Advertisement

Politische Vierteljahresschrift

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 173–192 | Cite as

Die Einflussmöglichkeiten der Europäischen Kommission auf die europäische Politik

  • Susanne K. Schmidt
Abhandlungen

Zusammenfassung

Die Einflussmöglichkeiten der Europäischen Kommission auf die europäische Politik werden vor allem im Zusammenhang mit der Agendagestaltung diskutiert. Wie institutionalistische Analysen zeigen, kann die Kommission ihr Vorschlagsrecht nutzen, um eigene Politikvorstellungen durchzusetzen. Obwohl die Kommission darüber hinaus über Kompetenzen verfügt, ist bislang nicht systematisch dargelegt worden, inwiefern sich diese zur Steigerung ihres politischen Einflusses eignen. In diesem Artikel zeige ich, wie die Kommission ihre Kompetenzen als Hüterin der Verträge und aus dem Wettbewerbsrecht strategisch zu nutzen vermag. Mit Drohungen, die die Kommission aufgrund ihrer Kompetenzen aussprechen kann, gelingt es ihr, eigene Vorschläge im Ministerrat als „Wahl des kleineren Übels“ zu präsentieren. So kann der Ministerrat gezwungen werden, ihren Vorschlägen zuzustimmen. Ich diskutiere die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen dieser Strategie und zeige, inwieweit sich Studien, die andere Einflussmöglichkeiten der Kommission hervorheben, in diesem Analyserahmen konzeptualisieren lassen.

The means of the European commission to influence European policies

Abstract

The means of the European Commission to influence European policies are being discussed predominantly with view to its agenda-setting powers. Institutionalist analyses have shown how the Commission can use agenda setting to bring to bear its own political preferences on the Council. With view to other Commission rights, in contrast, there have not been similar systematic analyses to show the Commission’s impact on European policies. In this article it is shown how the Commission can use its rights following from its role as a guardian of the Treaty and from competition law strategically. By simultaneously imposing threats on the Member States, the Commission can present its proposals to the Council as a “lesser evil”, pressurizing the Council into acceptance. The paper shows the scope and limits of this strategy and takes into consideration how other studies discussing the Commission’s powers fit into this framework of analysis.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Allen, David, 1996: Competition Policy: Policing the Single Market, in: Wallace, Helen/ Wallace, William (Hrsg.), Policy-Making in the European Union, Oxford, 157–183.Google Scholar
  2. Alter, Karen J., 1998: Who are the „Masters of the Treaty“?: European Governments and the European Court of Justice, in: International Organization 52(1), 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alter, Karen J./ Meunier-Aitsahalia, Sophie, 1994: Judicial Politics in the European Community. European Integration and the Pathbreaking Cassis de Dijon Decision, in: Comparative Political Studies 26(4), 535–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argyris, Nicholas, 1989: The EEC Rules of Competition and the Air Transport Sector, in: Common Market Law Review 26(5), 3–32.Google Scholar
  5. Armstrong, Kenneth A./ Bulmer, Simon J., 1998: The Governance of the Single European Market, Manchester/New York.Google Scholar
  6. Behrens, Peter, 1992: Die Konvergenz der wirtschaftlichen Freiheiten im europäischen Gemeinschaftsrecht, in: Europarecht 2, 145–162.Google Scholar
  7. Bulmer, Simon J., 1994: Institutions and Policy Change in the European Communities: The Case of Merger Control, in: Public Administration 72(3), 423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burley, Anne-Marie/ Mattli, Walter, 1993: Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration, in: International Organization 47, 41–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Button, Kenneth, 1992: The Liberalization of Transport Services, in: Swann, Dennis (Hrsg.), The Single European Market and Beyond, London, 146–161.Google Scholar
  10. Coleman, William D./ Tangermann, Stefan, 1999: The 1992 CAP Reform, the Uruguay Round and the Commission: Conceptualizing Linked Policy Games, in: Journal of Common Market Studies 37(3), 385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crombez, Christophe, 2001: The Treaty of Amsterdam and the Codecision Procedure, in: Aspinwall, Mark D./ Schneider, Gerald (Hrsg.), The Rules of Integration, Manchester, im Erscheinen.Google Scholar
  12. Edwards, Geoffrey/ Spence, David (Hrsg.), 1997: The European Commission, London.Google Scholar
  13. Everling, Ulrich, 1984: The Member States of the European Community before their Court of Justice, in: European Law Review 5, 215–241.Google Scholar
  14. Fenwick, Helen/ Hervey, Tamara K., 1995: Sex Equality in the Single Market: New Directions for the European Court of Justice, in: Common Market Law Review 32, 443–470.Google Scholar
  15. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1995: The Politics of Legal Integration in the European Union, in: International Organization 49(1), 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garrett, Geoffrey/ Tsebelis, George, 1996: An Institutional Critique of Intergovernmentalism, in: International Organization 50(2), 269–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Genschel, Philipp, 2000: Die Grenzen der Problemlösungsfähigkeit der EU, in: Grande, Edgar/ Jachtenfuchs, Markus (Hrsg.), Die Problemlösungsfähigkeit der EU, Baden-Baden, 191–207.Google Scholar
  18. Golub, Jonathan, 2000: Globalisation, Sovereignty and Policymaking: Insights from European Integration, in: Holden, Barry (Hrsg.), Global Democracy: A Debate, London, 179–201.Google Scholar
  19. Green Cowles, Maria, 1995: Setting the Agenda for a New Europe: The ERT and EC 1992, in: Journal of Common Market Studies 33(4), 501–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson, Brian T., 1998: What Happened to Fortress Europe? External Trade Policy Liberalization in the European Union, in: International Organization 52(1), 55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Héritier, Adrienne, 1997a: Market-making Policy in Europe: Its Impact on Member State Policies. The Case of Road Haulage in Britain, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy, in: Journal of European Public Policy 4(4), 539–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Héritier, Adrienne, 1997b: Policy-Making by Subterfuge: Interest Accommodation, Innovation and Substitute Democratic Legitimation in Europe — Perspectives from Distinctive Policy Areas, in: Journal of European Public Policy 4(2), 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Héritier, Adrienne/ Mingers, Susanne/ Knill, Christoph/ Becka, Martina, 1994: Die Veränderung von Staatlichkeit in Europa. Ein regulativer Wettbewerb: Deutschland, Großbritannien und Frankreich in der Europäischen Union, Opladen.Google Scholar
  24. Hix, Simon, 1999: Constitutional Agenda-Setting Through Discretion in Rule Interpretation: Why the European Parliament Won at Amsterdam, Paper.Google Scholar
  25. Kingdon, John W., 1984: Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Choices, Boston.Google Scholar
  26. Leibfried, Stephan/ Pierson, Paul, 1995: Semisovereign Welfare States: Social Policy in a Multitiered Europe, in: Leibfried, Stephan/ Pierson, Paul (Hrsg.), European Social Policy: Between Fragmentation and Integration, Washington D.C., 43–77.Google Scholar
  27. Majone, Giandomenico, 1992: Market Integration and Regulation: Europe after 1992, in: Metroeconomica 43, 131–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Majone, Giandomenico, 1996: The European Commission as Regulator, in: Majone, Giandomenico (Hrsg.), Regulating Europe, London, 61–82.Google Scholar
  29. Marks, Gary/ Hooghe, Liesbet/ Blank, Kermit, 1996: European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v. Multi-Level Governance, in: Journal of Common Market Studies 34(3), 341–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mattli, Walter/ Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1995: Law and Politics in the European Union: a Reply to Garrett, in: International Organization 49(1), 183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mattli, Walter/ Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1998: Revisiting the European Court of Justice, in: International Organization 52(1), 177–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McGowan, Lee/ Wilks, Stephen, 1995: The First Supranational Policy in the European Union: Competition Policy, in: European Journal of Political Research 28, 141–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1991: Negotiating the Single European Act: National Interests and Conventional Statecraft in the European Community, in: International Organization 45(1), 19–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1995: Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Integration: A Rejoinder, in: Journal of Common Marker Studies 33(4), 611–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1998: The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht, Ithacy, NY.Google Scholar
  36. More, Gillian, 1991: Severance Pay for Part-Time Workers, in: European Law Review 16, 58–64.Google Scholar
  37. Moser, Peter, 1997: The Benefits of the Conciliation Procedure for the European Parliament. Comment to George Tsebelis, Decision Rules in the European Union: A Rational Choice Perspective, Zürich, 57–62.Google Scholar
  38. O’Reilly, Dolores, 1997: From State-Control to EC Competence Air Transport Liberalisation, EUI Working Papers RSC No. 97/33.Google Scholar
  39. Ostrom, Elinor, 1986: An Agenda for the Study of Institutions, in: Public Choice 48, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pescatore, Pierre, 1983: La carence du législateur communautaire et le devoir du juge, in: Lüke, Gerhard/ Ress, Georg/ Will, Michael R. (Hrsg.), Rechtsvergleichung, Europarecht und Staatenintegration, Köln/Berlin/Bonn/München, 559–580.Google Scholar
  41. Pierson, Paul, 1996: The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutionalist Perspective, in: Comparative Political Studies 29(2), 123–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pollack, Mark A., 1997: Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the European Community, in: International Organization 51(1), 99–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pollack, Mark A., 2000: A Blairite Treaty: Neoliberalism and Regulated Capitalism in the Treaty of Amsterdam, in: Neunreither, Karlheinz/ Wiener, Antje (Hrsg.), European Integration after Amsterdam: Institutional Dynamics and Prospects for Democracy, Oxford, 266–289.Google Scholar
  44. Ross, George, 1995: Jacques Delors and European Integration, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Sandholtz, Wayne/ Stone Sweet, Alec (Hrsg.), 1998: European Integration and Supranational Governance, Oxford.Google Scholar
  46. Sandholtz, Wayne/ Zysman, John, 1989: 1992: Recasting the European Bargain, in: World Politics 42(1), 95–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1985: Die Politikverflechtungsfalle: Europäische Integration und Deutscher Föderalismus im Vergleich, in: Politische Vierteljahresschrift 26, 323–356.Google Scholar
  48. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1994: Community and Autonomy: Multi-level Policy-making in the European Union, in: Journal of European Public Policy 1(2), 219–242.Google Scholar
  49. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1996: Democratic Policy in Europe, in: European Law Journal 2(2), 136–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1997: Games Real Actors Play. Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  51. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1998: Die Problemlösungsfähigkeit der Mehrebenenpolitik in Europa, in: Politische Vierteljahresschrift, Sonderheft 29, 121–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schimank, Uwe, 1992: Spezifische Interessenkonsense trotz generellem Orientierungsdissens, in: Giegel, Hans-Joachim (Hrsg.), Kommunikation und Konsense in modernen Gesellschaften, Frankfurt a.M., 236–275.Google Scholar
  53. Schmidt, Susanne K., 1998: Liberalisierung in Europa. Die Rolle der Europäischen Kommission, Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  54. Schneider, Gerald, 1995: The Limits of Self-Reform: Institution-Building in the European Union, in: European Journal of International Relations 1, 59–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schneider, Volker/ Werle, Raymund, 1990: International Regime or Corporate Actor? The European Community in Telecommunications Policy, in: Dyson, Kenneth/ Humphreys, Peter (Hrsg.), The Political Economy of Communications, London, 77–106.Google Scholar
  56. Shapiro, Martin, 1992: The European Court of Justice, in: Sbragia, Alberta M. (Hrsg.), Europolitics. Institutions and Policymaking in the „New“ European Community, Washington, D.C., 123–156.Google Scholar
  57. Slot, Piet Jan, 1994: Energy and Competition, in: Common Market Law Review 31, 511–547.Google Scholar
  58. Smyrl, Marc E., 1998: When (and How) Do the Commission’s Preferences Matter?, in: Journal of Common Market Studies 36(1), 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stein, Thorsten, 1986: Richterrecht wie anderswo auch? Der Gerichtshof der Europäischen Gemeinschaften als „Integrationsmotor“, in: Heidelberg Hochschullehrer der Juristischen Fakultät der Universität (Hrsg.), Richterliche Fortbildung. Erscheinungsformen, Auftrag und Grenzen, Festschrift zur 600-Jahr-Feier der Ruprechts-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 619–641.Google Scholar
  60. Steunenberg, Bernard, 1994: Decision Making Under Different Institutional Arrangements: Legislation by the European Community, in: Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) 150(4), 642–669.Google Scholar
  61. Strivens, Robert/ Weightman, Elizabeth, 1989: The Air Transport Sector and the EEC Competition Rules in the Light of the Ahmed Saeed Case, in: European Competition Law Review 10, 557–567.Google Scholar
  62. Tömmel, Ingeborg, 1998: Transformation of Governance: The European Commission’s Strategy for Creating a ‘Europe of the Regions’, in: Regional & Federal Studies 8(2), 52–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tsebelis, George, 1994: The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter, in: American Political Science Review 88(1), 128–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tsebelis, George/ Garrett, Geoffrey, 1997: Agenda Setting, Vetoes, and the European Union’s Co-decision procedure, in: Journal of Legislative Studies 3(3), 74–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tsebelis, George/ Kreppel, Amie, 1998: The History of Conditional Agenda-Setting in European Institutions, in: European Journal of Political Research 33, 41–71.Google Scholar
  66. Vogel, David, 1995: Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  67. Vogel, Steven K., 1996: Freer Markets, More Rules. Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries, Ithaca/London.Google Scholar
  68. Weiler, Joseph, 1981: The Community System: The Dual Character of Supranationalism, in: Yearbook of European Law 1, 267–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Westlake, Martin, 1995: The council of the European Union, London.Google Scholar
  70. Young, Alasdair R., 1994: Ideas, Interests and Institutions: The Politics of Liberalisation in the EC’s Road Haulage Industry, Working Paper, European Institute, Brighton.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Westdeutscher Verlag 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne K. Schmidt
    • 1
  1. 1.Max-Planck-Institut für GesellschaftsforschungKölnGermany

Personalised recommendations