TY - JOUR
T1 - Settling it on the multi-level parliamentary field? A fields approach to interparliamentary cooperation in foreign and security policy
AU - Herranz-Surralles, Anna
N1 - Funding Information:
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the workshops ‘Competitors or Allies? The Relations between the European Parliament and National Parliaments across EU Policies’ (Institute for European Integration Research, Vienna, October 2018), ‘Inter-parliamentary Relations in the Post-Lisbon European Union’ (University of Luxembourg, October 2019) and the Colloquium of the Research Group ‘Politics and Culture in Europe’ (Maastricht University, January 2020). I am very grateful to the participants in these events, and in particular to Katharina Meissner, Ben Crum, Anna-Lena Högenauer, Peter Slominski, Michal Natorski, as well as three anonymous referees for their very detailed and helpful comments and suggestions. Last but not least, I express my gratitude to all the interviewees who generously agreed to share their time and expertise.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2022/2/23
Y1 - 2022/2/23
N2 - Interparliamentary cooperation in EU foreign and security policy, once the paradigmatic example of competitive relations between parliamentary levels, has recently evolved towards more cooperative dynamics. This evolution provides an interesting context in which to examine the conditions that facilitate or hinder cooperation in the EU multi-level parliamentary field. This article takes inspiration from Fligstein and McAdam's sociological theory of fields, arguing that certain field conditions (power, preferences, field environment, and social skill) can influence patterns of cooperation in a parliamentary field. The theoretical argument is assessed using two empirical cases: institutionalised cooperation in the Interparliamentary Conference on foreign policy, security and defence; and policy-specific cooperation during negotiations over the controversial European Defence Fund. The findings indicate that a relative 'settlement' of the parliamentary field does not necessarily translate into mutually reinforcing parliamentarism. On the contrary, certain properties in the field continue to impair the quality of democratic oversight in this burgeoning domain.
AB - Interparliamentary cooperation in EU foreign and security policy, once the paradigmatic example of competitive relations between parliamentary levels, has recently evolved towards more cooperative dynamics. This evolution provides an interesting context in which to examine the conditions that facilitate or hinder cooperation in the EU multi-level parliamentary field. This article takes inspiration from Fligstein and McAdam's sociological theory of fields, arguing that certain field conditions (power, preferences, field environment, and social skill) can influence patterns of cooperation in a parliamentary field. The theoretical argument is assessed using two empirical cases: institutionalised cooperation in the Interparliamentary Conference on foreign policy, security and defence; and policy-specific cooperation during negotiations over the controversial European Defence Fund. The findings indicate that a relative 'settlement' of the parliamentary field does not necessarily translate into mutually reinforcing parliamentarism. On the contrary, certain properties in the field continue to impair the quality of democratic oversight in this burgeoning domain.
KW - Multi-level parliamentary field
KW - interparliamentary cooperation
KW - foreign and security policy
KW - theory of fields
KW - European Defence Fund
U2 - 10.1080/01402382.2020.1858609
DO - 10.1080/01402382.2020.1858609
M3 - Article
SN - 0140-2382
VL - 45
SP - 262
EP - 285
JO - West European Politics
JF - West European Politics
IS - 2
ER -