scholarly journals Visions of Europe: emerging challenges for the European project in the aftermath of the 2014 European Parliament elections

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arianna Giovannini ◽  
Laura Polverari ◽  
Antonella Seddone

The European Union (EU) is facing a profound political crisis of leadership, legitimacy, and purpose. This article provides an analysis of these key dimensions of crisis. It does so by examining the way in which they intersect and their impact on the EU’s institutional architecture, on the politicization of the European public sphere, on the wider dynamics of representation that underpin these processes, and on the political systems and polities of the member states. Drawing on such analysis, we assess the 2014 European Parliament election with reference to the findings of the six articles included in this collection. We conclude with a critical reflection on the competing and often piecemeal ‘visions of Europe’ that emerge from the studies in this volume and the challenges they pose to the EU project.

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Jakub Charvát

Modern democratic political systems are hardly conceivable without political representation. This also applies to the European Union, a unique international organisation with a directly elected and fully-fledged assembly representing the EU citizens. Because geography is central to the operation of almost all electoral systems and the European Parliament is the first transnational assembly based on the Member States representation, the paper explores the spatial aspect of the composition of the European Parliament resulting from the 2019 election. The representation in the European Parliament may be degressively proportional, which implies malapportionment of seats across the EU Member States. The paper, thus, seeks to quantify the malapportionment in the 2019 election at both the aggregate level (by the adaption of Loosemore and Hanby´s distortion index) and individual level (advantage ratio and the value of a vote). It concludes malapportionment was just below 14,5% of the total seats in 2019 while the 2019 election did not bring the degressively proportional representation in the European Parliament as required by the Lisbon Treaty.


Author(s):  
Gert Würtenberger ◽  
Paul van der Kooij ◽  
Bart Kiewiet ◽  
Martin Ekvad

This chapter is about the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO), which was created by Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights or the Basic Regulation. It explains the purpose of the implementation and application of the Basic Regulation. It also describes CPVO as an agency of the European Union (EU), which is a body governed by European public law that is distinct from the EU institutions. This chapter describes the resources that led the European Parliament, the EU Council, and the European Commission to launch an inter-institutional dialogue on decentralized agencies in 2009. It points out, as stated in the Basic Regulation, that the decisions of the CPVO will be taken by a committee of three members of its staff.


Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries

This chapter examines the link between the four types of support and scepticism and the likelihood of casting a ballot for a Eurosceptic party in the 2014 European Parliament elections. Importantly, the chapter demonstrates close ties between being an exit sceptic and supporting hard Eurosceptic parties that reject the EU project and mobilize secession sentiment. Moreover, the chapter demonstrates that issue priorities matter greatly. Sceptics who care mostly about immigration display the highest support for hard Eurosceptic parties, especially on the right of the political spectrum, while those who care mostly about unemployment and the economy are, overall, less likely to vote for a Eurosceptic party. If they do, they support a soft Eurosceptic party, mostly on the left of the political spectrum. Finally, the chapter shows that the choices for Eurosceptic parties are mainly fuelled by concerns over immigration and a desire for more national control.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Stier

How transnational are European Parliament (EP) campaigns? Building on research on the Euro-pean public sphere and the politicisation of the EU, this study investigates to what extent the 2019 EP campaign was transnational and which factors were associated with ‘going transna-tional’. It conceptualises Twitter linkages of EP candidates as constitutive elements of a transna-tional campaign arena distinguishing interactions with EP candidates from other countries (hori-zontal transnationalisation) and interactions with the supranational European party families and lead candidates (vertical transnationalisation). The analysis of tweets sent by EP candidates from all 28 member states reveals that most linkages remain national. Despite this evidence for the second-order logic, there are still relevant variations contingent on EU positions of parties, the adoption of the Spitzenkandidaten system and socialisation in the EP. The findings have impli-cations for debates on the European public sphere and institutional reform proposals such as transnational party lists that might mitigate the EU’s democratic deficit.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claes De Vreese ◽  
Rachid Azrout ◽  
Judith Moeller

The 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections were held after a period where public opinion about the EU changed significantly. In this paper we investigate evaluations of the performance of the European Union, as this dimension of EU attitudes is particularly relevant ahead of elections. We look at public opinion developments since 2009 and then zoom in on the role played by the news media in shaping public opinion about EU performance by linking citizens’ evaluations across time to the news media content they were exposed to. The article relies on original multiple wave survey panel data and a systematic media content analysis in the Netherlands. It shows how public opinion has changed, how it changes around EP elections, and how exposure to media coverage can help improve citizens’ evaluations of EU performance.


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):  
Panagiotis Delimatsis

Secrecy and informality rather than transparency traditionally reign trade negotiations at the bilateral, regional, and multilateral levels. Yet, transparency ranks among the most basic desiderata in the grammar of global governance and has been regarded as positively related to legitimacy. In the EU’s case, transparent trade diplomacy is quintessential for constitutional—but also for broader political—reasons. First, even if trade matters fall within the EU’s exclusive competence, the EU executive is bound by the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to inform the European Parliament, the EU co-legislator, in regular intervals. Second, transparency at an early stage is important to address public reluctance, suspicion, or even opposition regarding a particular trade deal. This chapter chronicles the quest for and turning moments relating to transparency during the EU trade negotiations with Canada (CETA); the US (TTIP), and various WTO members on services (TiSA).


1996 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Hix ◽  
Christopher Lord

THE SINGLE EUROPEAN ACT AND THE MAASTRICHT TREATY attempted to balance two principles of representation in their redesign of the institutional structures of the European Union: the one, based on the indirect representation of publics through nationally elected governments in the European Council and Council of Ministers; the other, based on the direct representation of publics through a more powerful European Parliament. There is much to be said for this balance, for neither of the two principles can, on its own, be an adequate solution at this stage in the development of the EU. The Council suffers from a non-transparent style of decision-making and is, in the view of many, closer to oligarchic than to democratic politics. On the other hand, the claims of the European Parliament to represent public sentiments on European integration are limited by low voter participation, the second-order nature of European elections and the still Protean nature of what we might call a transnational European demos. The EU lacks a single public arena of political debate, communications and shared meanings; of partisan aggregation and political entrepreneurship; and of high and even acceptance, across issues and member states, that it is European and not national majority views which should count in collective rule-making.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-131
Author(s):  
Julia Lux

This article will investigate the ‘political crisis’ in France (Amable, 2017) to highlight two aspects often set aside in public and academic discussions: 1) the technocratic, neoliberal character of the European Union (EU) that limits democratic debate about political economic issues and 2) the socio-economic context the parties operate in. Using this perspective, I add to the debate on the inherent theoretical/conceptual tension between representative democracy and populism (Taggart, 2002) by showing how the ‘new economic governance’ increases the democratic problems of the EU by limiting the discursive space. Representative liberal democracy has particularly marginalised anti-capitalism at EU and national level. My analysis shows that the EU's discursive strategies are aligned to those of governing parties and the employers’ association. Left-wing actors and the Front National (FN) oppose the EU's discourse not necessarily for reasons of sovereignty but for political reasons concerning the politico-economic trajectory of France.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roman Senninger

Governments redistribute ever larger shares of their budgets to enhance the economic performance of specific areas within their jurisdiction. However, there is little evidence about one of the most fundamental questions arising from such place-based policies: Do citizens reward politicians for funding that benefits their local environment? To answer this question, I turn to the European Union and leverage quasi-experimental data from an initiative that distributed vouchers to European municipalities to establish free and high-quality WiFI connectivity before the European Parliament election in 2019. Moreover, I analyze geolocated data about beneficiaries of two major European Union funds, European Parliament election results along with register data from polling stations, and a city-wide survey experiment in Denmark. The results show that European place-based policy has little to no impact on turnout and Eurosceptic voting in European Parliament elections. The findings are discussed in the light of the recently introduced European Union recovery fund to combat economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document