The socio-rational hypothesis adds two new variables, that is the opinions of the Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. A stratified sample of non amending secondary legislation adopted from 1987 to 1993 has been drawn to test the hypotheses. Information asymmetry, informal legislative procedures and legislative instruments are statistically and substantively relevant in explaining executive discretion. Distribution of preferences has weak explanatory power probably because of the lack of reliable data and appropriate measurement. The Parliament and opinions do not relevantly affect Commission's discretion.
More discretion leads to more confining ex-post control.
Stellungnahmen beinflussen den Spielraum der Kommission hingegen nicht signifikant. The author Fabio Franchino is a PhD candidate in Government at the London School of Economics.