08/07/2013 Italian Political Science: Europeanizing legislatures (and beyond)

www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/europeanizing-legislatures-and-beyond 1/3

The Professional Review Of The Italian Political Science Association

Europeanizing  legislatures  (and  beyond)
by  Francesco  Zucchini  and  Marco  Giuliani  |  Published  in  issue7  /  Research

This  international  research  project  is  a  follow  up  to  a  previous  research  involving  a  European  network  of
scholars   in  the  field  of   legislative  studies.  This  network  has  just  released   its  first  collective  product  –  an
edited   volume   for   Springer   –   and   is   now   looking   for   new   avenues   of   research   complementing   its   past
accomplishments.  The  Italian  team  is  mainly  based  at  the  University  of  Milano  Statale.
It  is  worthwhile  to  go  back  to  the  origins  of  the  research  network  and  to  its  main  research  goals.  Everything
started  in  2008  as  a  sort  of  side-­product  (or  search  for  synergy)  of  the  bigger  comparative  study  on  policy
agenda-­setting  (http://www.comparativeagendas.org/).  At  the  margin  of  one  of  its  regular  annual  meeting,
it  was  proposed  to  organize  a  supplementary  and  informal  seminar.  This  seminar  was  held  in  Bordeaux,  and
included  European  scholars   from  a  wide   range  of   countries,   some  of  whom  not  directly   involved   in   the
“mother-­project”.  
The  starting  idea  was  extremely  simple.  According  to  the  so-­called  “Delors-­prophecy”  the  European  union
would  soon  be  at  the  origin  of  80%  of  the  domestic  normative  production.  The  research  network  wanted  to
test  empirically  this  prediction  in  a  number  of  countries  for  some  twenty  years  (in  Italy  the  exact  period  was
1987-­2006,  with  a  clear  overlap  with  the  legislatures  from  the  10th  to  the  14th).  Further  specifications  would
have  included  the  type  of  law,  its  origin  (government  or  private  member  bills),  the  policy  sector  (taken  from
the  twenty  macro-­categories  used  in  the  comparative  policy  agenda  project)  and  other  variables  according
to  the  datasets  available  in  the  different  member  states.

The  research  design  seemed  at  first  only  explorative  but  the  ongoing  cooperation  and  discussion  among  the
research   teams   offered   the   opportunity   to   think   about   several   methodological   problems,   test   different
techniques   (including   alternative   coding   protocols),   gain   insights   on   unexplored   topics,   and   contribute
indirectly  to  the  literature  on  Europeanization  and  to  the  field  of  legislative  studies.  
In  fact,  the  research  question  is  far  more  tricky  than  it  appears  at  first  sight.  First  of  all,  the  choice  of  the
unit  of  analysis,  the  law,  is  not  an  unproblematic  decision.  In  spite  of  the  apparent  formal  similarity,  “law”  is
an  intrinsically  ambiguous  concept  when  applied  to  different  constitutional  setups  that  offer  varying  degrees
of  freedom  to  the  action  of  executives  and  parliaments.  For  explicit  comparisons  this  problem  of  equivalence
should  be  tackled  directly,  but  in  our  explorative  analysis,  once  acknowledged,  each  national  team  had  the
opportunity  to  extend  its  own  analysis  in  different  directions.  The  Italian  team  did  it  by  exploring  secondary
legislation,  i.e.  analyzing  ministerial  decrees,  government  regulations  etc.,  for  a  collective  article  published
in  an  Italian  journal,  and  it  paid  a  specific  attention  to  legislative  decrees  for  the  Italian  chapter  in  the  edited
international  volume.  
Secondly,  the  operationalization  of  the  so-­called  “EU-­link”  deserves  a  careful  investigation.  In  other  terms
how   to   trace   back   the   European   origin   of   a   domestic   act   ?   The   research   network,   agreed   on   twelve
keywords  (e.g.  European  union,  Single  market,  European  Monetary  system,  etc.)  and  some  abbreviations
(like  EU,  ECSC,  EMU,  etc)  that  had  to  be  present  either  in  the  whole  text  (as  in  the  Italian  case)  or  in  the
summary/preamble  of  the  law  which,  in  some  countries,  was  extensive  enough  to  sufficiently  represent  the
entire  act.  

http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/
http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/europeanizing-legislatures-and-beyond
http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/contributors/francesco-zucchini
http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/contributors/marco-giuliani
http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/
http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/category/research/
http://www.comparativeagendas.org/


08/07/2013 Italian Political Science: Europeanizing legislatures (and beyond)

www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/europeanizing-legislatures-and-beyond 2/3

Thirdly,  but  not  the  least  important  aspect,  it  has  become  increasingly  clear  over  time  that  our  empirical  test
ended   up   underestimating   the   effect   of   the   European   Union   and   the   far   reaching   consequences   of
Europeanization  for  member  states.  In  fact,  we  are  able  only  to  recognize  the  impact  of  the  EU  on  laws  (i.e.
positive  integration  law-­making),  but  we  cannot  observe  law  prevention  (i.e.  the  impossibility  of  adopting
norms  contrasting  with  the  Treaties  or  the  acquis  communautaire)  and  the  effects  of  negative  integration

(e.g.  liberalizations  due  to  rulings  of  the  European  Court  of  Justice)1.  
The  results  confirmed  that  the  amount  of  legislation  originated  by  EU  acts  is  far  from  Delors’  target  (it  is
irregularly  increasing,  but  only  in  two  years  overcomes  the  threshold  of  25%),  but  that  the  EU  impact  is
more  relevant  for  secondary  legislation  and,  most  of  all,  for  legislative  decrees  (always  between  40%  and
90%,  on  a  yearly  basis,  since  1991).  The  Europeanization  process  seems  to  empower  the  executive  as  a
result  of  information  asymmetry  and  direct  formal  competencies.  In  the  Italian  case,  the  annual  community
act   –   which   largely   delegates   the   implementation   of   EU   directives   to   the   executive   –   and   a   reluctant
parliament  further  contributed  to  that  process.  All  the  chapters  compared  the  presence  of  the  “European
link”  for  policies  belonging  to  different  sectors.  In  addition  the  Italian  one  explored  the  role  of  the   initial
sponsor  of  the  bill  and  the  differentiated  presence  of  amendments.
For  a  more  explicitly  comparative  approach,  the  final  chapter  of  the  volume  took  the  legislative  national  data
in  order  to  build-­up  a  cross-­country  time-­series  dataset,  and  test  some  institutional  hypotheses  regarding
the  variable  distribution  of  the  EU-­links  across  countries,  sectors  and  years.

Where  are  we  going  from  here?  The  first  steps  took  us  approximately  four  years,  from  the  initial  informal
seminar   to   the  publication  of   the  edited  volume.   It  has  been  a  minor   involvement   for  all   the  partners,
without  any  explicit  funding.  In  June  2012  some  members  of  the  original  network  and  some  new  ones,  took
the  opportunity  of   the  ECPR   research   sessions   organized   at   the   European   University   Institute   for   some
brainstorming  and  for  planning  further  stages  of  the  research.  All  national  teams  agreed  that  it’s  impossible
to  replicate  the  “no-­funds”  experience  of  the  past,  and  it’s  probably  too  early  to  draft  a  new  “big”  European
project  (even  because  we  fall  between  the  last  tenders  of  the  FP7  and  the  future  Horizon  2020  program).
Nevertheless   we   decided   to   refine   and   extend   our   first   experience   in   order   to   prepare   for   a   major
submission.  
If  the  initial  thrust  was  to  test  what  has  been  then  dubbed  “the  Delors  Myth”,  our  further  steps  will  be  to
investigate  into  the  Europenization  of  legislatures  more  in  general,  by  paying  attention  to  features  different
from  the  laws.  The  general  idea  would  be  always  to  perform  some  country-­specific  analysis  on  EU  influenced
parliamentary  behavior  and  then  to  test  comparatively  the  factors  affecting  the  observed  variance  between
countries,  sectors  and  periods.  However  in  the  next  investigations  we  will  take  into  consideration  bills  and,
above   all,   parliamentary   questioning.   If   information   asymmetry,   mixed   with   the   direct   presence   in   EU
legislative  arena,  lies  at  the  origin  of  the  uneven  role  of  executives  in  EU  influenced  domestic  policy-­making,
then  MPs  may  try  to  regain  the  control  (and  activism)  they  seem  to  have  lost  in  law-­making  by  a  different
type  of  behavior.  We  will  explore  this  hypothesis  through  an  analysis  of  written  questions  advanced  to  the
executives.  
These   explorations   would   be   just   an   intermediate   step   towards   a   much   more   complex   and   ambitious
research   design   that   could   involve   in   the   future   all   the   traditional   (Bagehot’s)   functions   of   national
parliaments.  Differently  from  the  already  existing  studies  our  approach  to  the  Europeanization  of  legislatures
(and  parliaments)  would  be  based  on  a  systematic  comparative  quantitative  analysis  of  parliament’s  tasks  in
a  longitudinal  perspective.  We  believe  that  the  result  of  our  analysis  could  further  provide  an  empirical  basis
to  the  debate  on  the  sovereignty  issues  and  the  democratic  deficit.  Is  it  a  zero-­sum  game  between  member
states  and  EU  or  not?  What  is  the  role  of  elective  assemblies  in  the  EU  ?  Is  the  institutional  position  of  the
European  Parliament  really  the  main  problem  ?  or  rather  the  loss  of  influence  of  legislatures  ?.
If  the  research  direction  is  clear  it  is  nevertheless  impossible  up  to  now  to  draw  a  coherent  and  wide-­range
research   design   without   knowing   if   we   could   rely   on   an   appropriate   funding.   The   research   network   is
expanding  (see  below),  and  shares  the  same  attitude  towards  data  collection  and  analysis.  We  believe  we
have   the   opportunity   to   provide   major   insights   on   how   in   a   multi-­level   political   environment   we   are
governed  and  how  the  public  problems  are  tackled.  We  hope  that  also  the  potential  financing  bodies  share
the  same  firm  belief.

http://www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/europeanizing-legislatures-and-beyond#fn714318137508583c182632


08/07/2013 Italian Political Science: Europeanizing legislatures (and beyond)

www.italianpoliticalscience.eu/issue7/europeanizing-legislatures-and-beyond 3/3

Notes
1  The  same  reinforced  rules  of  the  Monetary  Union,  including  the  new  European  Fiscal  Compact  treaty,  via
budget  limitations,  may  deeply  influence  non-­decisions-­making  in  each  and  every  domestic  policy  sector.
Furthermore,  even  the  impact  of  EU  soft  laws  and  of  voluntary  coordination  (like  the  Lisbon’s  OMC)  may  be
difficult  to  trace  with  the  chosen  proxies.

The   Italian   research   group   includes:   Enrico   Borghetto,   Marco   Giuliani,   Francesco   Zucchini   and,
prospectively,  Federico  Russo.

The  Network  included  scholars  from:  University  of  Milano,  University  of  Mannheim,  Sabanci  University  of
Instanbul,   University   of   Bordeaux,   University   of   Vienna,   University   of   Turku,   University   of   Tampere,
University   of   Luxembourg,   University   of   Leiden,   Wageningen   University,   University   of   Barcelona   and
University  of  Geneva.  Some  other  scholars,  e.g.  from  the  UK,  participated  to  the  working  seminars  without
contributing  with  a  chapter  but  will  be  included  in  the  next  steps,  as  well  as  scholars  with  expertise  in  the
“new”   EU   member   states   (such   as   Malta,   or   Central-­Eastern   European   countries)   or   in   other   non-­EU
countries  (e.g.  Norway,  and  some  candidate  country).
Next  meetings  will  be  in  Mannheim  in  November  2012,  and  probably  Amsterdam  in  June  2013.

Relevant  Italian  publications:
E.  Borghetto,  M.  Giuliani  and  F.  Zucchini,  Quanta  Bruxelles  c’è  a  Roma?  L’europeizzazione
della  produzione  normativa  italiana,  in  “Rivista  Italiana  di  Politiche  Pubbliche”  (2009),  n.  1,
pp.  135-­162.

E.  Borghetto.  M.  Giuliani  and  F.  Zucchini,  Leading  Governments  and  Unwilling  Legislators:
The  European  Union  and  the  Italian  Law-­Making  (1987-­2006),  in  S.  Brouard,  O.  Costa  and  T.
König  (eds),  The  Europeanization  of  Domestic  Legislatures,  New  York,  Springer  2012,  pp.
109-­130.