@misc{Wegmann2022,
  author    = {Wegmann, Simone},
  title     = {Policy-making power of opposition players},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {1},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-56651},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-566516},
  pages     = {27},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The organisation of legislative chambers and the consequences of parliamentary procedures have been among the most prominent research questions in legislative studies. Even though democratic elections not only lead to the formation of a government but also result in an opposition, the literature has mostly neglected oppositions and their role in legislative chambers. This paper proposes to fill this gap by looking at the legislative organisation from the perspective of opposition players. The paper focuses on the potential influence of opposition players in the policy-making process and presents data on more than 50 legislative chambers. The paper shows considerable variance of the formal power granted to opposition players. Furthermore, the degree of institutionalisation of opposition rights is connected to electoral systems and not necessarily correlated with other institutional characteristics such as regime type or the size of legislative chambers.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Wegmann2022,
  author    = {Wegmann, Simone},
  title     = {Policy-making power of opposition players},
  series = {The Journal of Legislative Studies},
  volume    = {28},
  journal   = {The Journal of Legislative Studies},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1357-2334},
  doi       = {10.1080/13572334.2020.1843233},
  pages     = {1 -- 25},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The organisation of legislative chambers and the consequences of parliamentary procedures have been among the most prominent research questions in legislative studies. Even though democratic elections not only lead to the formation of a government but also result in an opposition, the literature has mostly neglected oppositions and their role in legislative chambers. This paper proposes to fill this gap by looking at the legislative organisation from the perspective of opposition players. The paper focuses on the potential influence of opposition players in the policy-making process and presents data on more than 50 legislative chambers. The paper shows considerable variance of the formal power granted to opposition players. Furthermore, the degree of institutionalisation of opposition rights is connected to electoral systems and not necessarily correlated with other institutional characteristics such as regime type or the size of legislative chambers.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ForsterHeinzel2021,
  author    = {Forster, Timon and Heinzel, Mirko Noa},
  title     = {Reacting, fast and slow},
  series = {Journal of European public policy},
  volume    = {28},
  journal   = {Journal of European public policy},
  number    = {8},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1350-1763},
  doi       = {10.1080/13501763.2021.1942157},
  pages     = {1299 -- 1320},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {The COVID-19 pandemic created extraordinary challenges for governments to safeguard the well-being of their people. To what extent has leaders' reliance on scientific advice shaped government responses to the COVID-19 outbreak? We argue that leaders who tend to orient themselves on expert advice realized the extent of the crisis earlier. Consequently, these governments would adopt containment measures relatively quickly, despite the high uncertainty they faced. Over time, differences in government responses based on the use of science would dissipate due to herding effects. We test our argument on data combining 163 government responses to the pandemic with national- and individual-level characteristics. Consistent with our argument, we find that countries governed by politicians with a stronger technocratic mentality, approximated by holding a PhD, adopted restrictive containment measures faster in the early, but not in the later, stages of the crisis. This importance of expert-based leadership plausibly extends to other large-scale societal crises.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Hanschmann2019,
  author    = {Hanschmann, Raffael Tino},
  title     = {Stalling the engine? EU climate politics after the 'Great Recession'},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-44044},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-440441},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {XXVIII, 303},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {This dissertation investigates the impact of the economic and fiscal crisis starting in 2008 on EU climate policy-making. While the overall number of adopted greenhouse gas emission reduction policies declined in the crisis aftermath, EU lawmakers decided to introduce new or tighten existing regulations in some important policy domains. Existing knowledge about the crisis impact on EU legislative decision-making cannot explain these inconsistencies. In response, this study develops an actor-centred conceptual framework based on rational choice institutionalism that provides a micro-level link to explain how economic crises translate into altered policy-making patterns. The core theoretical argument draws on redistributive conflicts, arguing that tensions between 'beneficiaries' and 'losers' of a regulatory initiative intensify during economic crises and spill over to the policy domain. To test this hypothesis and using social network analysis, this study analyses policy processes in three case studies: The introduction of carbon dioxide emission limits for passenger cars, the expansion of the EU Emissions Trading System to aviation, and the introduction of a regulatory framework for biofuels. The key finding is that an economic shock causes EU policy domains to polarise politically, resulting in intensified conflict and more difficult decision-making. The results also show that this process of political polarisation roots in the industry that is the subject of the regulation, and that intergovernmental bargaining among member states becomes more important, but also more difficult in times of crisis.},
  language  = {en}
}