Early warning to no avail?: explaining (in)activity of national parliaments in the Early Warning Mechanism

The Treaty of Lisbon introduced the Early Warning Mechanism (EWM) as a novel instrument for parliamentary control in EU affairs, granting national parliaments the authority to collectively and conditionally bring EU legislation 'to a halt'. This tool was used very sparingly, however. This poses a puzzle: why do national parliaments not resort to a mechanism that could in fact have a (conditional) impact on the EU legislative process? Against this backdrop, this contribution probes into the conditions that explain (in)activity in the EWM. This is done by way of using qualitative comparative analysis. We find that several conditions must be combined to influence parliamentary (in)activity. Significant factors include the combination of political motivation with institutional aspects. We identify two key factors that lead to more parliamentary activity: upper chambers that play a comparatively weaker role at the national level and Euroscepticism. Parliamentary resources are also critical.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of European Integration
Published
2026-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2026.2624669
Primary Topic
Data-Driven Disease Surveillance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Early warning to no avail?: explaining (in)activity of national parliaments in the Early Warning Mechanism

Christine Neuhold, Niek Kelders
Journal of European Integration
Data-Driven Disease Surveillance
article

Early warning to no avail?: explaining (in)activity of national parliaments in the Early Warning Mechanism

Christine Neuhold, Niek Kelders
article en

Abstract

The Treaty of Lisbon introduced the Early Warning Mechanism (EWM) as a novel instrument for parliamentary control in EU affairs, granting national parliaments the authority to collectively and conditionally bring EU legislation 'to a halt'. This tool was used very sparingly, however. This poses a puzzle: why do national parliaments not resort to a mechanism that could in fact have a (conditional) impact on the EU legislative process? Against this backdrop, this contribution probes into the conditions that explain (in)activity in the EWM. This is done by way of using qualitative comparative analysis. We find that several conditions must be combined to influence parliamentary (in)activity. Significant factors include the combination of political motivation with institutional aspects. We identify two key factors that lead to more parliamentary activity: upper chambers that play a comparatively weaker role at the national level and Euroscepticism. Parliamentary resources are also critical.

Journal of European Integration
Maastricht University (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Data-Driven Disease Surveillance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.