European Union research has made great strides in understanding the dynamics of the European Union decision-making process. In contrast to this progress, the dynamics unfolding after the enactment of a European Union secondary legislative act has largely been ignored. Some of these acts remain in force in their original form for several years while others are revised soon after their enactment. What factors account for this variation? We empirically analyze the proposition that in the presence of ‘legislative drift,’ i.e. the intertemporal variation of decision-makers’ preferences, major revisions of European Union legislative acts are more likely to occur. Based on an analysis of the revision histories of 158 major European Union acts in the time period between 1958 and 2003, we find significant support for this hypothesis.
AdlerESWilkersonJD (2013) Congress and the Politics of Problem Solving, Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
2.
BerryCRBurdenBCHowellWG (2010) After enactment: The lives and deaths of federal programs. American Journal of Political Science54(1): 1–17.
3.
Box-SteffensmeierJMJonesB (2004) Event History Modeling—A Guide for Social Scientists, New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BudgeIKlingemannH-DVolkensA (2001) Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
CrombezC (1996) Legislative Procedures in the European Community. British Journal of Political Science26(2): 199–228.
6.
CrombezCSimonH (forthcoming) Legislative activity and gridlock in the European Union. British Journal of Political Science.
7.
FranchinoF (2007) The Powers of the Union: Delegation in the EU, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
GolubJ (1999) In the shadow of the vote? Decision making in the European community. International Organization53(4): 733–764.
9.
GolubJ (2007) Survival analysis and European Union decision-making. European Union Politics8(2): 155–179.
10.
GolubJ (2008) The study of decision-making speed in the European Union: Methods, data and theory. European Union Politics9(1): 167–179.
11.
GolubJSteunenbergB (2007) How time affects EU decision-making. European Union Politics8(4): 555–566.
12.
GrambschPMTherneauTM (1994) Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals. Biometrika81(3): 515–526.
13.
Hagemann S (2007) Applying ideal point estimation methods to the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 8(2): 279–296.
14.
Hix S and Hoyland BK (2011) The political system of the European Union. 3rd ed. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
15.
HixSNouryARolandG (2005) Power to the parties: Cohesion and competition in the European Parliament, 1979–2001. British Journal of Political Science35(2): 209–234.
16.
HornMJShepsleKA (1989) Administrative process and organizational form as legislative responses to agency costs. Virginia Law Review75(2): 499–508.
17.
KeeleL (2010) Proportionally difficult: Testing for nonproportional hazards in cox models. Political Analysis18(2): 189–205.
18.
Klingemann H-D, Volkens A, Budge I, et al. (2006) Mapping Policy Preferences II: Estimates for Parties, Electors and Governments in Central and Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990–2003. New York: Oxford University Press.
19.
KlüverHSagarzazuI (2013) Ideological congruency and decision-making speed: The effect of partisanship across European Union institutions. European Union Politics14(3): 388–407.
20.
KönigT (2007) Divergence or convergence? From ever-growing to ever-slowing European legislative decision making. European Journal of Political Research46(3): 417–444.
21.
KönigT (2008) Analysing the process of EU Legislative decision-making: To make a long story Short. European Union Politics9(1): 145–165.
22.
KönigTBräuningerT (2004) Accession and reform of the European Union: A game-theoretical analysis of eastern enlargement and the constitutional reform. European Union Politics5(4): 419–49.
23.
KönigTLuigB (2012) Party ideology and legislative agendas: Estimating contextual policy positions for the study of EU decision-making. European Union Politics13(4): 604–625.
24.
KrehbielK (1998) Pivotal Politics: A Theory of US Lawmaking, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
LandesWMPosnerRA (1975) The independent judiciary in an interest group perspective. Journal of Law and Economics18(3): 875–901.
26.
LewisDE (2002) The politics of agency termination: Confronting the myth of agency immortality. The Journal of Politics64(1): 89–107.
27.
LoweWBenoitKMikhaylovS (2011) Scaling policy preferences from coded political texts. Legislative Studies Quarterly26(1): 123–155.
28.
MaltzmanFShipanCR (2008) Change, continuity, and the evolution of the law. American Journal of Political Science52(2): 252–267.
29.
MoeTM (1990) Political institutions: The neglected side of the story. Journal of Law, Economics and Organisation6: 213–253.
30.
MoravcsikA (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht, New York: Cornell University Press.
31.
NugentN (2006) The Government and Politics of the European Union, London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
32.
RagusaJM (2010) The lifecycle of public policy: An event history analysis of repeals to landmark legislative enactments, 1951–2006. American Politics Research38(6): 1015–1051.
33.
RikerW (1980) Implications from the dis-equilibrium of majority rule for the study of institutions. American Political Science Review74(2): 432–446.
34.
SchulzHKönigT (2000) Institutional reform and decision-making efficiency in the European Union. American Journal of Political Science44(4): 653–666.
35.
SelckTJ (2006) Preferences and Procedures: European Union Legislative Decision-Making, Dordrecht: Springer.
36.
ShepsleKA (1979) Institutional arrangement and equilibrium in multidimensional voting models. American Journal of Political Science23(1): 27–59.
37.
SteunenbergBSelckTJ (2006) Testing procedural models of EU legislative decision-making. In: ThomsonRStokmanFNAchenC (eds) The European Union Decides, New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 25–53.
38.
ToshkovD (2011) Public opinion and policy output in the European Union: A lost relationship. European Union Politics12(2): 169–191.
39.
TsebelisGGarrettG (2000) Legislative politics in the European Union. European Union Politics1(1): 9–36.
40.
Warntjen A, Hix S and Crombez C (2008) The party political make-up of EU – legislative bodies. Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 1243.
41.
Weiler JHH (1991) The Transformation of Europe. The Yale Law Journal 100: 2403–2483.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
