Skip to main content

Methodology and Case Selection

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 416 Accesses

Part of the book series: European Administrative Governance ((EAGOV))

Abstract

This chapter serves to explain how we assess our theoretical expectations empirically by relying on the congruence method in combination with process-tracing. Further, it specifies our methods of data collection. Moreover, we explain the book’s case selection rationale covering the EP’s institutional empowerment (or lack of it) over time and across policies. Hence, in order to corroborate or falsify our propositions, European Parliament Ascendant includes positive cases of empowerment where the EP succeeded in achieving new institutional rights and negative ones in which it failed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Beach, D., & Pedersen, R. B. (2013). Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bressanelli, E., & Chelotti, N. (2018). The European Parliament and Economic Governance: Explaining a Case of Limited Influence. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 24(1), 72–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D., Brady, H. E., & Seawright, J. (2010). Critiques, Responses, and Trade-Offs: Drawing Together the Debate. In H. E. Brady & D. Collier (Eds.), Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (pp. 125–159). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromage, D. (2018). The European Parliament in the Post-Crisis Era: An Institution Empowered on Paper Only? Journal of European Integration, 40(3), 281–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Héritier, A. (2008). Causal Explanation. In D. della Porta & M. Keating (Eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (pp. 61–80). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jupille, J., Carporaso, J. A., & Checkel, J. T. (2003). Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union. Comparative Political Studies, 36(1/2), 7–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner, K. L. (2016). Democratizing EU External Relations: The European Parliament’s Informal Role in SWIFT, ACTA, and TTIP. European Foreign Affairs Review, 21(2), 269–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripoll Servent, A., & Trauner, F. (2014). Do Supranational Institutions Make a Difference? EU Asylum Law Before and After ‘Communitarization’. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(8), 1142–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittberger, B., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2006). Explaining the Constitutionalization of the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(8), 1148–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roederer-Rynning, C. (2003). From ‘Talking Shop’ to ‘Working Parliament’? The European Parliament and Agricultural Change. Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(1), 113–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roederer-Rynning, C., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2012). Bringing Codecision to Agriculture: A Hard Case of Parliamentarization. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(7), 951–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosén, G. (2015). EU Confidential: The European Parliament’s Involvement in EU Security and Defence Policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 53(2), 383–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosén, G., & Raube, K. (2018). Influence Beyond Formal Powers: The Parliamentarisation of European Union Security Policy. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 20(1), 69–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trauner, F. (2012). The European Parliament and Agency Control in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. West European Politics, 35(4), 784–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Putte, L., De Ville, F., & Orbie, J. (2014). The European Parliament’s New Role in Trade Policy: Turning Power into Impact (CEPS Special Report No. 89). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adrienne Héritier .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Héritier, A., Meissner, K.L., Moury, C., Schoeller, M.G. (2019). Methodology and Case Selection. In: European Parliament Ascendant. European Administrative Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16777-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics