Which theories explain better the division of labour in the European Parliament?

Distributive theories.
96% (72 votes)
Informational theories.
1% (1 vote)
Partisan theories.
3% (2 votes)
Total votes: 75

Comments

The partisan theories explain the best the labour division in the EU parlament because usually the deputies choose topics they have a special interest in; usually the deputies from Fishing regions choose do make the fishing policies, while the deputies from poorer regions choose to make the policies about European funds.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 12
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

From your explanation, I think you are referring to "distributive" theories. What are partisan theories really about? http://wikisum.com/w/Cox_and_McCubbins:_Legislative_leviathan

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 2
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

The role of the European Parliament is gradually growing with the adoption of every new treaty. The European Parliament has been considered as an institutional addition, over the years having seriously increased its power and status as an important legislative institution. Despite the growing role of the EP in the decision-making process of the EU, the role of the standing committees in the EP decision-making process is less understood.

The theoretical framework used for these theories is borrowed from the history of the United States. The general assumptions are borne from the distributive, informational and partisan positive theories of legislative organization. According to them committees first, serve interests outside the chamber, second, bring informational advantage to the legislature as a whole and third, serve party interests.

Broadly speaking, there are three theories to explain the division of labor in the European Parliament: distributive (the division of labor in the EP is based on interests -bring the bacon home), informational (the purpose of this theories is to develop an expertise that will enable a greater diversity) and partisan. In their articles, Shepsle (1978) and Weingast (1995), describe the distributive theories, then Krehbiel (1991) the informational theories, Cox and McCubbins, (1993) the partisan ones. All three are positive institutional theories revealing rational behavior of actors and institutional structures identifying the distribution of legislative powers. However, they are not exclusive, they cannot be combined because they sit on different assumptions about the dimensionality of the policy actions.

In the field of politics there are some analysts that tried to make various tests and connections between this theories and the division of labor in the European Parliament.  For example, Yordanova (2009) tests the three theories on committee seat allocation in the 2004–2009 European Parliament. The author noticed that on average the political groups seat shares in the committees are broadly proportional to their seat shares in the plenary. Furthermore, there are obviously differences across committees. The composition of some committees seems to be best described as contrary, in line with an informational logic.

In contradiction, the author Yordanova fails to find much evidence for the partisan theories. According to the distributive perspective, Whitaker (2001) finds that MEPs claim to be able to self-select into committees. Jensen & Winzen (2012) evaluate the distributive, informational, and partisan perspectives from the viewpoint of patterns of participation in legislative negotiations. They find the least support for the distributive perspective and somewhat more support for the informational perception. Also, they find that the partisan perspective provides the best fit with the patterns in the data.

For further information please read:  http://www.euce.org/eusa2009/papers/yordanova_09D.pdf

 

Overall, although distributive and informational aspects may be present in the operation of the committee system in the European Parliament, the amount of evidence suggests that the committee system is controlled by the political groups and the national party delegations within them. According to all above I strongly believe that the best theories suitable to explain the division of labor in the European Parliament are the distributive ones. However, the balance of power between national party delegations and political groups remains disputed.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 15
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

Distributive division of labor is the preferred method of action in Parliament, and for good reason. This enables each member of the institution to propose and support legislation that they either care passionately about, or know a lot about. This promotes involvement in the decision-making process and allows for the creation of better legislation that is more relevant to EU citizens.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 10
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

The division of labor in European Parlamment goes beyond nominal membership in one committee. Both limit the time and resources deputies and parliamentary labor associated transaction costs are important factors that explain the specialization of the institution. However, the evidence is still limited EMPR and it would be good to do more research before they make generalizations in this regard. Powerful analysis system EP committees raise questions of representativeness and effectiveness closely related to the idea of democracy.
The most appropriate division of labor theories explaining the EP I think are distributive.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 13
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

Diviziunea muncii din cadrul Parlamentului European este distributivă, aceasta fiind împărțită între cele 20 de comisii, două subcomitete și 39 de delegații, fiecare ocupându-se de un anumit domeniu, pentru buna funcționare legislativă și administrativă a Uniunii Europene. În cadrul acestor comitete (comisii) se dezbat, se aprobă și se elaborează rapoartele legislative din proprie perspectivă și inițiativă, urmând a fi trimise în ședințe plenare pentru aprobarea finală. Pentru ca diviziunea muncii să fie eficientă și cu rezultate vizibile, se folosesc teorii distributive.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 13
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1
Expert vote

Plagiarism is unethical behaviour and will not be allowed.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 4
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Expert vote

The process of integration of nation-states has been and still is a highly debated topic by representatives of international relations theory. The League of Nations, the United Nations and especially the European Union have been regarded by some as the first steps towards a "united" or "integrated" world. There are some assumptions about the starting point of integration theories. The first of these assumptions concerns a common theme in the philosophical as well as the empirical literature of the humanistic and social sciences, namely that hostility between people would cease to be all the same. Wars are determined by differences between people and conflicts of interest, fear and envy over these differences. If people could know one another, understand the beliefs, goals and problems of others, their natural rationality and empathy would outweigh, or at least reduce, mutual hostility. As Haas notes, through international integration "relations can be built and preventive measures can be taken in relations between nations and people long before tensions, disputes, conflicts or violence break out." The second assumption takes into account the large number of transactions in multiple units. These transactions give rise to pressures that can prevent the parties involved from going against the others, which will ultimately lead to disputes. The third assumption is that an integrated international system will resemble the nation state in such a way that violence will be controlled by a group chosen or designated by the system. Conflicts could then be resolved in a modicable way as opposed to anarchy.  The last assumption is a non-functionalist one, which states that people co-operate in a small, non-ideological, non-central area are able to build, over time, decooperation models that will help overcome crucial issues.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 19
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1
Expert vote

I think that the distributive theories explain the division of responsabilities of EP's members. Like the american system, the European Parliament has to deal with a large number of domains that cannot be sustained in just one committee. Every single domain or severals domains are atributed to a certain committee, formed by a certain number of members in the EP. In every single committee there are laws that need to be proposed, discussed, finalized and sent further in order to be repealed or not. That is the most efficient way to provide the best solutions to the EU's members, in every domain, from politics, agriculture to economics.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 17
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1
Expert vote

Parlamentul European este singura instituţie supranaţională ai cărei membri sunt aleşi în mod democratic, prin vot universal direct, reprezentând cetăţenii statelor membre, fiind un garant a legitimității democratice a legislației europene. De asemenea, este ales o dată la cinci ani, este implicat în adoptarea a numeroase legi (directive, regulamente etc.) care influenţează viaţa fiecărui cetăţean și este singura instituție comunitară care se întâlnește și își ține dezbaterile public. Pentru a da randament maxim în dreptul fiecărui domeniu, înainte de activitatea sesiunilor plenare ale Parlamentului, membrii lucrează în comisii permanente. Pe lângă aceste comisii permanente, Parlamentul mai poate înființa și subcomisii, comisii temporare, care se ocupă de probleme specifice, precum și comisii de anchetă. Teoria informativă vine să sprijine ideea precum că toți deputații lucrează în beneficiul Parlamentului European cu condiția de a se specializa într-un anumit domeniu. Astfel încât, Comisiile vor fi alcătuite din experți în domeniul respectiv, dar cu interese și ideologii diferite. Tocmai din această cauză, deputații aleg Comisiile care produc bunurile cerute de alegători, vizând interesul propriu, acela de a-și menține puterea. În funcție de ceea ce se produce în aceste Comisii, în unele Comisii se aplică mai mult o teorie decât alta. De pildă, dacă se produc schimbări în domeniul legislativ care vor afecta pe toți în mod egal, atunci membrii acestei Comisii vor fi, în mod absolut, experți în domeniu, astfel încât, teoria informativă se va aplica aici în mod coerent. Pe de altă parte, teoriile distributive sunt cele care explică per total divizarea muncii PE, reprezentând răspândirea beneficiilor pe diferite domenii, interese și circumscripții într-o singură legislație. Teoria alegerii raționale se bazează pe ipoteza de raționalitate ale actorilor politici, adică pe unele preferințe individuale, de maximizare a intereselor proprii printr-un comportament instrumental. Urmărirea propriului interes nu va favoriza apariția nemulțumirilor din partea alegătorilor, mai exact, coaliției de câștig, atâta timp cât comportamentul instrumental al politicianului nu va afecta interesele alegătorilor. Un politician bun se va adresa indivizilor cu care el împărtășește aceleași interese, fiind necesari pentru a-i asigura lui ajungerea la putere și îi va menține suficient de mulțumiți cu deciziile sale ca să rămână loiali. În același mod și PE încearcă să acorde importanță tuturor domeniilor, pentru ca fiecare individ să fie mulțumit de funcționarea Uniunii și beneficiile de cetățean al Uniunii; -universalismul, se referă la faptul că de politicile de distribuție beneficiază o gamă largă de oameni și nu ține cont de anumite condiții sau de statut, putând fi considerate un bun public; -omnibus, legislația distributivă este considerată omnibus și combină piesele mici, divizibile, care se ocupă de multe districte. De exemplu, aceasta alocă fonduri pentru o colecție de proiecte locale independente, care variază ca mărime, domeniul de aplicare și suma de bani. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_tendency)
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 22
Peer vote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1
Expert vote