Suchergebnisse

This paper has been presented during the workshop 'Where now for Europarties? Reflections post-Lisbon' (20-21 June 2011, Maastricht University) and during the 6th ECPR General Conference in Reykjavik (25-27 August 2011, University of Iceland). ; Political parties at the European level – Europarties – do not only seek to be represented in the institutions of the EU (office-seeking) and to strengthen their role in the European Parliament elections (vote-seeking). Also, they try to colour the politics and policies of the Union, through the dissemination of ideas and the promotion of values linked to their political ideologies. In contrast to political groups in the European Parliament, until recently, Europarties were lacking resources enabling them to follow closely the substance of the EU policy process. However, the recent creation and funding of European political foundations affiliated to Europarties has been seen as a chance to provide them with the tools to become more policy-oriented. Currently, no less than eleven European political foundations are active in Brussels and beyond, and the total EU grant available to them for 2011 amounts to more than 11 million EURO. This paper investigates, for the first time, these European political foundations. It does so empirically and comparatively, based on the study of primary resources and a number of semistructured interviews, alongside existing research. The topic is addressed through a focus on the establishment of European political foundations, their organisation and their 'transnational' character (as networks of national political foundations). The central questions are: What are the key features of European political foundations? What purposes do they serve? And how should their relationship with Europarties be understood? Answers to these questions will shed light on one of the most recent innovations in the development of Europarties, and thus contribute to a new research agenda on EU party politics.

The implementation of the Lisbon Treaty assessed new prerogatives to the European Parliament (EP) on the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and on the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). This has increased the role of the EP thus changing the balance of power with other EU institutions, as the Council of Ministers, the European Council and also the new High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR). This new situation conveys more powers and responsibilities to the EP and to its main actors, i.e. the political parties. Even if also national parties have their own opinions on CFSP and CSDP issues, it is obvious that their supranational and EU level organisations, the so-called Europarties, devote to the foreign policy of EU much more attention. Aim of this paper is to analyse whether Europarties share the same attitude towards the existence of a EU common foreign and defence policy, and what are the main conceptual frames adopted by each Europarty on some of the main EU foreign and defence issues. Europarties' positions are analysed through a discourse analysis approach in order to understand their ideas towards three fundamental institutional frameworks of the EU foreign policy: the Lisbon Treaty, the existence of the CFSP and the existence of the CSDP (and the European Defence Agency). Moreover, a content analysis is conducted on Europarties' electoral manifestos and on the main EU strategic documents in order to understand which are the main conceptual frames used by parties and by EU on the foreign and defence issues. In particular four categories concerning different aspects of the CFSP and of the CSDP are identified: nature of threats, foreign and defence policy tools, geographical areas of interest, multilateral organizations. Results show that not only the non-mainstream Europarties, whose critical views towards the EU or some aspects of the EU were already known, but also amongst the EPP, the PES and ELDR there are some differences in their attitude towards the CFSP and the CSDP. While the EPP and the ELDR seem to be clearly enthusiastic of the new CFSP and CSDP - as designed by the Lisbon Treaty - Socialists, even if they agree and underline the importance of the reformed CFSP, are more critical towards the CSDP. With respect to the four categories (nature of threats, foreign and defence policy tools, geographical areas of interest, multilateral organizations) the Europarties offer different attitudes and priorities to those expressed in the official documents of the EU. In particular, Europarties seem to have a completely different perception of which threats have to be considered the most dangerous. It is worth noting that every Europarty considers the climate change as the threat which deserves more space and attention while for the official documents the environmental issue represents only one of the menaces posed to the EU.

While Europarties have received increasing attention in recent years, little is known about how they arrive at common policy positions, given their strong internal ideological heterogeneity. In order to explain position formation within Europarties, this article argues that national parties compete with each other in an attempt to upload their own policy positions to their Europarty. The article hypothesizes that their ability to succeed in these attempts depends on their legislative resources. The argument is tested by analysing position formation within the four major Europarties for all European Parliament elections between 1979 and 2004. The empirical results confirm that position choice is skewed towards parties with a large seat share, which has important implications for political representation in Europe. Adapted from the source document.

While Europarties have received increasing attention in recent years, little is known about how they arrive at common policy positions, given their strong internal ideological heterogeneity. In order to explain position formation within Europarties, this article argues that national parties compete with each other in an attempt to upload their own policy positions to their Europarty. The article hypothesizes that their ability to succeed in these attempts depends on their legislative resources. The argument is tested by analysing position formation within the four major Europarties for all European Parliament elections between 1979 and 2004. The empirical results confirm that position choice is skewed towards parties with a large seat share, which has important implications for political representation in Europe.

On the bases of the new EU Profiler data for the 2009 European Parliament elections, this work looks at two basic criteria to assess the representative potential of the EU party system: its competitiveness and the policy coherence of its parties. It is here argued that, if the national parties are successfully able to aggregate their programmes and agendas at the EU level, proposing different options to the European voters, the EU 'democratic deficit' might not be as severe as it is often lamented. It is found that the Europarties, despite the enlargements towards Central and Eastern Europe, are sufficiently coherent and different to seek to fulfil an expressive, or representative, function. By selectively placing its focus on the 'supply-side' of politics, this work shows that European voters could indeed make meaningful choices, which the Europarties might turn into concrete policies through their parliamentary activity. Adapted from the source document.

In recent years, one of the most interesting and potentially promising developments in European Union (EU) party politics has been the establishment of European political foundations. At the time of writing, no less than 12 European political foundations are active in Brussels and beyond, and the total EU grant available to them for 2012 amounted to almost 12 million euro. However, very little is known as to how exactly these European political foundations perform their tasks. Taking stock of the first five years of their operation, this article analyses European political foundations empirically and comparatively, based on the study of primary resources and a number of semi-structured interviews, alongside existing research. The central questions concern the purposes European political foundations serve and the nature of their relationship with Europarties. From a theoretical perspective, this article addresses the issue of the development of European political foundations within the wider debate on EU party politics, and offers a number of insights regarding the actual and potential role of European political foundations in strengthening Europarties. Adapted from the source document.