Suchergebnisse

A group of agents wants to reform the status quo if and only if this is Pareto improving. Agents have private information and may have common or private objectives, which creates a tension between information aggregation and minority protection. We analyze a simple voting system - majority rule with veto power (Veto) - that essentially resolves this tension, for it combines the advantageous properties of both majority and unanimity rules. We argue that our results shed new light on the evolution of voting rules in the EU institutions and could help to inform debates about policy reforms in cases such as juries in the US.

This article studies the effect of parliamentary involvement on security policy. Building on Democratic Peace Theory, it examines whether democracies with a parliamentary veto power are indeed less likely to participate in military interventions, than democracies without such a veto power, ceteris paribus. By studying patterns of participation across 25 to 35 countries in five military missions, this paper finds modest evidence for such a parliamentary peace and suggests that it depends on the character of the military mission in question. If a mission is framed as a test case of alliance solidarity, as was the case with OEF and the Iraq War, domestic institutional constraints can be trumped by alliance politics. If, however, countries enjoy more discretion in deciding on the use of force, domestic constraints such as parliamentary war powers have a tangible impact on government policy.

This comparative case study tries to offer an empirical insight into the explanatory power of competing approaches on parliamentary influence in the cooperation procedure of the European Union. The theoretical debate on the impact of the cooperation procedure has received remarkable attention & centers around the relative importance of parliamentary agenda-setting & veto powers. Our comparative analysis reveals two important conceptual differences among the competing approaches on parliamentary power: first in their focus on the preference profile &, second, in their modeling of the reference point. The empirical findings show that the supranational preference profile characterizes the actor configuration in European legislative politics, at either the dimensional or the issue level of Commission proposals. The competing approaches overestimate supranational agenda-setting power & parliamentary veto power is unlikely to strengthen the pro-integrationist influence. 2 Tables, 6 Figures, 24 References. [Copyright 2001 Sage Publications Ltd.]

The consequences of consolidating EU representation at the IMF Executive Board by regrouping the 27 Member States into two EU constituencies, euro area and non-euro area, are discussed. In particular we contrast voting power as proposed by Penrose-Banzhaf (PBI) and Shapley-Shubik (SSI), and other respectively related measures of blocking (or veto) power and decision efficiency as proposed by Coleman and Paterson. Hitherto, IMF-specific literature is PBI-based. However, theoretical reasons and empirical plausibility arguments for the SSI are compelling. The (SSI) voting power of the two large constituencies - U.S.A. and euro area - reflects their corresponding voting shares over a range of majority thresholds, whereas PBI voting power reduces to only half of vote share at the majority threshold of 85% needed for some Executive Board decisions. SSI-related estimates of veto power are generally lower than the Coleman indices. Correspondingly, the efficiency of collective decision-making is considerably underestimated by the Coleman measure.

This comparative case study tries to offer an empirical insight into the explanatory power of competing approaches on parliamentary influence in the cooperation procedure of the European Union. The theoretical debate on the impact of the cooperation procedure has received remarkable attention and centres around the relative importance of parliamentary agenda-setting and veto powers. Our comparative analysis reveals two important conceptual differences among the competing approaches on parliamentary power: first in their focus on the preference profile and, second, in their modelling of the reference point. The empirical findings show that the supranational preference profile characterizes the actor configuration in European legislative politics, at either the dimensional or the issue level of Commission proposals. The competing approaches overestimate supranational agenda-setting power and parliamentary veto power is unlikely to strengthen the pro-integrationist influence.

The consequences of consolidating EU representation at the IMF Executive Board by regrouping the 27 Member States into two EU constituencies, euro area and non-euro area, are discussed. In particular we contrast voting power as proposed by Penrose-Banzhaf (PBI) and Shapley-Shubik (SSI), and other respectively related measures of blocking (or veto) power and decision efficiency as proposed by Coleman and Paterson. Hitherto, IMF-specific literature is PBI-based. However, theoretical reasons and empirical plausibility arguments for the SSI are compelling. The (SSI) voting power of the two large constituencies - U.S.A. and euro area - reflects their corresponding voting shares over a range of majority thresholds, whereas PBI voting power reduces to only half of vote share at the majority threshold of 85% needed for some Executive Board decisions. SSI-related estimates of veto power are generally lower than the Coleman indices. Correspondingly, the efficiency of collective decision-making is considerably underestimated by the Coleman measure. -- International Monetary Fund ; European Union ; voting power analysis ; veto power

In this book, the author outlines three independent bases for the existence of legal limits to the veto by UN Security Council permanent members while atrocity crimes are occurring. The provisions of the UN Charter creating the veto cannot override the UN's 'Purposes and Principles', nor jus cogens (peremptory norms of international law). There are also positive obligations imposed by the Geneva and Genocide Conventions in situations of war crimes and genocide - conventions to which all permanent members are parties. The author demonstrates how vetoes and veto threats have blocked the Security Council from pursuing measures that could have prevented or alleviated atrocity crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes) in places such as Myanmar, Darfur, Syria, and elsewhere. As the practice continues despite regular condemnation by other UN member states and repeated voluntary veto restraint initiatives, the book explores how the legality of this practice could be challenged.