Veto Power
External Review of Whole Manuscript
Institutional Design in the European Union
dc.contributor.author | Slapin, Jonathan B. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-09-23T05:30:49Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-09-23T05:30:49Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
dc.identifier | OCN: 1256590320 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/50643 | |
dc.description.abstract | Jonathan B. Slapin traces the historical development of the veto privilege in the EU and how a veto— or veto threat— has been employed in treaty negotiations of the past two decades. As he explains, the importance of veto power in treaty negotiations is one of the features that distinguishes the EU from other international organizations in which exit and expulsion threats play a greater role. At the same time, the prominence of veto power means that bargaining in the EU looks more like bargaining in a federal system. Slapin's findings have significant ramifications for the study of international negotiations, the design of international organizations, and European integration. | |
dc.language | English | |
dc.subject.classification | thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPS International relations | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Political Science | |
dc.subject.other | International Relations | |
dc.title | Veto Power | |
dc.title.alternative | Institutional Design in the European Union | |
dc.type | book | |
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy | e07ce9b5-7a46-4096-8f0c-bc1920e3d889 | |
oapen.relation.isFundedBy | b818ba9d-2dd9-4fd7-a364-7f305aef7ee9 | |
oapen.relation.isbn | 9780472117932 | |
oapen.collection | Knowledge Unlatched (KU) | |
oapen.imprint | University of Michigan Press | |
oapen.identifier | https://openresearchlibrary.org/viewer/8212b4ca-ddb5-44f4-9d7f-97b6d12730d6 | |
oapen.identifier.isbn | 9780472117932 | |
grantor.number | 100398 | |
peerreview.anonymity | Double-anonymised | |
peerreview.id | d98bf225-990a-4ac4-acf4-fd7bf0dfb00c | |
peerreview.open.review | No | |
peerreview.publish.responsibility | Scientific or Editorial Board | |
peerreview.review.decision | Yes | |
peerreview.review.stage | Pre-publication | |
peerreview.review.type | Full text | |
peerreview.reviewer.type | External peer reviewer | |
peerreview.title | External Review of Whole Manuscript | |
oapen.review.comments | The proposal was selected by the acquisitions editor who invited a full manuscript. The full manuscript was reviewed by two external readers using a double-blind process. Based on the acquisitions editor recommendation, the external reviews, and their own analysis, the Executive Committee (Editorial Board) of U-M Press approved the project for publication. |