Explaining Variation in the Use of European Litigation Strategies

By K. Alter, J. Vargas. 2000

212 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b04fd0a46627be930efcfba07392780d8919ef85

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. Ulrich Sedelmeier
2. D. Coen

In Political Science and International Relations

1. Ulrich Sedelmeier
2. D. Coen
3. Frank Schimmelfennig

Citations in the corpus

• After conditionality: post-accession compliance with EU law in East Central Europe (2008, background): “Some more recent studies have emphasized the importance of societal mobilization for compliance in the EU (Alter and Vargas 2000: 457–9; Börzel 2003: 38–9, 53–4; 2006; Cichowski 2007; Conant 2002; Falkner et al. 2005: 36–7).”
• Empirical and theoretical studies in EU lobbying (2007, background): “Nonetheless, regardless of the dynamics between ECJ and interest group activity, Alter and Vargas (2000) argue that litigation is only effective in EU politics when supported by direct lobbying strategies.”
• Lobbying versus litigation: political and legal strategies of interest representation in the European Union (2007, unknown): “The broader and more encompassing the interest group’s mandate and constituency, the less likely it will choose a litigation strategy (Alter and Vargas 2000: 473).”