| dc.description.abstract | This research analyses the effectiveness of equivalence frames within the European Union. It
asks itself the following question: In how far are certain frames by interest groups more
effective in influencing the European Commission in drafting legislative proposals?
The analysis conducted in this research found that negative frames are more effective in
influencing the European Commission in drafting legislative proposals. This confirms a bias
towards negative frames.
However, it was also found that business interest groups don’t make more use of
negative frames than non-business interest groups. This finding doesn’t confirm a double bias
in which specific interest groups make more use of more effective frames. In addition it was
found that differences exist per case. This suggests that every case is unique and that not every
frame is as effective in another case.
Therefore it can be concluded that certain frames, more specifically negative frames,
are more effective in influencing the European Commission in drafting legislative proposals
but that differences exist per case and that the usage of frames is equally divided over business
and non-business interest groups. The conclusions of this research thus raises questions about
the argument of effectiveness of civil society participation systems while it didn’t show that
the legitimacy of the system is severely undermined as interest groups equally use this bias. | |
