Derleme
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

The Case of EU in terms of Access of Interest Groups in Decision-Making Process

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 404 - 413, 24.07.2019

Öz

Access to
decision-making processes in political systems is a determinant factor for
interest groups asking for affecting the decisions in accordance with common
interests during this process. Groups of different nations, whether they are EU
membership or not, gathering with these common interests are active for
accessing EU decision-making process. This study deals with interactions of
European Commission, EU Parliament, Council of Minister and also other EU
institutions (such as; Court of Justice of European Union, European Ombudsman,
European Court of Auditors, Economic and Social Committee, Committee of
Regions, European Investment Bank and European Central Bank) with interest
groups and outstanding factors in access of interest groups to these
institutions. Thereto, European Commission, EU Parliament and Council of
Minister evaluate access of interest groups as reciprocally benefitting process
by their improved interaction processes and submit different access points to
these groups. Other EU institutions present limited access points to interest
groups by their interaction processes within the context of their scope of
authority and assignment.    

Kaynakça

  • Alkan, H. (1999). “Avrupa Birliği Karar Alma Süreçlerinde Baskı Grupları”, Türk İdare Dergisi, Yıl:71(422), Ankara, s.35-51.
  • Ara, B. (2004). Avrupa Birliği’nde Lobicilik, Ankara Üniversitesi SBE, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
  • Arabacı, A. (2008). “Avrupa Birliğinde Çıkar Temsilinin Gelişimi”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, 5(17), s.23-103.
  • Andersen, S., Kjell, E. (1991). “European Community Lobying”, European Journal of Political Research, 20 (2), s.173-187.
  • Anderson, J.E. (2010). Public Policymaking: An Introduction, Wadsworth Cengage Learning Publishing, Boston.
  • Ateş, T. (2005). “Avrupa'da Sosyal Diyalogun Kurumsal Yapısı: AB Ekonomik ve Sosyal Komitesi”, Ankara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (1), s.45-85.
  • Baker, R. (1997). Enviromental Law and Policy in the European Union and the United States, Praeger Publishing, Wesport.
  • Baykal, S. (2002). AT Hukukunun Etkili Biçimde Uygulanması ve Bireysel Haklar, Ankara Üniversitesi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Araştırma Dizisi, Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, Ankara.
  • Bouwen, P. (2001). Corporate Lobbying in the European Union:Towards a Theory of Access, European University Institute, İtaly.
  • Bouwen, P. (2004). “The Logic of Access to the European Parliament: Business Lobbying in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(3), s.473-495.
  • Bouwen, P., Mccown, M. (2007). “Lobbying Versus Litigation: Political and Legal Strategies of Interest Representation in the European Union”, Journal of European Public Policy, 14 (3),s. 422-443.
  • Brzınskı, J.B., Lancaster, T.D., Tuschhoff, C. (1999). Compounded Representation in West European Federations, Frank Cass Publishers, London.
  • Charrad, K. (2005). Lobbying the European Union, Nachwuchsgruppe Europaische Zivilgesellschaft.
  • Cını, M. (1996). The European Comission, Manchester University Press, New York.
  • Corbett,R., Jacops, F. Shackleton, M. (1995). European Parliament, Cartelmill Publishing, London.
  • Cram, L. (1998). “The EU Institutions and Collective Action”, (Der.) J. Greenwood ve M. Aspinwall, Collective Action in the European Union, Routledge Publishing, New York, s.63-80.
  • Cullıngworth, N. (2004). BTEC National Public Services, Nelson Thornes Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Decision of the European Ombudsman Closing his inquiry into complaint 244 /2006 / (BM) JMA against the European Investment Bank (02.05.2014). http :// www. ombudsman. europa.eu /cases /decision. Faces /en /3995/htm.
  • Dınan, D. (2005). Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi, (2.cilt), Kitap Yayınevi, İstanbul.
  • Donaldson,L. (1995). American Anti-Managemant Theories of Organization, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.
  • EESC Mission Statement, http: //www.eesc.europa.eu/?i= portal.en.about-the-committee (04.04.2014).
  • Eısıng,R. (2008). Interest Groups and Policy-making, Living Reviews in European Governance, 3(4).
  • Erhan, Ç., Kızılırmak, A.B., Olcay, C.A. ( 2009). Avrupa Birliği: Temel Konular, İmaj Yayınevi, Ankara.
  • Esen, S. (2004). Avrupa Birliği Bölgeler Komitesi, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 59 (1), s.90-117.
  • Fontaıne, P. (2006). Europe in 12 Lessons, European Commission General for Communication Publications, Brussels.
  • Gorges, M. J. (1996). Euro Corporatism?: Interest Intermediation in European Community, University Press of America, London, s.1–30.
  • Greenwood, J. (2003). Interest Representation in the European Union, New York, Palgrave.
  • Harden, L. (2001). "When Europeans Complain:The Work of the European Ombudsman", The Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, (Ed:A. Dashwood, J. Spencer, A. Ward ,C. Hillion), Hard Publishing, Oregon, s.199-237.
  • Hayo, B. (2003). European Monetary Policy:Institutional Design and Policy Experience, Intereconomics, 7 (8), s.209-218.
  • Kaltenthaler, K. (2006). Policymaking in the European Central Bank, Littlefield Publishing, Maryland.
  • Karluk, R. (2007). Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye, Beta Yayınları, İstanbul.
  • Kohler-Koch, B. (1997). Organize İnterests in the EC and the European Parliament, European İntegration Online Papers 1,(9).
  • Kohler-Koch, B. (1998). Organized Interests in the EU and the European Parliament: Lobbying, Pluralism and European Integration, (Der.) Paul-H Claeys et al, European Interuniversity Press, Brussels.
  • Lehmann,W., Bosche, L. (2003). Lobbying in the European Union, European Parliament, Luxembourg.
  • Levine, S., White,P.E. (1961). “Exchange as a Contual Fraework fort he Study of İnterornanizationals Relationships”, Administrative Science Quarterly, (5), s.583-601.
  • Lodge, J., Valantıne, H. (1980). "The Economic and Social Committee in EEC Decision-making", International Organizations, 34 (2), s.265-284.
  • Maier, P. (2002). Political Pressure, Rhetoric and Monetary Policy, Edward Elvar, Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Mazey, S., Rıchardson, J. (1993.a). “Transference of Power, Decision Rules, and Rules of the Game”, Lobbying in the European Community, (Ed: S. Mazey and J. Richardson), Oxford University Press, Oxford, s.3-26.
  • ------- --------------------- . (1993.b). "İnterest Groups in the European Community" Pressure Groups, (Ed: J.J.Richarson), Oxford Univ Pres, New York,s.191-213.
  • Ombudsman, NGOs can Help EU Institutions do Their Job Beter (02.02.2014), http://www.ombudsman. europa. eu/en /press/ release.faces /en/236/html.
  • Peterson, J., Shackleton, M.(2012). The Institutions of the European Union, Oxford University Press, 3, United Kingdom.
  • Pollack, M.A. (1997). “Representing Diffuse Interests in EC Policy-Making”, Journal of European Public Policy, 4 (4), s.572-590.
  • Reıf, C.L. (2004). The Ombudsman, Good Governance and the International Human Rights System, Koninklijke Brill NV Publishers, Netherlands.Sanderson, C.A. (2010). Social Psychology, Wiley Publishing, USA.
  • Schmitter,P.C.,Streeck, W. (1994). "Organized İnterests and the Europe of 1992",(Ed: B.F.Nelsen, A. C-G. Stubb), The European Union: Theory and the Practice of the European Union, Lynn Rienner Publishers, London, s.169-188.
  • Smismans S. (2006). Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance, Edwar Elgar Publishing, UK.
  • Jayapalan, N. (2002). Comprehensive Modern Political Analysis, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, Delhi.
  • Wagstaff, P. (1999). Regionalism in the European Union, Intelleg Book Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Warleıgh, A. (2002). Understanding European Union Institutions, Rodledge Publishing, London.
  • Woll, P. (1974). Public Policy, Winthrop Publishing, Cambridge.

Karar Alma Süreçlerine Çıkar Gruplarının Erişimi Açısından AB Örneği

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 404 - 413, 24.07.2019

Öz

Siyasal sistemlerde karar alma
süreçlerine erişim, bu süreçte alınan kararları ortak çıkarları doğrultusunda
etkilemek isteyen çıkar grupları için belirleyici bir unsurdur. AB’de de AB
üyesi olsun veya olmasın farklı ülkelerden ortak çıkarlar etrafında bir araya
gelmiş gruplar, AB karar alma süreçlerine erişim sağlamak için faaliyet
göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada AB karar alma sürecine doğrudan katılan Avrupa
Komisyonu, Avrupa Parlamentosu ve Bakanlar Konseyi ile diğer AB kurumlarının
(Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı, Avrupa Ombudsmanı, Avrupa Sayıştayı, Ekonomik ve
Sosyal Komite, Bölgeler Komitesi, Avrupa Yatırım Bankası, Avrupa Merkez
Bankası) çıkar gruplarıyla etkileşimleri ve çıkar gruplarının bu kurumlara
erişiminde öne çıkan unsurlar belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Buna göre, Avrupa
Komisyonu, Avrupa Parlamentosu ve Bakanlar Konseyi geliştirdikleri etkileşim
süreçleri ile çıkar gruplarının erişimini karşılıklı fayda sağlayan bir süreç
olarak değerlendirmekte ve bu gruplara farklı erişim noktaları sunmaktadır. AB'nin
diğer kurumları ise görev ve yetki alanları kapsamında kurdukları etkileşim
süreçleri ile çıkar gruplarına sınırlı erişim noktaları sunmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Alkan, H. (1999). “Avrupa Birliği Karar Alma Süreçlerinde Baskı Grupları”, Türk İdare Dergisi, Yıl:71(422), Ankara, s.35-51.
  • Ara, B. (2004). Avrupa Birliği’nde Lobicilik, Ankara Üniversitesi SBE, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
  • Arabacı, A. (2008). “Avrupa Birliğinde Çıkar Temsilinin Gelişimi”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, 5(17), s.23-103.
  • Andersen, S., Kjell, E. (1991). “European Community Lobying”, European Journal of Political Research, 20 (2), s.173-187.
  • Anderson, J.E. (2010). Public Policymaking: An Introduction, Wadsworth Cengage Learning Publishing, Boston.
  • Ateş, T. (2005). “Avrupa'da Sosyal Diyalogun Kurumsal Yapısı: AB Ekonomik ve Sosyal Komitesi”, Ankara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (1), s.45-85.
  • Baker, R. (1997). Enviromental Law and Policy in the European Union and the United States, Praeger Publishing, Wesport.
  • Baykal, S. (2002). AT Hukukunun Etkili Biçimde Uygulanması ve Bireysel Haklar, Ankara Üniversitesi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Araştırma Dizisi, Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, Ankara.
  • Bouwen, P. (2001). Corporate Lobbying in the European Union:Towards a Theory of Access, European University Institute, İtaly.
  • Bouwen, P. (2004). “The Logic of Access to the European Parliament: Business Lobbying in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(3), s.473-495.
  • Bouwen, P., Mccown, M. (2007). “Lobbying Versus Litigation: Political and Legal Strategies of Interest Representation in the European Union”, Journal of European Public Policy, 14 (3),s. 422-443.
  • Brzınskı, J.B., Lancaster, T.D., Tuschhoff, C. (1999). Compounded Representation in West European Federations, Frank Cass Publishers, London.
  • Charrad, K. (2005). Lobbying the European Union, Nachwuchsgruppe Europaische Zivilgesellschaft.
  • Cını, M. (1996). The European Comission, Manchester University Press, New York.
  • Corbett,R., Jacops, F. Shackleton, M. (1995). European Parliament, Cartelmill Publishing, London.
  • Cram, L. (1998). “The EU Institutions and Collective Action”, (Der.) J. Greenwood ve M. Aspinwall, Collective Action in the European Union, Routledge Publishing, New York, s.63-80.
  • Cullıngworth, N. (2004). BTEC National Public Services, Nelson Thornes Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Decision of the European Ombudsman Closing his inquiry into complaint 244 /2006 / (BM) JMA against the European Investment Bank (02.05.2014). http :// www. ombudsman. europa.eu /cases /decision. Faces /en /3995/htm.
  • Dınan, D. (2005). Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi, (2.cilt), Kitap Yayınevi, İstanbul.
  • Donaldson,L. (1995). American Anti-Managemant Theories of Organization, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.
  • EESC Mission Statement, http: //www.eesc.europa.eu/?i= portal.en.about-the-committee (04.04.2014).
  • Eısıng,R. (2008). Interest Groups and Policy-making, Living Reviews in European Governance, 3(4).
  • Erhan, Ç., Kızılırmak, A.B., Olcay, C.A. ( 2009). Avrupa Birliği: Temel Konular, İmaj Yayınevi, Ankara.
  • Esen, S. (2004). Avrupa Birliği Bölgeler Komitesi, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 59 (1), s.90-117.
  • Fontaıne, P. (2006). Europe in 12 Lessons, European Commission General for Communication Publications, Brussels.
  • Gorges, M. J. (1996). Euro Corporatism?: Interest Intermediation in European Community, University Press of America, London, s.1–30.
  • Greenwood, J. (2003). Interest Representation in the European Union, New York, Palgrave.
  • Harden, L. (2001). "When Europeans Complain:The Work of the European Ombudsman", The Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, (Ed:A. Dashwood, J. Spencer, A. Ward ,C. Hillion), Hard Publishing, Oregon, s.199-237.
  • Hayo, B. (2003). European Monetary Policy:Institutional Design and Policy Experience, Intereconomics, 7 (8), s.209-218.
  • Kaltenthaler, K. (2006). Policymaking in the European Central Bank, Littlefield Publishing, Maryland.
  • Karluk, R. (2007). Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye, Beta Yayınları, İstanbul.
  • Kohler-Koch, B. (1997). Organize İnterests in the EC and the European Parliament, European İntegration Online Papers 1,(9).
  • Kohler-Koch, B. (1998). Organized Interests in the EU and the European Parliament: Lobbying, Pluralism and European Integration, (Der.) Paul-H Claeys et al, European Interuniversity Press, Brussels.
  • Lehmann,W., Bosche, L. (2003). Lobbying in the European Union, European Parliament, Luxembourg.
  • Levine, S., White,P.E. (1961). “Exchange as a Contual Fraework fort he Study of İnterornanizationals Relationships”, Administrative Science Quarterly, (5), s.583-601.
  • Lodge, J., Valantıne, H. (1980). "The Economic and Social Committee in EEC Decision-making", International Organizations, 34 (2), s.265-284.
  • Maier, P. (2002). Political Pressure, Rhetoric and Monetary Policy, Edward Elvar, Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Mazey, S., Rıchardson, J. (1993.a). “Transference of Power, Decision Rules, and Rules of the Game”, Lobbying in the European Community, (Ed: S. Mazey and J. Richardson), Oxford University Press, Oxford, s.3-26.
  • ------- --------------------- . (1993.b). "İnterest Groups in the European Community" Pressure Groups, (Ed: J.J.Richarson), Oxford Univ Pres, New York,s.191-213.
  • Ombudsman, NGOs can Help EU Institutions do Their Job Beter (02.02.2014), http://www.ombudsman. europa. eu/en /press/ release.faces /en/236/html.
  • Peterson, J., Shackleton, M.(2012). The Institutions of the European Union, Oxford University Press, 3, United Kingdom.
  • Pollack, M.A. (1997). “Representing Diffuse Interests in EC Policy-Making”, Journal of European Public Policy, 4 (4), s.572-590.
  • Reıf, C.L. (2004). The Ombudsman, Good Governance and the International Human Rights System, Koninklijke Brill NV Publishers, Netherlands.Sanderson, C.A. (2010). Social Psychology, Wiley Publishing, USA.
  • Schmitter,P.C.,Streeck, W. (1994). "Organized İnterests and the Europe of 1992",(Ed: B.F.Nelsen, A. C-G. Stubb), The European Union: Theory and the Practice of the European Union, Lynn Rienner Publishers, London, s.169-188.
  • Smismans S. (2006). Civil Society and Legitimate European Governance, Edwar Elgar Publishing, UK.
  • Jayapalan, N. (2002). Comprehensive Modern Political Analysis, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, Delhi.
  • Wagstaff, P. (1999). Regionalism in the European Union, Intelleg Book Publishing, United Kingdom.
  • Warleıgh, A. (2002). Understanding European Union Institutions, Rodledge Publishing, London.
  • Woll, P. (1974). Public Policy, Winthrop Publishing, Cambridge.
Toplam 49 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Feza Solak Tuygun

Yayımlanma Tarihi 24 Temmuz 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi 17 Kasım 2018
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Solak Tuygun, F. (2019). Karar Alma Süreçlerine Çıkar Gruplarının Erişimi Açısından AB Örneği. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 404-413.