2 1 The innovative transport systems and the CityMobil project 10 1.1 The research questions 10 2 The state of art in the field of automatic transport systems 12 2.1 Case studies and demand studies for innovative transport systems 12 3 The design and implementation of surveys 14 3.1 Definition of experimental design 14 3.2 Questionnaire design and delivery 16 3.3 First analyses on the collected sample 18 4 Calibration of Logit Multionomial demand models 21 4.1 Methodology 21 4.2 Calibration of the “full” model. 22 4.3 Calibration of the “final” model 24 4.4 The demand analysis through the final Multinomial Logit model 25 5 The analysis of interaction between the demand and socioeconomic attributes 31 5.1 Methodology 31 5.2 Application of Mixed Logit models to the demand 31 5.3 Analysis of the interactions between demand and socioeconomic attributes through Mixed Logit models 32 5.4 Mixed Logit model and interaction between age and the demand for the CTS 38 5.5 Demand analysis with Mixed Logit model 39 6 Final analyses and conclusions 45 6.1 Comparison between the results of the analyses 45 6.2 Conclusions 48 6.3 Answers to the research questions and future developments 52

The European commission

In the literature on European integration, politicization as concept is often attributed major importance. This article shows how the literature variously discusses the politicization of European Union (EU) institutions, the politicization of EU decision‐making processes or the politicization of EU issues. Similarly, the literature attributes three different functions to politicization: it functions to crystallize opposing advocacy coalitions, to raise the question of legitimacy and to alter the course of European integration. Despite this diversity, this article argues we are in fact dealing with an encompassing process. To further our understanding of politicization of European integration, politicization as process is defined as an increase in polarization of opinions, interests or values and the extent to which they are publicly advanced towards policy formulation within the EU. Furthermore, attention is directed to practices of representative claims‐making in the public sphere through which ...

No polity for old politics? A framework for analyzing the politicization of European Integration

This article examines and explains the committee system of the EU as a crucial property of the EU governance system using a database on the European Commission's experts groups. What is the extent of the expert consultative system? What is the distribution of expert groups? Are these groups best understood as loose networks or do they constitute a stable, well-established consultative system? We observe a proliferation of expert groups over time and across sectors. They have become permanent properties of the EU governance system; yet they are remarkably unevenly distributed among different policy domains. Sectoral differentiation is accentuated by weak horizontal coordination between the Directorates-General. We argue that this heterogeneity is not only a result of deliberate design attempts and differences in policy tasks, but also the result of differences in legal and administrative capabilities, as well as the gradual development of different routines and norms among the DGs.

Who consults? The configuration of expert groups in the European union

Who provides the European Union with information? This article examines patterns of participation in the large expert group system under the European Commission. It explores competing propositions about the character of the Commission's information system, and tests four hypotheses about what affects participation in the EU expert group system. The authors distinguish between three kinds of information providers: scientists, societal actors and government officials. The empirical section of the paper builds upon an analysis of a data set covering all of the Commission expert groups (N = 1237). Although scientists, and interest groups, industries and NGOs are prevalent information providers for the Commission, the authors show that the informational foundation is strongly biased towards officials from national administrations. They argue that these distinct patterns of participation are significantly affected by inter-institutional and environmental conditions that the Commission Directorate Generals opera...

/pdf/access-of-experts-information-and-eu-decision-making-32h7md8tmh.pdf

Access of Experts: Information and EU Decision-making

Committees of national officials play a major role in the decision-making of the European Union's main legislative body, the Council of Ministers. The study investigates the conditions under which bureaucrats decide on legislative dossiers without direct involvement of ministers. A statistical analysis is performed to examine this question, using an original data set of 439 legislative proposals. The results of the analysis indicate that formal institutional features such as the voting rule in the Council and the involvement of the European Parliament affect committee decision-making, whereas no effects of committee socialization and preference divergence among member states are identified. The results diminish concerns about the democratic legitimacy of Council decision-making to some extent, as the findings demonstrate that bureaucrats tend to decide only the less salient and more complex proposals.

/pdf/committee-decision-making-in-the-council-of-the-european-w3axeqx4zz.pdf

Committee Decision-making in the Council of the European Union:

The Council is too often depicted as the battleground for intermittent clashes between national ministers. Based upon case studies of legislation produced in five ‘First Pillar’ sectors, the research presented here has explored the submerged, and much larger, part of this institutional ‘iceberg’: Council working groups. It does so by examining how members of these entities interact with civil servants in COREPER and ministers, on the one hand, and representatives of the Commission and the European Parliament, on the other. Contrary to many practitioner or formalist accounts, the principal finding is that working groups do not operate solely on a ‘technical level’. Instead, they are vital arenas through which the ambiguous nature of politics in the European Union heavily influences negotiating processes and legislative outcomes.

Eves Fouilleux

Papers

Technical or political ? The working groups of the EU council of ministers