欧洲议会

V. Schmidt
{"title":"欧洲议会","authors":"V. Schmidt","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198797050.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 8 discusses the European Parliament’s pathway to legitimacy, and its transition from having “no size at all” in Eurozone governance to increasing influence. The chapter begins with an analysis of the EP’s sources of power—which were initially very few, given its marginalization in Eurozone governance—and of its growing throughput legitimacy. Although the most input legitimate of EU actors in principle, in practice it has had limited relevance to citizens and has been far removed from them as well as from national parliaments—themselves the biggest losers in Eurozone crisis governance. But the EP’s lack of remit did not stop it from using its input legitimacy to enhance its own procedural exercise of “voice,” deployed increasingly critically to demand accountability from other EU actors. The EP also slowly gained influence as the “go-to” body for other EU actors in search of legitimation via a political accountability forum. The chapter follows with a discussion of the Janus-faced public perceptions of the EP’s role in Eurozone governance, moving from views of the European Parliament as a talking shop increasingly toward its being a potential equal partner. The chapter shows that initially the EP was a talking shop that largely went along with Council and Commission initiatives, in keeping with its minimal powers, but that over time the EP gained increasing powers both formally, through legislation, and informally, in particular as other EU actors turned more and more to the EP for legitimation by giving accounts to an input-legitimate accountability body.","PeriodicalId":262894,"journal":{"name":"Europe's Crisis of Legitimacy","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The European Parliament\",\"authors\":\"V. Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198797050.003.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 8 discusses the European Parliament’s pathway to legitimacy, and its transition from having “no size at all” in Eurozone governance to increasing influence. The chapter begins with an analysis of the EP’s sources of power—which were initially very few, given its marginalization in Eurozone governance—and of its growing throughput legitimacy. Although the most input legitimate of EU actors in principle, in practice it has had limited relevance to citizens and has been far removed from them as well as from national parliaments—themselves the biggest losers in Eurozone crisis governance. But the EP’s lack of remit did not stop it from using its input legitimacy to enhance its own procedural exercise of “voice,” deployed increasingly critically to demand accountability from other EU actors. The EP also slowly gained influence as the “go-to” body for other EU actors in search of legitimation via a political accountability forum. The chapter follows with a discussion of the Janus-faced public perceptions of the EP’s role in Eurozone governance, moving from views of the European Parliament as a talking shop increasingly toward its being a potential equal partner. The chapter shows that initially the EP was a talking shop that largely went along with Council and Commission initiatives, in keeping with its minimal powers, but that over time the EP gained increasing powers both formally, through legislation, and informally, in particular as other EU actors turned more and more to the EP for legitimation by giving accounts to an input-legitimate accountability body.\",\"PeriodicalId\":262894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Europe's Crisis of Legitimacy\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Europe's Crisis of Legitimacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198797050.003.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europe's Crisis of Legitimacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198797050.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第八章讨论了欧洲议会的合法性之路,以及它在欧元区治理中从“完全没有规模”到影响力不断增强的转变。本章首先分析了欧洲议会的权力来源——鉴于其在欧元区治理中的边缘化,最初的权力来源很少——以及其日益增长的吞吐量合法性。尽管原则上这是欧盟参与者最合法的投入,但在实践中,它与公民的相关性有限,而且与他们和各国议会相距甚远——它们本身就是欧元区危机治理中最大的输家。但欧洲议会缺乏职权范围并没有阻止它利用其投入的合法性来加强自己在程序上的“发言权”,并日益严厉地要求其他欧盟参与者承担责任。欧洲议会也慢慢获得了影响力,成为其他欧盟成员国通过政治问责论坛寻求合法性的“首选”机构。本章接着讨论了公众对欧洲议会在欧元区治理中的角色的两面看法,从欧洲议会作为一个清谈馆的观点越来越多地转向其作为一个潜在的平等伙伴。本章表明,最初欧洲议会是一个清谈馆,在很大程度上与理事会和委员会的倡议保持一致,以保持其最小的权力,但随着时间的推移,欧洲议会通过立法和非正式方式获得了越来越多的权力,特别是随着其他欧盟参与者越来越多地转向欧洲议会寻求合法化,向一个投入合法的问责机构提供账户。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The European Parliament
Chapter 8 discusses the European Parliament’s pathway to legitimacy, and its transition from having “no size at all” in Eurozone governance to increasing influence. The chapter begins with an analysis of the EP’s sources of power—which were initially very few, given its marginalization in Eurozone governance—and of its growing throughput legitimacy. Although the most input legitimate of EU actors in principle, in practice it has had limited relevance to citizens and has been far removed from them as well as from national parliaments—themselves the biggest losers in Eurozone crisis governance. But the EP’s lack of remit did not stop it from using its input legitimacy to enhance its own procedural exercise of “voice,” deployed increasingly critically to demand accountability from other EU actors. The EP also slowly gained influence as the “go-to” body for other EU actors in search of legitimation via a political accountability forum. The chapter follows with a discussion of the Janus-faced public perceptions of the EP’s role in Eurozone governance, moving from views of the European Parliament as a talking shop increasingly toward its being a potential equal partner. The chapter shows that initially the EP was a talking shop that largely went along with Council and Commission initiatives, in keeping with its minimal powers, but that over time the EP gained increasing powers both formally, through legislation, and informally, in particular as other EU actors turned more and more to the EP for legitimation by giving accounts to an input-legitimate accountability body.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信