scholarly journals Europe belongs to the young? Generational differences in public opinion towards the European Union during the Eurozone crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Lauterbach ◽  
Catherine E. De Vries
2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Brigevich

The rise of “new regionalism” is one of the most salient features of the post-Cold War international order. Despite the resurgence of regionalism in Europe, little consensus exists on how regional identity impacts public opinion toward the European Union. To remedy this problem, this study examines the impact of three types of individual-level regional identity on support for integration: parochialism (exclusive regionalism), inclusive regionalism, and pseudo-exclusive regionalism. Contrary to scholarly expectations, the multilevel analysis reveals that inclusive regionalists are as equally Eurosceptic as parochial regionalists. In general, regional identity depresses support for integration unless it is expressly combined with a supranational identity. This finding holds true even in minority nations, where respondents are, on the whole, less Euro-friendly.


Author(s):  
Anand Menon ◽  
Luigi Scazzieri

This chapter examines the history of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European integration process. The chapter dissects the long-term trends in public opinion and the more contingent, short-term factors that led to the referendum vote to leave the European Union. The UK was a late joiner and therefore unable to shape the early institutional development of the EEC. British political parties and public opinion were always ambiguous about membership and increasingly Eurosceptic from the early 1990s. Yet the UK had a significant impact on the EU’s development, in the development of the single market programme and eastward enlargement. If Brexit goes through, Britain will nevertheless maintain relations with the EU in all policy areas from agriculture to energy and foreign policy. Europeanization will remain a useful theoretical tool to analyse EU–UK relations even if the UK leaves the Union.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clement Fontan ◽  
Sabine Saurugger

This article analyses the causal factors underlying the formation of French preferences during the Eurozone crisis solving process (2008–2017). Going beyond the clear distinction between national preference formation and interstate bargaining of liberal intergovernmentalism, this article combines new intergovernmentalism, political economy and feedback loops to study the horizontal linkages between different actors included in the process of domestic preference formation. Based on the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) Choices dataset, which includes semi-structured interviews conducted with French policy-makers involved in the European Union negotiations at the highest level, we will concentrate on French preference formation in four negotiations at the European Union level: the 3 May 2010 agreement on bilateral loans to Greece, the initial capitalisation amount of the European Stability Mechanism, the negotiations on the legal nature of the ‘debt-brake’ included in the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance and the reverse qualified majority voting procedure. The article shows that confidential and restricted administrative networks played a central role in reducing the uncertainty stemming from the fragile financial positions of the hypertrophied domestic banking system. At the same time, French negotiators find themselves between a rock and a hard place during negotiations at the European Union level, not crossing the red line fixed by Germany, on the one hand, and ensuring that policy solutions are compatible with governmental political stance and domestic economic interests, on the other hand. Contrary to recent research pointing out to the increasing influence of domestic public opinion on national preference formation, however, feedback loops between the outcome of the crisis solving process and French politics and policies had very little impact.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (83) ◽  
pp. 6-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dejan Jović

Abstract This paper focuses on perceptions of the European Union (EU) and external actors (such as the United States, Russia, and Turkey) in six countries of the Western Balkans (WB) and Croatia in a comparative perspective. We present data generated by public opinion polls and surveys in all countries of that region in order to illustrate growing trends of EU indifferentism in all predominately Slavic countries of the region. In addition, there is an open rejection of pro-EU policies by significant segments of public opinion in Serbia and in the Republic of Srpska, Bosnia-Herzegovina. On the contrary, there is much enthusiasm and support for the West in general and the EU in particular in predominately non-Slavic countries, Kosovo and Albania. We argue that the WB as a region defined by alleged desire of all countries to join the the EU is more of an elite concept than that shared by the general population, which remains divided over the issue of EU membership. In explaining reasons for such a gap we emphasise a role of interpretation of the recent past, especially when it comes to a role the West played in the region during the 1990s.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Finke ◽  
Stefanie Bailer

To what extent did the European Monetary Union crisis alter the logic of European Union decision making? We analyze the relevance of asymmetric market pressures as compared to that of formal voting and agenda setting rules by applying three established bargaining models to the ‘EMU Positions’ data. Accounting for the interdependence between issues and agreements, we locate actors’ positions on three reform dimensions, namely the level of fiscal discipline, transfer payments and institutionalization. We find that market pressure during the height of the Eurozone crisis was particularly relevant, and that debtor countries were weakened by their difficulty in refinancing their public debt. Our finding shows that formal rules determining agenda setting and veto rights remain relevant even in times of crisis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document