The European Parliament and Trade Policy Ten Years After Lisbon – Mapping Preferences, Influence and Politicization Dynamics

Abstract

In 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon empowered the European Parliament in EU trade policy. Whereas the European Parliament used to play a largely consultative role in this domain with arguably limited influence on policy outcomes, it is now a co-legislator on par with the Council of Ministers and extensive powers. It is widely assumed that the European Parliament’s new powers shift the EU’s overall trade policy preferences, change EU trade policymaking and negotiating dynamics, and contribute to its politicization and democratic contestation. Academic research on the impact of the European Parliament’s empowerment on EU trade policy, however, remains rare despite the fact that more than a decade has passed since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. This panel seeks to contribute to a better understanding of how, when and where the new powers of the European Parliament affect EU trade policymaking and outcomes. The four papers of this panel dwell on three interrelated questions: First, what are the preferences of the European Parliament in trade policy and how are they formed? Rosèn et al. and Meissner analyze the formation of the European Parliament’s preferences in two salient sub-domains of EU trade policy – namely developmental cooperation and digital trade. Siles-Bruegge and Strange examine how transnational networks and framing strategies affect preference formation more broadly. Basedow and Hoerner present a new dataset that contains information on all trade-related votes in the European Parliament between 2004 and 2018 and thus gives a first comprehensive overview of how the trade policy preferences of the European Parliament have evolved. Second, the papers dwell on the question of when, where and how the European Parliament succeeds in shaping trade policy outcomes? Meissner and Rosèn et al. find that issue linkages between policies and policy dossiers mitigate the European Parliament’s influence on policy outcomes, whereas Siles-Bruegge and Strange recall the importance of societal activism. Basedow and Hoerner, in turn, suggest that the European Parliament’s influence is subject to institutional learning following its empowerment. Finally, the papers of this panel raise the question of how the European Parliament’s new powers and politicization of trade policy interact. The papers give insights into when and how the European Parliament or the broader political context politicise trade policymaking and affect outcomes.

Title	Details
The European Parliament and Trade Policy: A New Dataset on MEP Voting Behavior (2004-2018)	View Paper Details
National Autonomy or Transnational Solidarity? The Use of Multiple Geographic Frames to Politicize Trade Policy During the GATS 2000 and TTIP Negotiations	View Paper Details
The European Parliament and Digital Trade	View Paper Details
Deciphering Veto Threats: EU Trade Policy Post-Lisbon	View Paper Details