Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

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

  • Petya Alexandrova (a1)

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.

Corresponding author
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

P. Alexandrova , M. Carammia , S. Princen and A. Timmermans (2014), ‘Measuring the European Council agenda: introducing a new approach and dataset’, European Union Politics 15(1): 152167.

P. Alexandrova , M. Carammia and A. Timmermans (2012), ‘Policy punctuations and issue diversity on the European Council agenda’, Policy Studies Journal 40(1): 6988.

F.R. Baumgartner , S.L. De Boef and A.E. Boydstun (2008), The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

J.J.L. Candel G.E. Breeman , S.J. Stiller and C.J.A.M. Termeer (2014), ‘Disentangling the consensus frame of food security: the case of the EU Common Agricultural Policy reform debate’, Food Policy 44: 4758.

L. Cerna and M. Chou (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.

R.W. Cobb and C.D. Elder (1971), ‘The politics of agenda-building: an alternative perspective for modern democratic theory’, The Journal of Politics 33(4): 892915.

F. Daviter (2014), ‘An information processing perspective on decision making in the European Union’, Public Administration 92(2): 324339.

F. Daviter (2011), Policy Framing in the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

C. Green-Pedersen and P.B. Mortensen (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.

S. Guigner (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.

N. Jaworska and A. Chupetlovska-Anastasova (2009), ‘A review of multidimensional scaling (MDS) and its utility in various psychological domains’, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 5(1): 110.

Y. Jeon and D.P. Haider-Markel (2001), ‘Tracing issue definition and policy change: an analysis of disability issue images and policy response’, Policy Studies Journal 29(2): 215231.

F. Kjellberg (1977), ‘Do policies (really) determine politics? And eventually how?’, Policy Studies Journal 5(s1): 554570.

H. Klüver (2011), ‘The contextual nature of lobbying: explaining lobbying success in the European Union’, European Union Politics 12(4): 483506.

J.B. Kruskal and M. Wish (1978), Multidimensional Scaling, London: Sage.

U. Mörth (2000), ‘Competing frames in the European Commission – the case of the defence industry and equipment issue’, Journal of European Public Policy 7(2): 173189.

B.G. Peters (1994), ‘Agenda‐setting in the European Community’, Journal of European Public Policy 1(1): 926.

L.C. Plein (1991), ‘Popularizing biotechnology: the influence of issue definition’, Science, Technology & Human Values 16(4): 474490.

S. Princen (2010), ‘Venue shifts and policy change in EU fisheries policy’, Marine Policy 34(1): 3641.

S. Princen (2007), ‘Agenda-setting in the European Union: a theoretical exploration and agenda for research’, Journal of European Public Policy 14(1): 2138.

P. Scholten and A. Timmermans (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.

A.D. Sheingate (2000), ‘Agricultural retrenchment revisited: issue definition and venue change in the United States and European Union’, Governance 13(3): 335363.

E. Strom and A. Cook (2004), ‘Old pictures in new frames: issue definition and federal arts policy’, Review of Policy Research 21(4): 505522.

J.C. Talbert and M. Potoski (2002), ‘Setting the legislative agenda: the dimensional structure of bill cosponsoring and floor voting’, The Journal of Politics 64(3): 864891.

J. Tallberg and K.M. Johansson (2008), ‘Party politics in the European Council’, Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 12221242.

A. Underdal (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.

W. Van der Brug (1999), ‘Voters’ perceptions and party dynamics’, Party Politics 5(2): 147169.

T. Veen (2011), ‘The dimensionality and nature of conflict in European Union politics: on the characteristics of intergovernmental decision-making’, European Union Politics 12(1): 6586.

B. Wendon (1998), ‘The Commission as image-venue entrepreneur in EU social policy’, Journal of European Public Policy 5(2): 339353.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

European Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 1755-7739
  • EISSN: 1755-7747
  • URL: /core/journals/european-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 4
Total number of PDF views: 58 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 242 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.