Enduring Gaps between Public Preferences and Institutional Designs

Author(s):  
Niva Golan-Nadir
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Jeannet ◽  
Esther Ademmer ◽  
Martin Ruhs ◽  
Tobias Stöhr

Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries

The European Union (EU) is facing one of the rockiest periods in its existence. At no time in its history has it looked so economically fragile, so insecure about how to protect its borders, so divided over how to tackle the crisis of legitimacy facing its institutions, and so under assault by Eurosceptic parties. The unprecedented levels of integration in recent decades have led to increased public contestation, yet at the same the EU is more reliant on public support for its continued legitimacy than ever before. This book examines the role of public opinion in the European integration process. It develops a novel theory of public opinion that stresses the deep interconnectedness between people’s views about European and national politics. It suggests that public opinion cannot simply be characterized as either Eurosceptic or not, but rather that it consists of different types. This is important because these types coincide with fundamentally different views about the way the EU should be reformed and which policy priorities should be pursued. These types also have very different consequences for behaviour in elections and referendums. Euroscepticism is such a diverse phenomenon because the Eurozone crisis has exacerbated the structural imbalances within the EU. As the economic and political fates of member states have diverged, people’s experiences with and evaluations of the EU and national political systems have also grown further apart. The heterogeneity in public preferences that this book has uncovered makes a one-size-fits-all approach to addressing Euroscepticism unlikely to be successful.


Author(s):  
Ann-Kathrin Reinl ◽  
Heiko Giebler

As a consequence of the European Economic Crisis, the European Union (EU) has implanted mechanisms to assist fellow member states facing economic difficulties. Despite an increasing academic interest in public preferences for such intra-EU solidarity measures, research has so far largely ignored individual characteristics that could possibly influence politicians’ views. In this paper, we look at politicians’ preferences for transnational solidarity and argue that these preferences depend on attitudes regarding socioeconomic issues as well as attitudes related to the EU. Moreover, we hypothesize that the relationship is moderated by responsibility attribution and the economic situation in a country. Using survey data of about 4000 politicians running for office in nine EU countries, we find that transnational solidarity is more common for socioeconomically left-wing and pro-EU politicians. Yet, attitudinal differences only cease to matter when the beneficiary state is perceived responsible for the crisis and economic problems at home are low.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary Boudet ◽  
Chad Zanocco ◽  
Greg Stelmach ◽  
Mahmood Muttaqee ◽  
June Flora

2021 ◽  
pp. 113803
Author(s):  
Sanna Read ◽  
Bob Erens ◽  
Raphael Wittenberg ◽  
Gerald Wistow ◽  
Francis Dickinson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 146511652110068
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Jeannet ◽  
Tobias Heidland ◽  
Martin Ruhs

The protection of asylum seekers and refugees has become one of the most politically divisive issues in the European Union, yet there has been a lack of research on public preferences for asylum and refugee policies. This article analyzes which policies Europeans prefer and why. We advance a theoretical framework that explains how asylum and refugee policies that use limits and conditions enable individuals to resolve conflicting humanitarian and perceived national interest logics. Using an original conjoint experiment in eight countries, we demonstrate that Europeans prefer policies that provide refugee protection but also impose control through limits or conditions. In contrast to the divisive political debates between European Union member states, we find consistent public preferences across European countries.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Michael J Liles ◽  
M Nils Peterson ◽  
Kathryn T Stevenson ◽  
Markus J Peterson

Summary Public preferences for wildlife protection can dictate the success or failure of conservation interventions. However, little research has focused on wildlife preferences among youth or how youth prioritize species-based conservation. We conducted a study of youth between 7 and 20 years old (n = 128) at five local schools situated near critical hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) nesting beaches in El Salvador to determine their wildlife preferences and how they prioritize species for conservation based on five attributes: endemism; use for hunting and fishing; rapid decline in population size; presence around their home; and ecological significance. These Salvadoran youth showed preferences for native over non-native species and tended to rank rapid population decline as the most important attribute for prioritizing wildlife for protection, followed by use for hunting and fishing. Participants in local environmental education activities placed greater importance on species in rapid decline than non-participants, who considered endemism as most important. Overall, these findings reveal how environmental education may successfully promote increased prioritization of imperilled species among youth. Economic payments for conserving hawksbill turtles may link the two top reasons that Salvadoran youth provided for protecting species by compensating for the reduced hunting required to facilitate population stabilization.


Author(s):  
Richard Norman ◽  
Suzanne Robinson ◽  
Helen Dickinson ◽  
Iestyn Williams ◽  
Elena Meshcheriakova ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document