–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bartolini, S. 2000. The Class Cleavage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bartolini, S. and Mair, P., eds. 1984. Party Politics in Contemporary Western Europe. London: Cass.Google Scholar

Bawn, K. 1995. Political control versus expertise: congressional choices about administrative procedures. American Political Science Review 89: 62–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bawn, K. 1997. Choosing strategies to control the bureaucracy: statutory constraints, oversight, and the committee system. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 13: 101–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bawn, K. 1999. Money and majorities in the Federal Republic of Germany: evidence for a veto players model of government spending. American Journal of Political Science 43: 707–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bednar, J., Ferejohn, J. and Garrett, G. 1996. The politics of European federalism. International Review of Law and Economics 16: 279–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Behrens, P. and Smyrl, M. 1999. A conflict of rationalities: EU regional policy and the single market. Journal of European Public Policy 6: 419–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bendor, J. and Meirowitz, A. 2004. Spatial models of delegation. American Political Science Review 98: 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bendor, J., Taylor, S. and Gaalen, R. 1987. Stacking the deck: bureaucratic missions and policy design. American Political Science Review 81: 873–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beyers, J. and Dierickx, G. 1998. The working groups of the Council of the European Union: supranational or intergovernmental negotiations?Journal of Common Market Studies 36: 289–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bignami, F. 1999. The administrative state in a separation of powers constitution: lessons for European Community rulemaking from the United States. Jean Monnet Working Paper 5/99. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Law School.Google Scholar

Blondel, J. and Müller-Rommel, F., eds. 1988. Cabinets in Western Europe. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blondel, J. and Thiebault, J.-L., eds. 1991. The Profession of Cabinet Minister in Western Europe. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bollen, K. and Jackman, R. 1990. Regression diagnostics: an expository treatment of outliers and influential cases. In Modern Methods of Data Analysis, ed. Fox, J. and Long, S. J.. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Börzel, T. A. 2000. Why there is no ‘southern problem’: on environmental leaders and laggards in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 7: 141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Börzel, T. A. 2001. Non-compliance in the European Union: pathology or statistical artefact?Journal of European Public Policy 8: 803–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bowler, S. and Farrell, D. M. 1995. The organizing of the European Parliament: committees, specialization and co-ordination. British Journal of Political Science 25: 219–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bowler, S. and Farrell, D. M. 1999. Parties and party discipline within the European Parliament: a norms-based approach. In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, ed. Bowler, S., Farrell, D. M. and Katz, R. S.. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, pp. 208–22.Google Scholar

Bradley, K. StC. 1992. Comitology and the law: through a glass, darkly. Common Market Law Review 29: 693–721.Google Scholar

Bradley, K. StC. 1997. The European Parliament and comitology: on the road to nowhere?European Law Journal 3: 230–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bräuninger, T., Cornelius, T., König, T. and Schuster, T. 2001. The dynamics of European integration: a constitutional analysis of the Amsterdam Treaty. In The Rules of Integration: Institutionalist Approaches to the Study of Europe, ed. Aspinwall, M. and Schneider, G.. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Browne, E. C. and Franklin, M.. 1973. Aspects of coalition payoffs in European parliamentary democracies. American Political Science Review 67: 453–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brzinski, J. B. 1995. Political group cohesion in the European Parliament, 1989–1994. In The State of the European Union. Building a European Polity?, ed. Rhodes, C. and Mazey, S.. Harlow: Longman, pp. 135–58.Google Scholar

Budge, I., Hofferbert, R. I. and Klingemann, H.-D . 1994. Parties, Policies, and Democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Budge, I. and Keman, H., eds. 1990. How Party Government Works: Testing a Theory of Formation, Functioning and Termination in 20 Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Budge, I., Klingemann, H.-D., Volkens, A., Bara, J. and Tanenbaum, E., eds. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bueno, Mesquita B. and Stokman, F. N., eds. 1994. European Community Decision Making: Models, Applications, and Comparisons. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Bulmer, S. 1994. Institutions and policy change in the European communities: the case of merger control. Public Administration 72: 423–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bursens, P. 2002. Why Denmark and Belgium have different implementation records: on transposition laggards and leaders in the EU. Scandinavian Political Studies 25: 173–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Calvert, R. L., McCubbins, M. D. and Weingast, B. R. 1989. A theory of political control and agency discretion. American Journal of Political Science 33: 588–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cameron, D. R. 1992. The 1992 initiative: causes and consequences. In Euro-Politics: Institutions and Policymaking in the “New” European Community, ed. Sbragia, A. M.. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, pp. 23–74.Google Scholar

Caporaso, J., Cowles, M. G. and Risse, T., eds. 2001. Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Carrubba, C. and Gabel, M. 2002. Roll-call votes and party discipline in the European Parliament: reconsidering MEP voting behaviour. EPRG Working Paper.Google Scholar

Castles, F. and Mair, P. 1984. Left–right political scales: some expert judgments. European Journal of Political Research 12: 73–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chayes, A. and Handler Chayes, A. 1993. On compliance. International Organization 47: 175–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chayes, A. and Handler Chayes, A. 1995. The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Chayes, A., Handler Chayes, A. and Mitchell, R. B. 1998. Managing compliance: a comparative perspective. In Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords, ed. Weiss, E. Brown and Jacobson, H. K.. Cambridge, MA: MIT University Press.Google Scholar

Christiansen, T. 1996. A maturing bureaucracy? The role of the Commission in the policy process. In European Union. Power and Policy-Making, ed. Richardson, J.. London: Routledge, pp. 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christiansen, T. 1997. Tensions of European governance: politicized bureaucracy and multiple accountability in the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy 4: 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christiansen, T. and Kirchner, E., eds. 2000. Europe in Change – Committee Governance in the European Union. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Cini, M. 1996. The European Commission: Leadership, Organization and Culture in the EU Administration. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Cini, M. 1997. Administrative culture in the European Commission: the cases of competition and environment. In At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission, ed. Nugent, N.. London: Macmillan, pp. 71–88.Google Scholar

Clegg, N. and Hulten, M. 2003. Reforming the European Parliament. London: Foreign Policy Centre.Google Scholar

Lord Cockfield, A. 1992. The real significance of 1992. In The Politics of 1992: Beyond the European Single Market, ed. Crouch, C. and Marquand, D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Coen, D. and Thatcher, M. 2000. Utility reform in Europe. Current Politics and Economics of Europe 9, special issue.Google Scholar

Coleman, W. D. and Tangermann, S. 1999. The 1992 CAP reform, the Uruguay round and the Commission. Journal of Common Market Studies 37: 385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Commission of the EC. 1985a. Completing the Internal Market. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1985b. Technical Harmonization and Standards: a New Approach. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1994a. Green Paper on the Liberalisation of Telecommunications Infrastructure and Cable Television Networks. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1994b. Report to the European Council on the Application of the Subsidiarity Principle. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1996a. Public Procurement in the European Union: Exploring the Way Forward. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1996b. Taxation in the European Union – Report on the Development of Tax Systems. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1997. Third Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1998. Fourth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1999a. The 1999 Communications Review: Towards a New Framework for Electronic Communications Infrastructure and Associated Services. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1999b. Fifth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package.> Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 1999c. White Paper on Modernisation of the Rules Implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2000a. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Application of the Precautionary Principle and Multiannual Arrangements for Setting TACS. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2000b. The Results of the Public Consultation on the 1999 Communications Review and Orientations for the New Regulatory Framework. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2001a. The Future of the Common Fisheries Policy. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2001b. Seventh Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2002. Eighth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2003. Ninth Report on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package. Brussels: CEC.

Commission of the EC. 2004. A Report on the Functioning of Public Procurement Markets in the EU: Benefits from the Application of EU Directives and Challenges for the Future. Brussels: CEC.

Cook, R. D. and Weisberg, S. 1983. Diagnostics for heteroscedasticity in regression. Biometrika 70: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coombes, D. 1970. Politics and Bureaucracy in the European Community – a Portrait of the European Commission. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Corbett, R., Jacobs, F. and Shackleton, M. 1995. The European Parliament. Edinburgh: Catermill.Google Scholar

Cram, L. 1993. Calling the tune without paying the piper? Social policy regulation: the role of the Commission in European Community social policy. Policy and Politics 21: 135–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cram, L. 1994. The European Commission as a multi-organization: social policy and it policy in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy 1: 195–217.Google Scholar

Cram, L. 1997. Policy-Making in the EU: Conceptual Lenses and the Integration Process. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Crombez, C. 1996. Legislative procedures in the European Community. British Journal of Political Science 26: 199–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crombez, C. 1997a. The co-decision procedure in the European Union. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22: 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crombez, C. 1997b. Policy making and Commission appointment in the European Union. Aussenwirtshaft 52: 63–82.Google Scholar

Crombez, C. 2001. The Treaty of Amsterdam and the codecision procedure. In The Rules of Integration: Institutionalist Approaches to the Study of Europe, ed. Aspinwall, M. and Schneider, G.. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 101–22.Google Scholar

Crombez, C. 2003. The democratic deficit in the European Union: much ado about nothing?European Union Politics 4: 101–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crombez, C., Steunenberg, B. and Corbett, R. 2000. Understanding the EU legislative process: political scientists' and practitioners' perspectives. European Union Politics 1: 363–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crozier, M., Huntington, S. P. and Watanuk, J. 1975. The Crisis of Democracy. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar

Davidson, R. and MacKinnon, J. G. 1981. Several tests for model specification in the presence of alternative hypotheses. Econometrica 49: 781–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Figueiredo, , R. J. P., Spiller, P. T.Jr and Urbiztondo, S. 1999. An informational perspective on administrative procedures. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 15: 283–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dehejia, V. H. and Genschel, P. 1999. Tax competition in the European Union. Politics and Society 27: 403–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dehousse, R. 2003. Comitology: who watches the watchmen?Journal of European Public Policy 10: 798–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Demmke, C., Eberharter, E., Schaefer, G. F. and Türk, A. 1996. The history of comitology. In Shaping European Law and Policy: the Role of Committees and Comitology in the Political Process, ed. Pedler, R. H. and Schaefer, G. F.. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration, pp. 61–82.Google Scholar

Dimitrakopoulos, D. 2001. Learning and steering: changing implementation patterns and the Greek central government. Journal of European Public Policy 8: 604–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dimitrova, A. and Steunenberg, B. 2000. The search for convergence of national policies in the European Union. An impossible quest?European Union Politics 1: 201–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dion, D. 1998. Evidence and inference in the comparative case study. Comparative Politics 30: 127–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Docksey, C. and Williams, K. 1994. The Commission and the execution of Community policy. In The European Commission, ed. Edwards, G. and Spence, D.. Harlow: Longman, pp. 117–45.Google Scholar

Dogan, R. 1997. Comitology: little procedures with big implications. West European Politics 20: 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Doleys, T. J. 2000. Member states and the European Commission: theoretical insights from the new economics of organizations. Journal of European Public Policy 7: 532–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donnelly, M. 1993. The structure of the European Commission and the policy formation process. In Lobbying in the European Community, ed. Mazey, S. and Richardson, J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 74–81.Google Scholar

Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M. and Barsoom, P. N. 1996. Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?International Organization 50: 379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunleavy, P. 1985. Bureaucrats, budgets and the growth of the state: reconstructing an instrumental model. British Journal of Political Science 15: 299–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Earnshaw, D. and Judge, D. 1993. The European Parliament and the sweetners directive: from footnote to inter-institutional conflict. Journal of Common Market Studies 31: 103–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Earnshaw, D. and Judge, D. 1996. From co-operation to co-decision. The European Parliament's path to legislative power. In European Union. Power and Policy-Making, ed. Richardson, J.. London: Routledge, pp. 96–126.Google Scholar

Earnshaw, D. and Judge, D. 1997. The life and time of the co-operation procedure. Journal of Common Market Studies 35: 543–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, G. and Spence, D., eds. 1994. The European Commission. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

Egan, M. 1998. Regulatory strategies, delegation and European market integration. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 485–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eichener, V. 1997. Effective European problem-solving: lessons from the regulation of occupational safety and environmental protection. Journal of European Public Policy 4: 591–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eising, R. 2002. Policy learning in embedded negotiations: explaining EU electricity liberalization. International Organization 56: 85–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Elgström, O., Bjurulf, B., Johansson, J. and Sannerstedt, A. 2001. Coalitions in European Union negotiations. Scandinavian Political Studies 24: 111–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 1994. Administrative procedures, information, and agency discretion. American Journal of Political Science 38: 697–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 1995. A theory of strategic oversight: Congress, lobbyists, and the bureaucracy. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 11: 227–55.Google Scholar

Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 1999a. Asymmetric information, delegation, and the structure of policy-making. Journal of Theoretical Politics 11: 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 1999b. Delegating Powers: a Transaction Cost Politics Approach to Policy Making under Separate Powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, D. and O'Halloran, S. 2006. A theory of efficient delegation. In Delegation in Contemporary Democracies, ed. Braun, D. and Gilardi, F.. London: Routledge, pp. 77–98.Google Scholar

Esser, J. and Noppe, R. 1996. Private muddling through as a political programme? The role of the European Commission in the telecommunications sector in the 1980s. West European Politics 19: 547–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Esteban, J. and Ray, , D. 1999. Conflict and distribution. Journal of Economic Theory 87: 379–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Euro Info Centre Aarhus County. 1996. Analysis of Irregularities Occurring in Tender Notices Published in the Official Journal of the European Communities 1990–1993. Aarhus.

European Parliament. 1998. Report on the Proposal for a Council Decision Laying Down the Procedures for the Exercise of Implementing Powers Conferred Upon the Commission (Com(98)0380). Brussels: European Parliament.

Faas, T. 2003. To defect or not to defect? National, institutional and party group pressures on MEPs and their consequences for party group cohesion in the European Parliament. European Journal of Political Research 42: 841–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Falkner, G. 1999. European social policy: towards multi-level and multi-actor governance. In The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, ed. Kohler-Koch, B. and Eising, R.. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fiorina, M. P. 1977. Congress: the Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Fiorina, M. P. 1982. Legislative choice of regulatory forms: legal process or administrative process?Public Choice 39: 33–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2000a. The Commission's executive discretion, information and comitology. Journal of Theoretical Politics 12: 155–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2000b. Control of the Commission's executive functions: uncertainty, conflict and decision rules. European Union Politics 1: 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2000c. Statutory discretion and procedural control of the European Commission's executive functions. Journal of Legislative Studies 6: 28–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2001. Delegation and constraints in the national execution of the EC policies: a longitudinal and qualitative analysis. West European Politics 24: 169–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2002. Efficiency or credibility? Testing the two logics of delegation to the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy 9: 677–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2004. Delegating powers in the European Community. British Journal of Political Science 34: 449–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. 2005. A formal model of delegation in the European Union. Journal of Theoretical Politics 17: 217–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franchino, F. and Rahming, A. J. 2003. Biased ministers, inefficiency, and control in distributive policies: an application to the EU fisheries policy. European Union Politics 4: 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franzese, R. J. Jr. 2002. Macroeconomic Policies in Developed Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fuchs, G. 1994. Policy-making in a system of multi-level governance – the Commission of the European Community and the restructuring of the telecommunications sector. Journal of European Public Policy 1: 177–94.Google Scholar

Gabel, M. and Hix, S. 2002. Defining the EU political space: an empirical study of the European election manifestos, 1979–1999. Comparative Political Studies 35: 934–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gabel, M. J. and Huber, J. D. 2000. Putting parties in their place: inferring party left–right ideological positions from party manifestos data. American Journal of Political Science 44: 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gallagher, M.Laver, M. and Mair, P. 2001. Representative Government in Modern Europe. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Garrett, G. 1992. International cooperation and institutional choice: the European Community's internal market. International Organization 46: 533–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garrett, G. 1995. From the Luxembourg compromise to codecision: decision making in the European Union. Electoral Studies 14: 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garrett, G. and Tsebelis, G. 1996. An institutional critique of intergovernmentalism. International Organization 50: 269–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garrett, G. and Weingast, B. R. 1993. Ideas, interests, and institutions: constructing the European Community's internal market. In Ideas and Foreign Policy. Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change, ed. Goldstein, J. and Keohane, R. O.. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 173–206.Google Scholar

Gatsios, K. and Seabright, P. 1989. Regulation in the European Community. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 5: 37–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Genschel, P. 2002. Steuerharmonisierung und Steuerwettbewerb in der Europäischen Union. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar

George, A. L. and Bennett, A. 2004. Case Studies and Theory Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gerring, J. 2004. What is a case study and what is it good for?American Political Science Review 98: 341–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilligan, T. and Krehbiel, K. 1989. Asymmetric information and legislative rules with a heterogeneous committee. American Journal of Political Science 33: 459–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilligan, T. and Krehbiel, K. 1990. Organization of informative committees by a rational legislature. American Journal of Political Science 34: 531–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gillingham, J. 2003. European Integration, 1950–2003: Superstate or New Market Economy?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giuliani, M. 2003. Europeanization in comparative perspective: institutional fit and national adaptation. In The Politics of Europeanization, ed. Featherstone, K. and Radaelli, C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 134–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golden, M. A. 2003. Electoral connections: the effects of the personal vote on political patronage, bureaucracy and legislation in postwar Italy. British Journal of Political Science 33: 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golub, J. 1999. In the shadow of the vote? Decision making in the European Community. International Organization 53: 733–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golub, J. 2000. Institutional reform and decisionmaking in the European Union. PSA Conference, 10–13 April. London: London School of Economics.Google Scholar

Gomà, R. 1996. The social dimension of the European Union: a new type of welfare system?Journal of European Public Policy 3: 209–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gorsuch, R. L. 1983. Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Gorvin, B., ed. 1998. The Transformation of Contemporary Conservatism. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Grant, W. 1997. The Common Agricultural Policy. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greene, W. 1997. Econometric Analysis. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Guay, T. R. 1997. The European Union, expansion of policy-making, and defense industrial policy. Journal of European Public Policy 4: 404–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haas, E. B. 1958. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social and Economic Forces, 1950–57. London: Stevens & Sons.Google Scholar

Haas, E. B. 1964. Technocracy, pluralism and the new Europe. In A New Europe?, ed. Richards Graubard, S.. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Haas, P. M. 1998. Compliance with EU directives: insights from international relations and comparative politics. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haibach, G. 2000. The history of comitology. In Delegated Legislation and the Role of Committees in the EC, ed. Andenas, M. and Türk, A.. Boston, MA: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar

Hall, M. 1992. Behind the European Works Council Directive: the European Commission's legislative strategy. British Journal of Industrial Relations 30: 547–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hall, P. 1983. Policy innovation and the structure of the state: the politics–administration nexus in Britain and France. Annals 466: 43–59.Google Scholar

Hallerberg, M. and von Hagen, J. 1999. Electoral institutions, cabinet negotiations, and budget deficits within the European Union. In Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, ed. Poterba, J. and Hagen, J ., Chigaco, IL: Chicago University Press, pp. 209–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hammond, T. H. and Knott, J. H. 1996. Who controls the bureaucracy?: presidential power, congressional dominance, legal constraints, and bureaucratic autonomy in a model of multi-institutional policy-making. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 12: 119–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hammond, T., Hill, J. and Miller, G. 1986. Presidential appointment of bureau chiefs and the ‘congressional control of administration’ hypothesis. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Harcourt, A. J. 1998. EU media ownership regulation: conflict over the definitions of alternatives. Journal of Common Market Studies 36: 369–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haverland, M. 2000. National adaptation to European integration: the importance of institutional veto points. Journal of Public Policy 20: 83–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hawes, M. and Lawrence, Broz J. 2003. Domestic Politics of International Monetary Fund Policy. San Diego, CA: University of California.Google Scholar

Hayes-Renshaw, F. and Wallace, H. 1997. The Council of Ministers. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heclo, H. 1974. Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Heller, W. B. 2001. Making policy stick: why the government gets what it wants in multiparty parliaments. American Journal of Political Science 45: 780–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Héritier, A. 1995. “Leaders” and “laggards” in European clean air policy. In Convergence or Diversity: Internationalization and Economic Policy Response, ed. Unger, B. and Waarden, F.. Aldershot: Avebury, pp. 278–306.Google Scholar

Héritier, A. 1996. The accommodation of diversity in European policy-making and its outcomes: regulatory policy as a patchwork. Journal of European Public Policy 3: 149–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Héritier, A. 1997. Policy-making by subterfuge: interest accommodation, innovation and substitute democratic legitimation in Europe – perspectives from distinctive policy areas. Journal of European Public Policy 4: 171–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Héritier, A. 1999. Policy-making and Diversity in Europe: Escaping Deadlock. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Héritier, A., Kerwer, D., Knill, C., et al., eds. 2001. Differential Europe: New Opportunities and Restrictions for Member-State Policies. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Hix, S. 1999. Dimensions and alignments in European Union politics: cognitive constraints and partisan responses. European Journal of Political Research 35: 69–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. 2000. Parliamentary oversight of executive power: what role for the European Parliament in comitology? In Europe in Change – Committee Governance in the European Union, ed. Christiansen, T. and Kirchner, E.. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Hix, S. 2001. Legislative behaviour and party competition in the European Parliament: an application of nominate to the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies 39: 663–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. 2002a. Constitutional agenda-setting through discretion in rule interpretation: why the European Parliament won at Amsterdam. British Journal of Political Science 32: 259–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. 2002b. Parliamentary behavior with two principals: preferences, parties, and voting in the European Parliament. American Journal of Political Science 46: 688–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. 2004. Electoral institutions and legislative behavior: explaining voting-defection in the European Parliament. World Politics 56: 194–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. 2005. The Political System of the European Union. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Hix, S. and Gabel, M. 2002. The European parliament and executive politics in the EU: voting behaviour and the Commission president investiture procedure. In Institutional Challenges in the European Union, ed. Hosli, M. A.Van, Deeman and Widgren, M.. London: Routledge, pp. 22–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S.Kreppel, A. and Noury, A. 2003. The party system in the European Parliament: collusive or competitive?Journal of Common Market Studies 41: 309–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. and Lord, C. 1995. The making of a president: the European Parliament and the confirmation of Jacques Santer as President of the Commission. Government and Opposition 31: 62–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S. and Lord, C. 1997. Political Parties in the European Union. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S., Noury, A. and Roland, G. 2002. A “normal” Parliament? Party cohesion and competition in the European Parliament, 1979–2001. EPRG Working Paper 39.Google Scholar

Hix, S., Noury, A. and Roland, G. 2005. Power to the parties: cohesion and competition in the European Parliament, 1979–2001. British Journal of Political Science 35: 209–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hix, S., Raunio, T. and Scully, R. 2003. Fifty years on: research on the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies 41: 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoffmann, S. 1966. Obstinate or obsolete? The fate of the nation-state and the case of Western Europe. Daedalus 95: 862–915.Google Scholar

Hooghe, L. 1997. A house with differing views: the European Commission and cohesion policy. In At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission, ed. Nugent, N.. London: Macmillan, pp. 72–108.Google Scholar

Hooghe, L. 1999a. Images of Europe: orientations to European integration among senior officials of the Commission. British Journal of Political Science 29: 345–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooghe, L. 1999b. Supranational activists or intergovernmental agents? Explaining the orientations of senior Commission officials toward European integration. Comparative Political Studies 32: 435–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooghe, L. 2000. Euro-socialists or Euro-marketeers? EU top officials on capitalism. Journal of Politics 62: 430–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooghe, L. 2001. The European Commission and the Integration of Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hooghe, L. ed. 1996. Cohesion Policy and European Integration: Building Multi-Level Governance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hooghe, L. and Keating, M. 1994. The Politics of European Union Regional Policy. Journal of European Public Policy 1: 367–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. 2000. European Integration and Multi-level Governance. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Hooghe, L., Marks, G. and Wilson, C. J. 2002. Does left/right structure party positions on European integration?Comparative Political Studies 35: 965–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hopenhayn, H. and Lohmann, S. 1996. Fire-alarm signals and the political oversight of regulatory agencies. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 12: 196–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horn, M. J. 1995. The Political Economy of Public Administration. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horn, M. J. and Shepsle, K. A. 1989. Administrative process and organizational form as legislative responses to agency costs. Virginia Law Review 75: 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoyland, B. K. 2005. Government and opposition in the European Union. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar

Huber, J. D. 1996. The vote of confidence in parliamentary democracies. American Political Science Review 90: 269–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. 1998. How does cabinet instability affect political performance? Portfolio volatility and health care cost containment in parliamentary democracies. American Political Science Review 92: 577–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. and Inglehart, R. 1995. Expert interpretations of party space and party locations in 42 societies. Party Politics 1: 73–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. and Lupia, A. 2001. Cabinet instability and delegation in parliamentary democracies. American Journal of Political Science 45: 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. and McCarty, N. 2001. Cabinet decision rules and political uncertainty in parliamentary bargaining. American Political Science Review 95: 345–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. and McCarty, N. 2004. Bureaucratic capacity, delegation, and political reform. American Political Science Review 98: 481–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D. and McCarty, N. 2006. Bureaucratic capacity and legislative performance. In The Macropolitics of Congress, ed. E. S. Adler and J. Lapinski. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 50–78.Google Scholar

Huber, J. D. and Shipan, C. R. 2002. Deliberate Discretion? The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huber, J. D., Shipan, C. R. and Pfahler, M. 2001. Legislatures and statutory control of bureaucracy. American Journal of Political Science 45: 330–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hubschmid, C. and Moser, P. 1997. The co-operation procedure in the EU: why was the European Parliament influential in the decision on car emission standards?Journal of Common Market Studies 35: 225–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hug, S. 2003. Endogenous preferences and delegation in the European Union. Comparative Political Studies 36: 41–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hug, S. and König, , T. 2002. In view of ratification: governmental preferences and domestic constraints at the Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. International Organization 56: 447–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

ICES. 2000. Report on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak. Copenhagen: ICES.

ICES. 2001. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Southern Shelf Demersal Stocks. Copenhagen: ICES.

Institut für Europäische Politik. 1989. “Comitology”: Characteristics, Performance, and Options. Preliminary Final Report. Bonn: Institut für Europäische Politik.

Jabko, N. 1999. In the name of the market: how the European Commission paved the way for monetary union. Journal of European Public Policy 6: 475–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, , , W. H. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 303–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Joerges, C. and Neyer, J . 1997a. From intergovernmental bargaining to deliberative political process: the constitutionalisation of comitology. European Law Journal 3: 273–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Joerges, C. and Neyer, J . 1997b. Transforming strategic interaction into deliberative problem-solving: European comitology in the foodstuffs sector. Journal of European Public Policy 4: 609–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Judge, D. and Earnshaw, D. 1994. Weak European Parliament influence? A study of the environmental committee of the European Parliament. Government and Opposition 29: 262–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Judge, D., Earnshaw, D. and Cowan, N. 1994. Ripples or waves: the European Parliament in the European Community policy process. Journal of European Public Policy 1: 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jun, Hae-Won. 2003a. Catching the runaway bureaucracy in Brussels. European Union Politics 4: 421–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jun, Hae-Won. 2003b. Initiatives and amendments: Euro-parliamentarians' preferences on the Commission's discretion. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 21–31, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar

Jupille, J. 2004. Procedural Politics: Issues, Interests, and Institutional Choice in the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kalyvas, S. N. 1996. The Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Kasack, C. 2004. The legislative impact of the European Parliament under the revised co-decision procedure: environmental, public health and consumer protection policies. European Union Politics 5: 241–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kassim, H. and Menon, A. 2003. The principal-agent approach and the study of the European Union: promise unfulfilled?Journal of European Public Policy 10: 121–39.Google Scholar

Kaufman, H. 1956. Emerging conflicts in the doctrines of public administration. American Political Science Review 50: 1057–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keefer, P. and Stasavage, D. 2003. The limits of delegation: veto players, central bank independence, and the credibility of monetary policy. American Political Science Review 97: 407–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kelemen, R. D. 1995. Environmental policy in the European Union: the struggle between Court, Commission and Council. In Convergence or Diversity: Internationalization and Economic Policy Response, ed. Unger, B. and Waarden, F.. Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar

Kelemen, R. D. 2002. The politics of “Eurocratic” structure and the new European agencies. West European Politics 25: 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kelemen, R. D. 2003. The structure and dynamics of EU federalism. Comparative Political Studies 36: 184–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kelemen, R. D. 2004. The Rules of Federalism: Institutions and Regulatory Politics in the EU and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Keohane, R. O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Kiewiet, D. R. and McCubbins, M. D. 1991. The Logic of Delegation. Congressional Parties and the Appropriations Process. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

King, A. 1975. Overload: the problem of governing in the 1970s. Political Studies 23: 284–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

King, G., Keohane, R. O. and Verba, S. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

King, G., Tomz, M. and Wittenberg, J. 2000. Making the most of statistical analyses: improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44: 341–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirchner, E. J., ed. 1988. Liberal Parties in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kitschelt, H. P. 1994. The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knill, C. 1998. European policies: the impact of national administrative traditions. Journal of Public Policy 18: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knill, C. 2001. The Europeanisation of National Administrations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Knill, C. and Lenschow, A. 1998. Coping with Europe: the impact of British and German administrations on the implementation of EU environmental policy. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 595–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohler-Koch, B. and Eising, R., eds. 1999. The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

König, T. 2001. Principals, agents and the process of European legislation. ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Grenoble.Google Scholar

König, T. and Pöter, M . 2001. Examining the EU legislative process: the relative importance of agenda and veto power. European Union Politics 2: 329–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krehbiel, K. 1991. Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kreppel, A. 1999. What affects the European Parliament's legislative influence? An analysis of the success of EP amendments. Journal of Common Market Studies 37: 521–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kreppel, A. 2000. Rules, ideology and coalition formation in the European Parliament. European Union Politics 1: 340–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kreppel, A. 2002a. The European Parliament and Supranational Party System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kreppel, A. 2002b. Moving beyond procedure: an empirical analysis of European Parliament legislative influence. Comparative Political Studies 35: 784–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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: 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kreppel, A. and Tsebelis, G. 1999. Coalition formation in the European Parliament. Comparative Political Studies 32: 933–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krislov, S., Ehlermann, C.-D. and Weiler, J. 1986. The political organs and the decision-making process in the United States and the European Community. In Integration through Law, ed. Cappelletti, M., Seccombe, M. and Weiler, J.. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 3–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kydland, F. and Prescott, E. C. 1977. Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency of optimal plans. Journal of Political Economy 85: 137–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laffan, B. and Shackleton, M. 2000. The budget. In Policy-Making in the European Union, ed. Wallace, H. and Wallace, W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 211–41.Google Scholar

Laffont, J.-J., ed. 2003. The Principal Agent Model: the Economic Theory of Incentives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

Laffont, J.-J. and Martimort, D. 2002. The Theory of Incentives: the Principal-Agent Model. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lampinen, R. and Uusikylä, P . 1998. Implementation deficit – why member states do not comply with EU directives. Scandinavian Political Studies 21: 231–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

LaPalombara, J. 1958. Political party systems and crisis government: French and Italian comparisons. Midwest Journal of Political Science 2: 117–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laver, M., ed. 2001. Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Laver, M., Benoit, K. and Garry, J. 2003. Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review 97: 311–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laver, M. and Garry, J. 2000. Estimating policy positions from political texts. American Journal of Political Science 44: 619–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laver, M. and Hunt, W. B . 1992. Policy and Party Competition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Laver, M. and Shepsle, K. A., eds. 1994. Cabinet Ministers and Parliamentary Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

eds. 1996. Making and Breaking Governments: Cabinets and Legislatures in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lenaerts, K. 1991. Some reflections on the separation of powers in the European Community. Common Market Law Review 28: 11–35.Google Scholar

Lequesne, C. 2000. The common fisheries policy. Letting the little ones go? In Policy-Making in the European Union, ed. Wallace, H. and Wallace, W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 345–72.Google Scholar

Levi-Faur, D. 1999. The governance of competition: the interplay of technology, economics, and politics in European Union electricity and telecom regimes. Journal of Public Policy 19: 175–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lijphart, A. 1971. Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review 65: 682–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lijphart, A. 1975. The comparable-cases strategy in comparative research. Comparative Political Studies 8: 158–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lindberg, L. N. 1963. The Political Dynamics of European Economic Integration. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Lohmann, S. and O'Halloran, S . 1994. Divided government and US trade policy: theory and evidence. International Organization 48: 595–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lumio, M. and Sinigaglia, L. C . 2003. Statistics in Focus: Telecommunications in Europe. Brussels: Eurostat.Google Scholar

Lupia, A. and McCubbins, M. D. 1994a. Designing bureaucratic accountability. Law and Contemporary Problems 57: 91–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lupia, A. and McCubbins, M. D. 1994b. Learning from oversight: fire alarms and police patrols reconstructed. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 10: 96–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

MacMullen, A. 1997. European Commissioners, 1952–95: national routes to a European elite. In At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission, ed. Nugent, N.. London: Macmillan, pp. 27–48.Google Scholar

MacMullen, A. 2000. European Commissioners, 1952–99: national routes to a European elite. In At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission, ed. Nugent, N.. London: Macmillan, pp. 27–48.Google Scholar

Majone, G. 1992. Market integration and regulation: Europe after 1992. Metroeconomica 43: 131–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 1993. The European Community between social policy and social regulation. Journal of Common Market Studies 31: 153–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 1994. The rise of the regulatory state in Europe. West European Politics 17: 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 1996. Regulating Europe. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 2000. The credibility crisis of Community regulation. Journal of Common Market Studies 38: 273–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 2001. Two logics of delegation: agency and fiduciary relations in EU governance. European Union Politics 2: 103–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Majone, G. 2002. The European Commission: the limits of centralisation, the perils of parliamentarisation. Governance 15: 375–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mamadouh, V. and Raunio, T. 2003. The committee system: powers, appointments and report allocation. Journal of Common Market Studies 41: 333–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marks, G. 1992. Structural policy in the European Community. In Euro-Politics: Institutions and Policymaking in the “New” European Community, ed. Sbragia, A. M.. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, pp. 191–224.Google Scholar

Marks, G. and Steenbergen, M. R., eds. 2004. European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marks, G. and Wilson, C. J. 2000. The past in the present: a cleavage theory of party response to European integration. British Journal of Political Science 30: 433–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marks, G., Wilson, C. J. and Ray, L. 2002. National political parties and European integration. American Journal of Political Science 46: 585–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marsh, J. 1997. The common agricultural policy. In New Challenges to the European Union: Policies and Policy-Making, ed. Stavridis, S., Mossialos, E., Morgan, R. and Machin, H.. Aldershot: Darthmouth, pp. 401–37.Google Scholar

Marsh, M. 1998. Testing the second-order election model after four European elections. British Journal of Political Science 28: 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martin, L. L. 2003. Distribution, Information, and Delegation to International Organizations: the Case of IMF Conditionality. Mimeo, Cambridge, MA: University of Harvard.Google Scholar

Mashaw, J. L. 1985. Prodelegation: why administrators should make political decisions. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 1: 81–100.Google Scholar

Mastenbroek, E. 2003. Surviving the deadline: the transposition of EC directives in the Netherlands. European Union Politics 4: 371–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mattila, M. 2004. Contested decisions: empirical analysis of voting in the European Union Council of Ministers. European Journal of Political Research 43: 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mattila, M. and Lane, J.-E . 2001. Why unanimity in the Council? A roll call analysis of Council voting. European Union Politics 2: 31–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maurer, A. 2003. The legislative powers and impact of the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies 41: 227–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mawson, J., Martins, M. R. and Gibney, J. T. 1985. The development of the European Community regional policy. In Regions in the European Community, ed. Keating, M. and Jones, B.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 20–59.Google Scholar

Mayhew, D. R. 1991. Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946–1990. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Mazey, S. 1995. The development of EU equality policies: bureaucratic expansion on behalf of women?” Public Administration 73: 591–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mbaye, H. A. D. 2001. Why national states comply with supranational law: explaining implementation infringements in the European Union. European Union Politics 2: 259–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCormick, J. P. 2001. Machiavellian democracy: controlling elites with ferocious populism. American Political Science Review 95: 297–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCubbins, M. D. 1985. The legislative design of regulatory structure. American Journal of Political Science 29: 721–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. G. and Weingast, B. R. 1987. Administrative procedures as instruments of political control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3: 243–77.Google Scholar

McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. G. and Weingast, B. R. 1989. Structure and process, politics and policy: administrative arrangements and the political control of agencies. Virginia Law Review 75: 431–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCubbins, M. D. and Page, T. 1987. A theory of congressional delegation. In Congress: Structure and Policy, ed. McCubbins, M. D. and Sullivan, T.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 409–25.Google Scholar

McCubbins, M. D. and Schwartz, , T. 1984. Congressional oversight overlooked: police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science 28: 165–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGowan, L. and Wilks, S. 1995. The first supranational policy in the European Union: competition policy. European Journal of Political Research 28: 141–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKeown, T. 1999. Case studies and the statistical world view. International Organization 53: 161–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meckstroth, T. W. 1975. “Most different systems” and “most similar systems”: a study in the logic of comparative inquiry. Comparative Political Studies 8: 132–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meerts, P. W. and Cede, F. 2004. Negotiating European Union. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Mendrinou, M. 1996. Non-compliance and the European Commission's role in integration. Journal of European Public Policy 3: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meunier, S. 2000. What single voice? European institutions and EU–US trade negotiations. International Organization 54: 103–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meunier, S. and Nicolaïdis, K . 1999. Who speaks for Europe? The delegation of trade authority in the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies 37: 477–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mitchell, R. B. 1994. International Oil Pollution at Sea: Environmental Policy and Treaty Compliance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Mitrany, D. 1966. A Working Peace System: an Argument for the Functional Development of International Organization. Chicago, IL: Quadrangle.Google Scholar

Moe, T. M. 1985. Control and feedback in economic regulation. American Political Science Review 79: 1094–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moe, T. M. 1987. An assessment of the positive theory of congressional dominance. Legislative Studies Quarterly 12: 475–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moe, T. M. 1989. The politics of bureaucratic structure. In Can Government Govern?, ed. Chubb, J. and Peterson, P.. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institutions, pp. 267–329.Google Scholar

Moe, T. M. 1990a. Political institutions: the neglected side of the story. Journal of Law, Economics and Organisation 6: 213–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moe, T. M. 1990b. The politics of structural choice: toward a theory of public bureaucracy. In Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond, ed. Williamson, O. E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 11–153.Google Scholar

Montanari, I. J. 1995. Harmonization of social policies and social regulation in the European Community. European Journal of Political Research 27: 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moravcsik, A. 1991. Negotiating the single European act: national interests and conventional statecraft in the European community. International Organization 45: 19–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moravcsik, A. 1998. The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Moravcsik, A. 1999. A new statecraft? Supranational entrepreneurs and international cooperation. International Organization 53: 267–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morton, R. B. 1999. Methods and Models: a Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models in Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moser, P. 1997. A theory of the conditional influence of the European Parliament in the cooperation procedure. Public Choice 91: 333–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Müller, W. C. and Strøm, K , eds. 2000. Coalition Governments in Western Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Müller-Rommel, F., ed. 1989. New Politics in Western Europe: the Rise and Success of Green Parties. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Nielson, D. L. and Tierney, M. J. 2003. Delegation to international organizations: agency theory and World Bank environmental reform. International Organization 57: 241–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niskanen, W. A. 1971. Bureaucracy and Representative Government. New York: Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar

Noel, E. 1973. The Commission's power of initiative. Common Market Law Review 10: 123–5.Google Scholar

Noury, A. G. 2002. Ideology, nationality, and Euro-parliamentarians. European Union Politics 3: 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nugent, N. 1995. The leadership capacity of the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy 2: 603–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nugent, N. ed. 2000. At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Nugent, N. 2001. The European Commission. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Nugent, N. 2002. The Government and Politics of the European Union. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

OECD. Government procurement: a synthesis report. Paris: OECD, 2001.

Offe, C. 1972. Political authority and class structures: an analysis of late capitalist societies. International Journal of Sociology 2: 73–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olivi, B. 1993. L'europa Difficile: Storia Politica della Comunità Europea. Bologna: Mulino.Google Scholar

Ostrom, C. W.. 1990. Time Series Analysis: Regression Techniques. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Padgett, S. and Paterson, W. E. 1991. A History of Social Democracy in Postwar Europe. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Page, E. 1997. People Who Run Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Page, E. C. and Dimitrakopoulos, D. 1997. The dynamic of EU growth: a cross-time analysis. Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 365–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Page, E. C. and Wouters, L. 1994. Bureaucratic politics and political leadership in Brussels. Public Administration 72: 445–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pahre, R. 2005. Formal theory and case-study methods in EU studies. European Union Politics 6: 113–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pajala, A. and Widgrén, M . 2004. A priori versus empirical voting power in the EU Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 5: 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Patterson, L. A. 1997. Agricultural policy reform in the European Community: a three-level game analysis. International Organization 51: 135–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pedler, R. H. and Schaefer, G. F., eds. 1996. Shaping European Law and Policy. The Role of Committees and Comitology in the Political Process. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar

Pelkmans, J. and Winters, L. A . 1988. Europe's Domestic Market. London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar

Pennings, P. 2002. The dimentionality of the EU policy space: the European elections of 1999. European Union Politics 3: 59–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peterson, J. 2001. The college of commissioners. In The Institutions of the European Union, ed. Peterson, J. and Shackleton, M.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 71–94.Google Scholar

Peterson, J. and Shackleton, M., eds. 2001. The Institutions of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Pierson, P. and Leibfried, S. 1996. Multitiered institutions and the making of social policy. In European Social Policy, ed. Leibfried, S. and Pierson, P.. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 1994. Creeping competence: the expanding agenda of the European Community. Journal of Public Policy 14: 95–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 1995. Regional actors in an intergovernmental play: the making and implementation of EC structural policy. In The State of the Union. Building a European Polity?, ed. Rhodes, C. and Harlow, S. Mazey, UK: Longman, pp. 361–90.Google Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 1997a. The Commission as an agent. In At the Heart of the Union. Studies of the European Commission, ed. Nugent, N.. London: Macmillan, pp. 109–28.Google Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 1997b. Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community. International Organization 51: 99–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 1998. The engines of integration? Supranational autonomy and influence in the European Union. In European Integration and Supranational Governance, ed. Sandholtz, W. and Sweet, A. Stone. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 217–49.Google Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 2000. The end of creeping competence? EU policy-making since Maastricht. Journal of Common Market Studies 38: 519–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 2001. International relations theory and European integration. Journal of Common Market Studies 39: 221–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 2002. Learning from the Americanists (again): theory and method in the study of delegation. West European Politics 25: 200–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 2003a. Control mechanism or deliberative democracy?: two images of comitology. Comparative Political Studies 36: 125–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollack, M. A. 2003b. The Engines of European Integration: Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Predieri, A. 1963. La produzione legislativa. In Il Parlamento Italiano 1946–1963, ed. Somogyi, S., Lotti, L., Predieri, A. and Sartori, G.. Naples: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, pp. 205–76.Google Scholar

Przeworski, A. and Teune, H. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing.Google Scholar

Puchala, D. J. 1999. Institutionalism, intergovernmentalism and European integration: a review article. Journal of Common Market Studies 37: 317–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Putman, R. D. 1975. The political attitudes of senior civil servants in Britain, Germany and Italy. In The Mandarins of Western Europe, ed. Dogan, M.. New York: Sage, pp. 87–127.Google Scholar

Quanjel, M. and Wolters, M. 1993. Growing cohesion in the European Parliament. Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research, Leiden.Google Scholar

Ragin, C. C. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California.Google Scholar

Ragin, C. C. and Becker, S. H., eds. 1992. What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ramsey, J. 1969. Tests for specification errors in classic linear least squares regression analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 31: 350–71.Google Scholar

Raunio, T. 1996. Parliamentary questions in the European Parliament: representation, information and control. Journal of Legislative Studies 2: 356–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ray, L. 1999. Measuring party orientations towards European integration: results from an expert survey. European Journal of Political Research 36: 283–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reif, K. 1984. National election cycles and European elections, 1979 and 1984. Electoral Studies 3: 244–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reif, K. 1997. Reflections: European elections as member state second-order elections revisited. European Journal of Political Research 31: 115–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reif, K. and Schmitt, H. 1980. Nine second-order national elections – a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results. European Journal of Political Research 8: 3–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rieger, E. 1995. Protective shelter or straitjacket: an institutional analysis of the common agricultural policy of the European Union. In European Social Policy: Between Fragmentation and Integration, ed. Leibfried, S. and Pierson, P.. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, pp. 194–230.Google Scholar

Rittberger, B. 2000. Impatient legislators and new issue-dimensions: a critique of the Garrett–Tsebelis “standard version” of legislative politics. Journal of European Public Policy 7: 554–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross, G. 1995a. Assessing the Delors era in social policy. In European Social Policy: Between Fragmentation and Integration, ed. Leibfried, S. and Pierson, P.. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, pp. 357–88.Google Scholar

Ross, G. 1995b. Jacques Delors and European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ross, S. 1973. The economic theory of agency: the principal's problem. American Economic Review 63: 134–9.Google Scholar

Sandholtz, W. 1992. High-Tech Europe: the Politics of International Cooperation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Sandholtz, W. 1993a. Choosing union: monetary politics and Maastricht. International Organization 47: 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sandholtz, W. 1993b. Institutions and collective action: the new telecommunications in Western Europe. World Politics 45: 242–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sandholtz, W. 1998. The emergence of a supranational telecommunication regime. In European Integration and Supranational Governance, ed. Sandholtz, W. and Sweet, A. Stone. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 134–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sandholtz, W. and Stone Sweet, A ., eds. 1998. European Integration and Supranational Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sandholtz, W. and Zysman, J. 1989. 1992: recasting the European bargain. World Politics 42: 95–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sbragia, A. 1996. Environmental policy: the “push–pull” of policy making. In Policy-Making in the European Union, ed. Wallace, H. and Wallace, W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 235–55.Google Scholar

Scharpf, F. W. 1996. Negative and positive integration in the political economy of European welfare states. In Governance in the European Union, ed. Marks, G., Scharpf, F. W., Schmitter, P. C. and Streeck, W.. London: Sage, pp. 15–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scheinmann, L. 1966. Some preliminary notes on bureaucratic relationships in the European Economic Community. International Organization 20: 750–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, S. K. 1996. Sterile debates and dubious generalisations: European integration theory tested by telecommunications and electricity. Journal of Public Policy 16: 233–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, S. K. 1998. Commission activism: subsuming telecommunications and electricity under competition law. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, S. K. 2000. Only an agenda setter? The European Commission's power over the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 1: 37–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneider, G. and Baltz, K. 2005. Domesticated Eurocrats: bureaucratic discretion in the legislative pre-negotiations of the European Union. Acta Politica 40: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneider, G., Baltz, K. and Finke, D. 2004. Paying the piper, calling the tune: interest intermediation in the pre-negotiations of EU legislation. Pan-European Conference on International Relations, The Hague, The Netherlands, September 9–11.Google Scholar

Schneider, G. and Cederman, L.-E . 1994. The change of tide in political cooperation: a limited information model of European integration. International Organization 48: 633–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneider, G., Finke, D. and Bailer, S. 2004. Bargaining power in the European Union: an evaluation of competing game-theoretic models. International Studies Association, Montreal, Canada, March 17–20.Google Scholar

Schneider, V. and Werle, R. 1990. International regime or corporate actor? The European Community in telecommunications policy. In The Political Economy of Telecommunications, ed. Dyson, K. and Humphreys, P.. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Schulz, H. and König, T . 2000. Institutional reform and decision-making effici-ency in the European Union. American Journal of Political Science 44: 653–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scully, R. M. 1997a. The European Parliament and the co-decision procedure: a reassessment. Journal of Legislative Studies 3: 58–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scully, R. M. 1997b. The European Parliament and the co-decision procedure: a rejoinder to Tsebelis and Garrett. Journal of Legislative Studies 3: 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scully, R. M. 1997c. Policy influence and participation in the European Parliament. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22: 233–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selck, T. J. 2004. On the dimensionality of European Union legislative decision-making. Journal of Theoretical Politics 16: 203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selck, T. J. and Steunenberg, B. 2004. Between power and luck: the European Parliament in the EU legislative process. European Union Politics 5: 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shipan, C. R. 2004. Regulatory regimes, agency actions, and the conditional nature of congressional influence. American Political Science Review 98: 467–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sidjanski, D. 1965. Some remarks on Siotis' article. Journal of Common Market Studies 3: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Siedentop, L. 2000. Democracy in Europe. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Siedentopf, H. and Ziller, J., eds. 1988. Making European Policies Work: the Implementation of Community Legislation. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Siotis, J. 1964. Some problems of European secretariats. Journal of Common Market Studies 2: 223–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Skinner, Q. 1981. Past Masters: Machiavelli. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar

Skinner, Q. 1993. The Republican ideal of political liberty. In Machiavelli and Republicanism, ed. Bock, G., Skinner, Q. and Viroli, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 293–309.Google Scholar

Smith, A. 2002. Why European commissioners matter. Journal of Common Market Studies 41: 37–55.Google Scholar

Smith, M. P. 1996. Integration in small steps: the European Commission and member-state aid to industry. West European Politics 19: 563–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, M. P. 1998. Autonomy by the rules: the European Commission and the development of state aid policy. Journal of Common Market Studies 36: 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spence, A. M. and Zeckhauser, R. J. 1971. Insurance, information and individual action. American Economic Review 61: 380–7.Google Scholar

Spence, D. 1994. Staff and personnel policy in the Commission. In The European Commission, ed. Edwards, G. and Spence, D.. Harlow: Longman, pp. 62–94.Google Scholar

Spence, D. B. 1999a. Agency discretion and the dynamics of procedural reform. Public Administration Review 59: 425–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spence, D. B. 1999b. Managing delegation ex ante: using law to steer administrative agencies. Journal of Legal Studies 28: 413–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spinelli, A. 1966. The Eurocrats: Conflict and Crisis in the European Community. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

1986. Federalism and the EUT. In European Union: the European Community in Search of a Future, ed. Lodge, J.. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Stetter, S. 2000. Regulating migration: authority delegation in justice and home affairs. Journal of European Public Policy 7: 80–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steunenberg, B. 1994. Decision making under different institutional arrange- ments: legislation by the European Community. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 150: 642–69.Google Scholar

Steunenberg, B. 1996. Agency discretion, regulatory policymaking, and different institutional arrangements. Public Choice 86: 309–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steunenberg, B. 1997. Co-decision and its reform. In Political Institutions and Public Policy. Perspectives on European Decision Making, ed. Steunenberg, B. and Vught, F.. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 205–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steunenberg, B., Koboldt, C. and Schmidtchen, D. 1996a. Beyond comitology: a comparative analysis of implementation procedures with parliamentary involvement. Aussenwirtshaft 52: 87–112.Google Scholar

Steunenberg, B., Koboldt, C. and Schmidtchen, D. 1996b. Policymaking, comitology, and the balance of power in the European Union. International Review of Law and Economics 16: 329–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stevens, A. and Stevens, H. 2001. Brussels Bureaucrats?New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Stone, Sweet A., Fligstein, N. and Sandholtz, ., eds. 2001. The Institutionalization of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Strauss, E. 1961. The Ruling Servants: Bureaucracy in Russia, France – and Britain?London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Streeck, W. 1996. Neo-voluntarism: a new European social policy regime? In Governance in the European Union, ed. Marks, G., Scharpf, F. W., Schmitter, P. C. and Streeck, W.. London: Sage, pp. 64–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Swank, D. 2003. Global Capital, Political Institutions, and Policy Change in Developed Welfare States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Swinbank, A. 1989. The common agricultural policy and the politics of European decision making. Journal of Common Market Studies 27: 303–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tallberg, J. 2002a. Delegation to supranational institutions: why, how and with what consequences?West European Politics 25: 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tallberg, J. 2002b. Paths to compliance: enforcement, management, and the European Union. International Organization 56: 609–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tallberg, J. 2003. European Governance and Supranational Institutions: Making States Comply. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tarditi, S., Thomson, K., Pierani, P. and Croci-Angelini, E ., eds. 1989. Agricultu-ral Trade Liberalisation and the European Community. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Taylor, P. 1983. The Limits of European Integration. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Thatcher, M. 2001. The Commission and national governments as partners: EC regulatory expansion in telecommunications 1979–2000. Journal of European Public Policy 8: 558–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thies, M. F. 2001. Keeping tabs on partners: the logic of delegation in coalition governments. American Journal of Political Science 45: 580–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thomassen, J. and Schmitt, H. 1999. Partisan structures in the European Parliament. In The European Parliament, the National Parliaments and European Integration, ed. Katz, R. S. and Wessels, B.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 129–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thompson, A. and Haftel, Y. 2003. Theorizing and operationalizing IO independence. Annual Convention of International Studies Association, 25 February–March 1, Portland, OR.Google Scholar

Thomson, R., Boerefijn, J. and Stokman, F. 2004. Actor alignments in European Union decision making. European Journal of Political Research 43: 237–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thomson, R., Stokman, F., Achen, C. and König, T., eds., 2006. The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tomz, M., Wittenberg, J. and King, G. 2003. Clarify: Software for interpreting and presenting statistical results. Version 2.1. Stanford University, University of Wisconsin and Harvard University. Available at http://gking.harvard.edu/.

Tsebelis, G. 1994. The power of the European Parliament as a conditional agenda setter. American Political Science Review 88: 128–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. 1995. Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science 25: 289–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. 1997. Maastricht and the democratic deficit. Aussenwirtshaft 52: 29–56.Google Scholar

Tsebelis, G. 1999. Veto players and law production in parliamentary democracies: an empirical analysis. American Political Science Review 93: 591–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. and Garrett, G. 1997. Agenda setting, vetoes and the European Union's co-decision procedure. Journal of Legislative Studies 3: 74–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. and Garrett, G. 2000. Legislative politics in the European Union. European Union Politics 1: 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. and Garrett, G. 2001. The institutional foundations of intergovernmentalism and supranationalism in the European Union. International Organization 55: 357–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G., Jensen, C. B., Kalandrakis, A. and Kreppel, A. 2001. Legislative procedures in the European Union: an empirical analysis. British Journal of Political Science 31: 573–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. and Kalandrakis, A. 1999. The European Parliament and environmental legislation: the case of chemicals. European Journal of Political Research 36: 119–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsebelis, G. and Kreppel, A. 1998. The history of conditional agenda-setting in European institutions. European Journal of Political Research 33: 41–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eijk, C. and Franklin, M., eds. 1996. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of the Union. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Van, Kersbergen K. 1995. Social Capitalism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Vaubel, R. 1994. The public choice analysis of European integration: a survey. European Journal of Political Economy 10: 227–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Volden, C. 2002a. Delegating powers to bureaucracies: evidence from the states. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 18: 187–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Volden, C. 2002b. A formal model of the politics of delegation in a separation of powers system. American Journal of Political Science 46: 111–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vos, E. 1997. The rise of committees. European Law Journal 3: 210–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vos, E. 1999. Institutional Frameworks of Community Health and Safety Legislation. Committees, Agencies and Private Bodies. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar

Wallace, H. and Wallace, W., eds. 2000. Policy-making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Weale, A. 1996. Environmental rules and rule-making in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 3: 594–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weale, A., Pridham, G., Cini, M.et al. 2003. Environmental Governance in Europe: an ever Closer Ecological Union?Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Weatherill, S. and Beaumont, P. 1995. EC Law. The Essential Guide to the Legal Workings of the European Community. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar

Weingast, B. R. and Moran, M. J. 1983. Bureaucratic discretion or congressional control? Regulatory policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Political Economy 91: 756–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wendon, B. 1998. The Commission as image-venue entrepreneur in EU social policy. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 339–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wessels, W. 1998. Comitology: fusion in action. Politico-administrative trends in the EU system. Journal of European Public Policy 5: 209–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Westlake, M. 1999. The Council of the European Union. London: John Harper Publishing.Google Scholar

Whitaker, R. 2005. National parties in the European Parliament: an influence in the committee system?European Union Politics 6: 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar