Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-7ccbd9845f-jxkh9 Total loading time: 3.246 Render date: 2023-01-27T10:34:18.815Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2017


The Treaty of Lisbon strengthened the role of national parliaments in the European Union. It introduced an ‘early warning system’, granting parliamentary chambers the right to reject legislative proposals by the European Commission. Previous studies assumed independence between the decisions of parliaments to reject a legislative proposal. We apply recent advances in inferential network analysis and argue that parliamentary vetoes are better explained by conceptualizing parliaments’ veto actions as a temporal network. Network effects can be observed along the dimension of party families. Based on a new permutation approach, we find that parliaments with similar party majorities influence each other over the course of the decision period (‘social influence’), rather than basing their decisions independently on joint prior partisanship (‘selection’).

© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Department of Politics & Public Administration, University of Konstanz (email:; Eawag (Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology) and Institute of Political Science, University of Bern (email:; and School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow (email:, respectively. A previous version of this article with the title ‘National Parliamentary Coordination after Lisbon: A Network Approach’ received the Best Paper of an Early Scholar Award at the 1st European Conference on Social Networks (EUSN). The authors would like to thank the selection committee for this recognition. Helpful feedback was also provided by Jenn Larson, Lena Schaffer, Katharina Holzinger, Karin Ingold, participants of the ECPR Joint Sessions Workshop ‘Analysing parliamentary behaviour in European Union affairs’ and the Editor and three anonymous referees. All errors remain our own. We thank Marilena Ast, Philipp Sauer and Sandra Wankmüller for their assistance with the data collection. Support for this research was provided by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant 149410). PL carried out parts of this research while at the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag), the University of Bern and the University of Konstanz. Data replication sets, supplementary tables and figures are available in Harvard Dataverse at: and online appendices at:


Allison, Paul D. 1982. Discrete-Time Methods for the Analysis of Event Histories. Sociological Methodology 13 (1):6198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auel, Katrin, and Christiansen, Thomas. 2015. After Lisbon: National Parliaments in the European Union. West European Politics 38 (2):261281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailer, Stefanie, Mattila, Mikko, and Schneider, Gerald. 2015. Money Makes the EU Go Round: The Objective Foundations of Conflict in the Council of Ministers. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 53 (3):437456.Google Scholar
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., and Jones, Bradford S.. 2004. Event History Modeling: A Guide for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandenberger, Laurence. 2016. rem: Relational Event Models. R package version 1.2.6. Available from http: //, accessed 21 October 2016.Google Scholar
Butts, Carter T. 2008. A Relational Event Framework for Social Action. Sociological Methodology 38 (1):155200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Ian. 2012. A ‘Virtual Third Chamber’ for the European Union? National Parliaments After the Treaty of Lisbon. West European Politics 35 (3):441465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Ian. 2015. A Yellow Card for the Striker: National Parliaments and the Defeat of EU Legislation on the Right to Strike. Journal of European Public Policy 22 (10):14061425.Google Scholar
Cranmer, Skyler J., Philip, Leifeld, Scott D., McClurg and Meredith, Rolfe. 2017. Navigating the Range of Statistical Tools for Inferential Network Analysis. American. Journal of Political Science 61 (1):237251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Vincent P., and Iriberri, Nagore. 2007. Level-k Auctions: Can a Nonequilibrium Model of Strategic Thinking Explain the Winner’s Curse and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions? Econometrica 75 (6):17211770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crum, Ben, and Fossum, John E. 2009. The Multilevel Parliamentary Field: A Framework for Theorizing Representative Democracy in the EU. European Political Science Review 1 (02):249271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, David B. 2009. xtable: Export tables to LaTeX or HTML. R package version 1.8-2. Available from, accessed 21 October 2016.Google Scholar
Dekker, David, Krackhardt, David, and Snijders, Tom A. B.. 2007. Sensitivity of MRQAP Tests to Collinearity and Autocorrelation Conditions. Psychometrika 72 (4):563581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desmarais, Bruce A., Harden, Jeffrey J., and Boehmke, Frederick J.. 2015. Persistent Policy Pathways: Inferring Diffusion Networks in the American States. American Political Science Review 109 (2):392460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Union. 2007. Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community. Official Journal of the European Union 50:1231.Google Scholar
Feiock, Richard C., and Scholz, John T.. 2010. Self-Organizing Governance of Institutional Collective Action Dilemmas. Pp. 333, in Self-Organizing Federalism, edited by Richard C. Feiock and John T. Scholz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gail, Michell H., Lubin, Jay H., and Rubinstein, Lawrence V.. 1980. Likelihood Calculations for Matched Case–Control Studies and Survival Studies with Tied Death Times. Biometrika 68:703707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gattermann, Katjana, and Hefftler, Claudia. 2015. Beyond Institutional Capacity: Political Motivation and Parliamentary Behaviour in the Early Warning System. West European Politics 38 (2):305334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Elisabeth R., Henry, Adam Douglas, and Lubell, Mark. 2013. Political Homophily and Collaboration in Regional Planning Networks. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3):598610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilardi, Fabrizio. 2010. Who Learns from What in Policy Diffusion Processes? American Journal of Political Science 54 (3):650666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Roger V. 1993. Collective Action and Network Structure. American Sociological Review 58 (2):182196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagemann, Sara. 2007. Applying Ideal Point Estimation Methods to the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 8 (2):279296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagemann, Sara, and Høyland, Bjørn. 2008. Parties in the Council? Journal of European Public Policy 15 (8):12051221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes-Renshaw, Fiona, Van Aken, Wim, and Wallace, Helen. 2006. When and Why the EU Council of Ministers Votes Explicitly. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 44 (1):161194.Google Scholar
Hefftler, Claudia, Neuhold, Christine, Rozenberg, Olivier, Smith, Julie, and Wessels, W.. 2015. The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Högenauer, Anna-Lena, and Christiansen, Thomas. 2015. Parliamentary Administrations in the Scrutiny of EU Decision-Making. Pp. 116132, in The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Högenauer, Anna-Lena, and Neuhold, Christine. 2015. National Parliaments After Lisbon: Administrations on the Rise? West European Politics 38 (2):335354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosli, Madeleine O., Mattila, Mikko, and Uriot, Marc. 2011. Voting in the Council of the European Union After the 2004 Enlargement: A Comparison of Old and New Member States. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 49 (6):12491270.Google Scholar
Hunter, David, Smyth, Padhraic, Vu, Duy Q., and Asuncion, Arthur U.. 2011. Dynamic Egocentric Models for Citation Networks. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-11), Bellevue, WA, USA, June 28-July 2, 2011. 857–64.Google Scholar
Kaeding, Michael, and Selck, Torsten J.. 2005. Mapping out Political Europe: Coalition Patterns in EU Decision-Making. International Political Science Review 26 (3):271290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiiver, Philipp. 2006. The National Parliaments in the European Union: A Critical View on EU Constitution-Building. Vol. 50. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Knutelská, Viera. 2011. National Parliaments as New Actors in the Decision-Making Process at the European Level. Journal of Contemporary European Research 7 (3):327344.Google Scholar
Knutelská, Viera. 2013. Cooperation among National Parliaments: An Effective Contribution to EU Legitimation? Pp. 3349, in Practices of Inter-Parliamentary Coordination in International Politics. The European Union and Beyond, edited by Ben Crum and John Erik Fossum. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Leifeld, Philip. 2013. texreg: Conversion of Statistical Model Output in R to LATEX and HTML Tables. Journal of Statistical Software 55 (8):124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leifeld, Philip, Cranmer, Skyler J., and Desmarais, Bruce A.. 2018. Temporal Exponential Random Graph Models with btergm: Estimation and Bootstrap Confidence Intervals. Journal of Statistical Software. Forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, Jürgen, Bussmann, Margit, Snijders, Tom A. B., and Brandes, Ulrik. 2013. Modeling Frequency and Type of Interaction in Event Networks. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 4 (1):332.Google Scholar
Leuffen, Dirk, Malang, Thomas, and Wörle, Sebastian. 2014. Structure, Capacity or Power? Explaining Salience in EU Decision-Making. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 52 (3):616631.Google Scholar
Lindstädt, René, Vander Wielen, Ryan J., and Green, Matthew. 2017. Diffusion in Congress: Measuring the Social Dynamics of Legislative Behavior. Political Science Research and Methods 5 (3):511527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, Russell. 2011. The Spread of Evidence-Poor Medicine via Flawed Social-Network Analysis. Statistics, Politics, and Policy 2:126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malang, Thomas; Laurence, Brandenberger; Philip, Leifeld. 2017. Replication Files for: Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics”,, Harvard Dataverse, V1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPhail, Clark. 1991. The Myth of the Madding Crowd. Transaction Publishers. New York: Walter de Gruyer, Inc.Google Scholar
McPherson, Miller, Smith-Lovin, Lynn, and Cook, James M.. 2001. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27 (1):415444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macy, Michael W. 1991. Chains of Cooperation: Threshold Effects in Collective Action. American Sociological Review 56 (6):730747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maggetti, Martino, and Gilardi, Fabrizio. 2016. Problems (and Solutions) in the Measurement of Policy Diffusion Mechanisms. Journal of European Public Policy 36 (1):87107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattila, Mikko. 2009. Roll Call Analysis of Voting in the European Union Council of Ministers After the 2004 Enlargement. European Journal of Political Research 48 (6):840857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miklin, Eric. 2013. Inter-Parliamentary Cooperation in EU Affairs and the Austrian Parliament: Empowering the Opposition? Journal of Legislative Studies 19 (1):2241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miklin, Eric. 2014. EU Politicisation and National Parliaments: Visibility of Choices and Better Aligned Ministers? Journal of Legislative Studies 20 (1):7892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miklin, Eric. 2016. Beyond Subsidiarity: The Indirect Effect of the Early Warning System on National Parliamentary Scrutiny in European Union Affairs. Journal of European Public Policy 24 (3):120.Google Scholar
Naurin, Daniel, and Lindahl, Rutger. 2008. East–North–South: Coalition-Building in the Council Before and After Enlargement. Pp. 6478, in Unveiling the Council of the European Union. Games Governments Play in Brussels, edited by Daniel Naurin and Helen Wallace. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintz, Anne. 2015. Parliamentary Collective Action under the Early Warning Mechanism. Politique européenne 3 (49):84114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quintane, Eric, Conaldi, Guido, Tonellato, Marco, and Lomi, Alessandro. 2014. Modeling Relational Events. A Case Study on an Open Source Software Project. Organizational Research Methods 17 (1):2350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raunio, Tapio. 2009. National Parliaments and European Integration: What We Know and Agenda for Future Research. Journal of Legislative Studies 15 (4):317334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raunio, Tapio. 2010. Destined for Irrelevance? Subsidiarity Control by National Parliaments. Elcano Newsletter 72:19.Google Scholar
Rozenberg, Olivier, and Hefftler, Claudia. 2015. Introduction. Pp. 143, in The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union, edited by Claudia Hefftler, Christine Neuhold, Olivier Rozenberg and Julie Smith. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ruiter, Rik de. 2013. Under the Radar? National Parliaments and the Ordinary Legislative Procedure in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 20 (8):11961212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saam, Nicole J., and Sumpter, David. 2009. Peer Selection in EU Intergovernmental Negotiations. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (3):356377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shalizi, Cosma Rohilla, and Thomas, Andrew C.. 2011. Homophily and Contagion are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies. Sociological Methods and Research 40 (2):211239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shipan, Charles R., and Volden, Craig. 2008. The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion. American Journal of Political Science 52 (4):840857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprungk, Carina. 2013. A New Type of Representative Democracy? Reconsidering the Role of National Parliaments in the European Union. Journal of European Integration 35 (5):547563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therneau, Terry M. 2015. A Package for Survival Analysis in S. R package version 2.38. Available from, accessed 17 August 2015.Google Scholar
Thomson, Robert. 2009. Actor Alignments in the European Union Before and After Enlargement. European Journal of Political Research 48 (6):756781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, Robert, Boerefijn, Jovanka, and Stokman, Frans. 2004. Actor Alignments in European Union Decision Making. European Journal of Political Research 43 (2):237261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veen, Tim. 2011. The Dimensionality and Nature of Conflict in European Union Politics: On the Characteristics of Intergovernmental Decision-Making. European Union Politics 12 (1):6586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkens, Andrea, Lehmann, Pola, Matthiess, Theres, Merz, Nicolas, Regel, Sven, and Werner, Annika. 2016. The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2016a. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.Google Scholar
Vu, Duy, Pattison, Philippa, and Robins, Garry. 2015. Relational Event Models for Social Learning in MOOCs. Social Networks 43:121135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilde, Pieter de. 2011a. Ex Ante vs. Ex Post: The Trade-off between Partisan Conflict and Visibility in Debating EU Policy Formulation in National Parliaments. Journal of European Public Policy 18 (5):672689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilde, Pieter de. 2011b. No Polity for Old Politics? A Framework for Analyzing the Politicization of European Integration. Journal of European Integration 33 (5):559575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilde, Pieter de, and Raunio, Tapio. 2015. Redirecting National Parliaments: Setting Priorities for Involvement in EU Affairs. Comparative European Politics. doi: 10.1057/cep.2015.28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Christopher. 2016. Issuing Reasoned Opinions: The Effect of Public Attitudes Towards the European Union on the Usage of the ‘Early Warning System’. European Union Politics 17 (3):504521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winzen, Thomas. 2017. Constitutional preferences and parliamentary reform: Explaining national parliaments’ adaptation to European integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, Christina, Schneider, Gerald, and Dobbins, Michael. 2005. The Contested Council: Conflict Dimensions of an Intergovernmental EU Institution. Political Studies 53 (2):403422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Malang et al. supplementary material

Malang et al. supplementary material 1

Download Malang et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 309 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Malang et al. Dataset

Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics
Available formats

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics
Available formats

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *