Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-7ccbd9845f-z5z76 Total loading time: 0.381 Render date: 2023-01-29T09:06:48.474Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Explaining political attention allocation with the help of issue character: evidence from the European Council

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2015

Petya Alexandrova*
Postdoctoral Researcher, Institute of Political Science, Leibniz University of Hannover, Chair for Comparative and German Politics, Hannover, Germany


Policy issues compete for the attention of political actors, and the size of the agenda an issue can occupy is largely determined by the way in which it is defined. This logic constitutes a simple agenda-setting model in which factors related to the participants in the policy process and their context influence the attention a single issue receives after being problematised. In order to be able to apply this model to the construction of a whole agenda, we need to add an intermediate step. This study proposes to do so by incorporating the notion of issue character and offers an empirical application of the adapted model to the European Council, a crucial informal player in European Union (EU) agenda setting. Using a dimensionality reduction technique, the composition of the agenda is broken down to two constitutive dimensions – core vs. non-core themes of government and economic vs. non-economic character. Since the first structuring element is in line with existing knowledge and the role expectations for the European Council, the analysis concentrates on the second type. Changing saliency levels of the economic issue character of the agenda are used as a dependent variable in a model, including predictors related to the nature of the institution and contextual factors. The results show that leftist European Council party ideology and growing government deficit in the EU contribute to the increasing prominence of the economic dimension, which in turn explains rising levels in attention to various issues, especially of the non-core themes type.

Research Article
© European Consortium for Political Research 2015 

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.)


Alexandrova, P., Carammia, M. and Timmermans, A. (2012), ‘Policy punctuations and issue diversity on the European Council agenda’, Policy Studies Journal 40(1): 6988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexandrova, P., Carammia, M., Princen, S. and Timmermans, A. (2014), ‘Measuring the European Council agenda: introducing a new approach and dataset’, European Union Politics 15(1): 152167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, R. (2001), ‘The emerging ‘urban agenda’ and the European spatial development perspective: towards an EU urban policy?’, European Planning Studies 9(3): 385406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachrach, P. and Baratz, M.S. (1962), ‘Two faces of power’, The American Political Science Review 56(4): 947952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, M.A. (2002), ‘Sex, lies, and war: how soft news brings foreign policy to the inattentive public’, American Political Science Review 96(1): 91109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, F.R., De Boef, S.L. and Boydstun, A.E. (2008), The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkland, T.A. (1997), After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events, Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Black, E.J. (2009), ‘EU equality commitments and shifting meanings of gender equality’, Review of European and Russian Affairs 5(1): 5282.Google Scholar
Borg, I. and Groenen, P.J.F. (2005), Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications, 2nd edn., New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Candel, J.J.L. Breeman, G.E., Stiller, S.J. and Termeer, C.J.A.M. (2014), ‘Disentangling the consensus frame of food security: the case of the EU Common Agricultural Policy reform debate’, Food Policy 44: 4758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, E.G. and Stimson, J.A. (1980), ‘The two faces of issue voting’, The American Political Science Review 74(1): 7891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerna, L. and Chou, M. (2014), ‘The regional dimension in the global competition for talent: lessons from framing the European scientific visa and blue card’, Journal of European Public Policy 21(1): 7695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cloos, J. (2008), Analyse des conclusions du Counceil Europeen depuis 1979. Note interne.Google Scholar
Cobb, R.W. and Elder, C.D. (1971), ‘The politics of agenda-building: an alternative perspective for modern democratic theory’, The Journal of Politics 33(4): 892915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, T.F. and Cox, M.A.A. (2001), Multidimensional Scaling, Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Daviter, F. (2011), Policy Framing in the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daviter, F. (2014), ‘An information processing perspective on decision making in the European Union’, Public Administration 92(2): 324339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Schoutheete, P. and Wallace, H. (2002), Study on the European Council, Brussels: Notre Europe.Google Scholar
Döring, H. and Manow, P. (2012), Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov): An Infrastructure for Empirical Information on Parties, Elections and Governments in Modern Democracies. Version 12/10–15 October 2012. Retrieved 9 January 2014 from Google Scholar
Eggermont, F. (2012), The Changing Role of the European Council in the Institutional Framework of the European Union: Consequences for the European Integration Process, Mortsel: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Foret, F. (2014), ‘Legitimacy in numbers? Communicative aspects on the post-Lisbon EU’, in F. Foret and Y. Rittelmeyer (eds), The European Council and European Governance. the Commanding Heights of the EU, London: Routledge, pp. 147166.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1974), Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience, Boston: Northeast University Press.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, C. and Mortensen, P.B. (2010), ‘Who sets the agenda and who responds to it in the Danish parliament? A new model of issue competition and agenda-setting’, European Journal of Political Research 49(2): 257281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guigner, S. (2004), ‘Institutionalizing public health in the European Commission: the thrills and spills of politicization’, in A. Smith (ed.), Politics and the European Commission: Actors, Interdependence, Legitimacy, London: Routledge, pp. 96115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hix, S. and Høyland, B. (2011), The Political System of the European Union, 3rd edn., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaworska, N. and Chupetlovska-Anastasova, A. (2009), ‘A review of multidimensional scaling (MDS) and its utility in various psychological domains’, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 5(1): 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, W. Bevan, S., Timmermans, A., Breeman, G., Brouard, S., Chaqués-Bonafont, L., Green-Pedersen, C., John, P., Mortensen, P.B. and Palau, A.M. (2011), ‘Effects of the core functions of government on the diversity of executive agendas’, Comparative Political Studies 44(8): 10011030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeon, Y. and Haider-Markel, D.P. (2001), ‘Tracing issue definition and policy change: an analysis of disability issue images and policy response’, Policy Studies Journal 29(2): 215231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, B.D. (2001), Politics and the Architecture of Choice, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jones, B.D. and Baumgartner, F.R. (2005), The Politics of Attention. How Government Prioritizes Problems, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J.W. (1995), Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, 2nd edn., New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.Google Scholar
Kjellberg, F. (1977), ‘Do policies (really) determine politics? And eventually how?’, Policy Studies Journal 5(s1): 554570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klüver, H. (2011), ‘The contextual nature of lobbying: explaining lobbying success in the European Union’, European Union Politics 12(4): 483506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruskal, J.B. and Wish, M. (1978), Multidimensional Scaling, London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, A. (2012), ‘Agenda-setting dynamics at the EU level: the case of the EU cultural policy’, Journal of European Integration 34(5): 505522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowi, T.J. (1964), ‘American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory’, World Politics 16(4): 677715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowi, T.J. (1972), ‘Four systems of policy, politics, and choice’, Public Administration Review 32(4): 298310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, C. (2007), ‘Lobbying success in the United States and the European Union’, Journal of Public Policy 27(1): 3556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mörth, U. (2000), ‘Competing frames in the European Commission – the case of the defence industry and equipment issue’, Journal of European Public Policy 7(2): 173189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moschella, M. (2011), ‘Getting hedge funds regulation into the EU agenda: the constraints of agenda dynamics’, Journal of European Integration 33(3): 251266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nugent, N. (2010), The Government and Politics of the European Union, 7th edn., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, B.G. (1994), ‘Agenda‐setting in the European Community’, Journal of European Public Policy 1(1): 926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, B.G. (2001), ‘Agenda-setting in the European Union’, in J. Richardson (ed.), European Union. Power and Policy-Making, 2nd edn., London: Routledge, pp. 7794.Google Scholar
Plein, L.C. (1991), ‘Popularizing biotechnology: the influence of issue definition’, Science, Technology & Human Values 16(4): 474490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Princen, S. (2007), ‘Agenda-setting in the European Union: a theoretical exploration and agenda for research’, Journal of European Public Policy 14(1): 2138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Princen, S. (2010), ‘Venue shifts and policy change in EU fisheries policy’, Marine Policy 34(1): 3641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhinard, M. (2010), Framing Europe: The Policy Shaping Strategies of the European Commission, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijnhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Rochefort, D.A. and Cobb, R.W. (1994), The Politics of Problem Definition: Shaping the Policy Agenda, Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Rosenau, J.N. (1966), ‘Pre-theories and theories of foreign policy’, in R.B. Farrell (ed.), Approaches to Comparative and International Politics, Evanston: Northwestern University Press, pp. 2792.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E.E. (1960), The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Scholten, P. and Timmermans, A. (2010), ‘Setting the immigrant policy agenda: expertise and politics in the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 12(5): 527544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheingate, A.D. (2000), ‘Agricultural retrenchment revisited: issue definition and venue change in the United States and European Union’, Governance 13(3): 335363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigelman, L. Sigelman, C.K., Walkosz, B.J. (1992), ‘The public and the paradox of leadership: an experimental analysis’, American Journal of Political Science 36(2): 366385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steyvers, M. (2002), ‘Multidimensional scaling’, in Lynn Nadel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, London: Nature Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Strom, E. and Cook, A. (2004), ‘Old pictures in new frames: issue definition and federal arts policy’, Review of Policy Research 21(4): 505522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talbert, J.C. and Potoski, M. (2002), ‘Setting the legislative agenda: the dimensional structure of bill cosponsoring and floor voting’, The Journal of Politics 64(3): 864891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallberg, J. and Johansson, K.M. (2008), ‘Party politics in the European Council’, Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 12221242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underdal, A. (1979), ‘Issues determine politics determine policies: the case for a ‘rationalistic’ approach to the study of foreign policy decision-making’, Cooperation and Conflict 14(1): 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Brug, W. (1999), ‘Voters’ perceptions and party dynamics’, Party Politics 5(2): 147169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Grinsven, P. and Melissen, J. (2002), ‘Europese raad tussen marginale aanpassing en radicale hervorming’, Internationale Spectator 56(9): 421425.Google Scholar
Veen, T. (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, A. Lacewell, O., Lehmann, P., Regel, S., Schultze, H. and Werner, A. (2011), The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR), Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).Google Scholar
Wendon, B. (1998), ‘The Commission as image-venue entrepreneur in EU social policy’, Journal of European Public Policy 5(2): 339353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werts, J. (2008), The European Council, London: John Harper Publishing.Google Scholar
Wessels, W. (2008a), Das Politische System Der Europäische Union, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wessels, W. (2008b), The European Council: a bigger club, a similar role?’, in E. Best, T. Christiansen and P. Settembri (eds), The Institutions of the Enlarged European Union: Continuity and Change, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 1633.Google Scholar
Wilson, J.Q. (1973), ‘Organizations and public policy’, in J.Q. Wilson (ed.), Political Organizations, New York: Basic Books, pp. 327347.Google Scholar
Wilson, J.Q. (1980), ‘The politics of regulation’, in J.Q. Wilson (ed.), The Politics of Regulation, New York: Basic Books, pp. 357394.Google Scholar
Yagade, A. and Dozier, D.M. (1990), ‘The media agenda-setting effect of concrete versus abstract issues’, Journalism Quarterly 67(1): 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.

Explaining political attention allocation with the help of issue character: evidence from the European Council
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.

Explaining political attention allocation with the help of issue character: evidence from the European Council
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.

Explaining political attention allocation with the help of issue character: evidence from the European Council
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? *