This chapter provides a historical overview of the evolution of European cooperation. It first sketches the historical background to several initiatives for international cooperation after the Second World War. It then discusses the way the EU evolved from the initial founding of the European Coal and Steel Community into what is now the European Union. In doing so it looks at the evolution of its policies, institutions and membership over the decades and highlights major international events and crises that affected developments. The chapter shows that the process of bringing the European countries together was long and winding with many fits and starts. Periods of rapid change and innovation have alternated with long stretches of gridlock and stalemate. The process was often erratic because of fundamentally different views on the nature, pace and scope of integration. While the term ‘European Union’ suggests that the organization was swiftly put in place on the basis of a solid design, the EU in essence is a patchwork that has been stitched together in a step-by-step fashion over the course of seven decades.

This chapter discusses the role of interest groups and lobbying in the EU. It starts by giving an overview of the number and types of interest groups active at the EU level and the different channels through which they try to exert influence. The system of interest representation in the EU is then analysed in terms of corporatism and pluralism, arguing that overall it is best characterized as a form of ’designed pluralism’. The strategies that interest groups use to influence policy-making are discussed in terms of inside and outside lobbying. Because of the way the EU’s political system works, inside lobbying is a much more common strategy at the EU level than outside lobbying. Although it is difficult to make an overall assessment of interest group influence, the impact that specific groups have depends crucially on the resources they command, the way the decision-making process is organized and the type of issue at stake. The chapter ends with a discussion of the relationship between lobbying and democracy, arguing that whether or not lobbying helps or is a threat to democracy depends on the balance between interest groups and the way in which lobbying takes place.

This chapter takes a closer look at the process in which issues are identified as requiring attention and the problems associated with them are defined (that is, agenda-setting) in the EU. It shows that agenda-setting is a highly political process because it has important consequences for the issues on which decisions are taken and the policy options that are considered. As a result, political actors actively try to bring issues on to the EU agenda or keep them off that agenda. The process through which issues come on to the EU agenda is complex and largely informal. Nevertheless, it is not purely random or idiosyncratic. Common elements and drivers can be discerned in many agenda-setting processes. The chapter identifies certain (combinations of) motives that explain why actors try to place an issue on the EU agenda. It also shows the ‘typical’ sequence of steps that are taken in EU agenda-setting processes, albeit with variations in specific cases. Finally, it discusses the factors that determine whether or not an issue will actually make it onto the EU agenda.

This chapter discusses the implementation of EU policies after they have been adopted. It is structured around three phases in the implementation process: legal implementation, practical implementation and monitoring implementation. Each of these phases takes place both at the EU-level and within member states, leading to a system of multi-level administration. Subsequent sections zoom in on each of the three phases. In relation to legal implementation, both transposition by member states and the adoption of delegated and implementing acts by the Commission are discussed, including the system of comitology. The section on practical implementation looks at areas in which EU institutions are the main implementers and discusses the general EU requirements for implementation by member states. The section on monitoring implementation includes an extensive discussion of (the procedural set-up and practical use of) the infringement procedure and preliminary rulings. The chapter ends with a discussion of the role of EU agencies and European regulatory networks in the implementation of EU policies, stressing the variation within and commonalities between these two types of structure.

This chapter presents key findings about people’s opinions on the EU as well as their participation in EP elections and referendums. It shows how evaluations of the EU have evolved from a permissive consensus in the early years of European cooperation to a constraining dissensus that has emerged since the 1990s. The chapter outlines the factors that determine people’s votes in EP elections as well as the different types of referenda that member states have organized with respect to EU affairs. Support for the EU can be explained by the benefits people derive from it, the beliefs they have about politics and identity and benchmarks. Citizens also take cues from political parties and politicians in making up their minds about the EU. Issues of identity have become more prominent in determining people’s stance towards politics, both at the national and at the European level. The more critical stance of EU citizens towards European integration has increased the support for Eurosceptic political parties, which want to see a smaller role for the EU.

This chapter discusses the roles of and relations between political parties, political groups and members of the European Parliament (MEPs). Domestic political parties play an important role because they are responsible for selecting the candidates for the European Parliament elections. Once elected, most of these political parties and their MEPs work together in political groups. In these political groups MEPs from like-minded parties organize their work and tend to vote as cohesive blocks. Political groups thus help to make the EP work in a much more effective manner than would be possible if the more than 200 parties that are represented there did not build coalitions. These political groups are organized along two main cleavages: a classic left–right cleavage as well as a more recent cleavage between groups that are more supportive and groups that are more critical of European integration. Finally, in addition to domestic parties, there are also European political parties. They have more limited tasks and mostly provide a platform for like-minded parties from the different member states.

This chapter reflects upon the functioning of the EU and the way it can be evaluated by using the comparative politics approach. Recent crises have increased the EU’s involvement in many policy areas, begging questions as to where the EU now stands as a political organization. Moreover, the greater involvement of the EU in policymaking also brings to the fore important questions about the democratic quality of the EU. The chapter first highlights the hybrid nature of the EU, combining features of an international organization with those of a state. It next discusses the debate about the democratic deficit, concerning the extent to which citizens can determine the EU’s policies and keep the EU accountable. The chapter subsequently discusses the rule of law crisis and the commitment of all EU member states to safeguard fundamental rights and values common to all the EU member states and enumerated in the Treaties. Concerns about democratic backsliding in some EU member states have resulted in procedures against member states to address the risk of breaching these values. As these procedures are highly political, tackling such breaches in this way is fraught with difficulties.

This chapter outlines what types of decision the EU takes and how these decisions are adopted. This includes explanations of the Ordinary Legislative Procedure, special legislative procedures and the Open Method of Coordination, as well as the role of informal trilogues, the way qualified majority voting in the Council works and the subsidiarity check by national parliaments. In addition, the chapter discusses the role of differentiated integration in EU decision-making. Throughout the text, the chapter highlights the rationales behind different forms of EU decision-making. It argues that the EU’s decision-making procedures seek to find a balance between competing objectives: fostering EU-wide approaches to issues, protecting the sovereignty of its member states and installing an element of democracy in the way decisions are made. If one understands the logic behind this balancing act, the complex and diverse world of legal instruments and decision-making procedures in the EU becomes much easier to navigate.