Fiscal solidarity: The conditional role of political knowledge

2020 ◽  
pp. 146511652096775
Author(s):  
Klaus Armingeon
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Political Knowledge ◽  
The Other ◽  
Independent Effect ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Fiscal Support ◽  
European Election ◽  
The Eu

In order to cope with the economic fall-out from the COVID-19 pandemic, the EU countries hit hardest by the virus requested fiscal support from the other EU member states. Likewise, the Eurozone arguably depends on some form of a fiscal union. This international redistribution critically depends on citizens’ support. Do politically knowledgeable citizens develop preferences for fiscal redistribution that are different from those of ignorant citizens? Based on the 2014 European Election Study, this article argues that knowledge plays a limited and conditional role. It hardly exerts a systematic independent effect. Rather, it helps crystallize party cues and basic European integration values. My findings are consistent with a theory, according to which knowledge eases the process of rationalizing preferences that originate in previous basic orientations.

scholarly journals Workers’ EU political alignments during the Great Recession

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
André Freire ◽  
Luís Cabrita ◽  
Mariana Carmo Duarte ◽  
Hugo Ferrinho Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Great Recession ◽  
The Other ◽  
Election Study ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Political Alignments ◽  
European Election ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

Using data from the European Election Study 2014, this article focuses on workers’ EU political alignments during the Great Recession. It deals with two research questions. First, how does the attitude of (manual) workers towards the EU compare to that of the middle and upper classes in the aftermath of the Great Recession? Second, when it comes to workers’ support for the EU, are there systematic differences between countries affected by the crisis? The article finds that, on the one hand, in terms of patterns of workers’ EU political alignments, there are no systematic differences between countries affected to varying degrees by the Great Recession. On the other hand, workers still feel fundamentally detached from the EU, especially when it comes to the manual workers. However, high levels of generalised detachment from the EU are not clearly translated into preferences for Eurosceptic parties, since there are high levels of vote fragmentation.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN LESSONS OF DECENTRALIZATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
pp. 175-184
Author(s):  
Evgeny Grigoryevich Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
National Unity ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Decentralization And Centralization ◽  
The Eu

The role of the state in the processes of European integration and decentralization is analyzed, the factors of threats for it are determined. The fol- lowing common features of decentralization processes in the EU member states are highlighted as strengthening the role of the regional level, the need to choose between different models of separation of powers between different levels of go- vernment (exclusive or joint authority) and the search for ways to adequately fi- nance transferred powers. Decentralization also actualizes the problem of territo- rial inequality and patronage for European countries. It is proved that the national state is a central actor in the process of decentralization, despite the fact that this process creates certain threats to the state itself. On the one hand, the EU as a supranational organization has already limited some aspects of the sovereignty of its member states, in particular, in the area of monetary policy. With the deepening of European integration, the powers of national states and in other areas are in- creasingly limited. On the other hand, the gradual increase in the share of powers conveyed by the state to decentralized and regional authorities further weakens its role. Moreover, the increasing influence of liberalism on state policy and the introduction of competition among the main providers of public services also li- mits the possibility of the state’s influence on its internal policies. Such a dynamics gives grounds for questioning the ability of states to effectively manage their ter- ritories. At the same time, it was noted that in most EU member states, the bodies of state power have long been the guarantor of national unity in both social and territorial terms. Such a “unity of opposites” (decentralization and centralization) is unlikely to change in the medium term.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN LESSONS OF DECENTRALIZATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. 175-184
Author(s):  
Evgeny Grigoryevich Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
National Unity ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Decentralization And Centralization ◽  
The Eu

The role of the state in the processes of European integration and decentralization is analyzed, the factors of threats for it are determined. The following common features of decentralization processes in the EU member states are highlighted as strengthening the role of the regional level, the need to choose between different models of separation of powers between different levels of government (exclusive or joint authority) and the search for ways to adequately finance transferred powers. Decentralization also actualizes the problem of territorial inequality and patronage for European countries. It is proved that the national state is a central actor in the process of decentralization, despite the fact that this process creates certain threats to the state itself. On the one hand, the EU as a supranational organization has already limited some aspects of the sovereignty of its member states, in particular, in the area of monetary policy. With the deepening of European integration, the powers of national states and in other areas are increasingly limited. On the other hand, the gradual increase in the share of powers conveyed by the state to decentralized and regional authorities further weakens its role. Moreover, the increasing influence of liberalism on state policy and the introduction of competition among the main providers of public services also limits the possibility of the state’s influence on its internal policies. Such a dynamics gives grounds for questioning the ability of states to effectively manage their territories. At the same time, it was noted that in most EU member states, the bodies of state power have long been the guarantor of national unity in both social and territorial terms. Such a “unity of opposites” (decentralization and centralization) is unlikely to change in the medium term.

scholarly journals Intergovernmentalism: Old, Liberal, and New

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Verdun
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Liberal Intergovernmentalism ◽  
Migration Crisis ◽  
National Governments ◽  
The Eu

European integration theories help us understand the actors and mechanisms that drive European integration. Traditionally, European integration scholars used grand theories of integration to explain why integration progresses or stands still. Born out of assumptions that are prevalent in realist international relations theories, intergovernmentalism was first developed as a theory in opposition to neofunctionalism. In a nutshell, intergovernmentalism argues that states (i.e., national governments or state leaders), based on national interests, determine the outcome of integration. Intergovernmentalism was seen as a plausible explanatory perspective during the 1970s and 1980s, when the integration process seemed to have stalled. Despite the fact that it could not explain many of the gradual incremental changes or informal politics, intergovernmentalism—as did various other approaches—gained renewed popularity in the 1990s, following the launch of liberal intergovernmentalism. During that decade, the study of European integration was burgeoning, triggered in part by the aim to complete the single market and the signing of the Maastricht Treaty that launched the European Union (EU). Intergovernmentalism also often received considerable pushback from researchers who were unconvinced by its core predictions. Attempts to relaunch intergovernmentalism were made in the 2010s, in response to the observation that EU member states played a prominent role in dealing with the various crises that the EU was confronted with at that time, such as the financial crisis and the migration crisis. Although intergovernmentalism is unable —and is not suited—to explain all aspects of European integration, scholars revert to intergovernmentalism as a theoretical approach in particular when examining the role of member states in European politics. Outside the EU, in the international arena (such as the United Nations), intergovernmentalism is also observed when studying various forums in which member states come together to bargain over particular collective outcomes in an intergovernmental setting.

Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
National Politics ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Novel Theory ◽  
The Eu

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.

scholarly journals Inequalities in the European Union—A Partial Order Analysis of the Main Indicators

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann
Keyword(s):  
Indicator System ◽  
Partial Ordering ◽  
Disposable Income ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Educational Aspect ◽  
The Eu

The inequality within the 27 European member states has been studied. Six indicators proclaimed by Eurostat to be the main indicators charactere the countries: (i) the relative median at-risk-of-poverty gap, (ii) the income distribution, (iii) the income share of the bottom 40% of the population, (iv) the purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita, (v) the adjusted gross disposable income of households per capita and (vi) the asylum applications by state of procedure. The resulting multi-indicator system was analyzed applying partial ordering methodology, i.e., including all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. The degree of inequality was studied for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019. The EU member states were partially ordered and ranked. For all three years Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Finland are found to be highly ranked, i.e., having rather low inequality. Bulgaria and Romania are, on the other hand, for all three years ranked low, with the highest degree of inequality. Excluding the asylum indicator, the risk-poverty-gap and the adjusted gross disposable income were found as the most important indicators. If, however, the asylum application is included, this indicator turns out as the most important for the mutual ranking of the countries. A set of additional indicators was studied disclosing the educational aspect as of major importance to achieve equality. Special partial ordering tools were applied to study the role of the single indicators, e.g., in relation to elucidate the incomparability of some countries to all other countries within the union.

International Aspects of Investment Liberalization in the PRC: A Case of EU-China Cooperation

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-224
Author(s):  
D. A. Potapov
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Investment ◽  
World Order ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Foreign Investments ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
International Aspects ◽  
The Eu

The paper examines the role of investment cooperation and national foreign investment regime as a means to promote China’s economic and political interests and to respond to new global challenges that the country faces nowadays. To this end, the author examines the main stages of China’s liberalization of the legal regime for foreign investment from the end of the 1970s with a special focus on a new foreign investment law. In doing so the author attempts to link the evolution of investment regulation in the PRC with the dynamics of international relations development and the changing role of China as a regional and global actor. The author emphasizes that a trend towards the emergence of a polycentric world order not only provokes the rise of international tensions but also provides new incentives to promote dialogue and enhance cooperation between states and non-governmental actors, particularly by encouraging foreign investments. At the same time, there is a growing need to improve regulatory mechanisms for direct foreign investments. All these contradictory trends have directly affected China’s foreign investment regime reform. In this context the investment cooperation between the PRC and the European Union is of particular importance. The EU possesses a set of innovative technological solutions and competencies that are of particular interest to the Chinese leaders in the context of their efforts to modernize the country’s economy. The paper examines the volume, dynamics and key directions of investment flows between China and the EU member-states. The fact that after seven years of difficult negotiations, the EU and China managed to develop a special bilateral regulatory mechanism — EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment — underscores again the importance of this cooperation for both parties. Even though the EU has suspended the ratification of this deal on the pretext of human right violations in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, the author concludes, that in the future this agreement will come into force, since the very logic of the emerging polycentric world order urges for deeper cooperation between the EU and China. In this context, the investment regulation appears not only as a means to protect the Chinese economic interests, but also as an instrument to strengthen China’s international positions in the changing global context.

Ideological voting for radical right parties in Europe

Acta Politica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Ortiz Barquero ◽  
Antonia María Ruiz Jiménez ◽  
Manuel Tomás González-Fernández
Keyword(s):  
Party Systems ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Election Study ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Electoral Support ◽  
Political Dissatisfaction ◽  
Radical Right Parties ◽  
European Election ◽  
Ideological Voting

AbstractThe aim of this research is to examine to what extent the electoral support for radical right parties (RRPs) is driven by ‘policy voting’ and to compare this support with that of centre-right parties. Using the European Election Study 2019, we focus on six party systems: Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Austria, and the United Kingdom. Our analyses reveal that party preferences for RRPs are better explained by policy considerations than by other alternative explanations (e.g. by ‘globalization losers’ or ‘protest voting’). Additionally, the results show that although preferences for both party families are mainly rooted in ‘policy voting’, notable differences emerge when looking at the role of specific policy dimensions. Overall, these findings suggest that the support for RRPs cannot be understood fundamentally as a mere reaction against economic pauperization or political dissatisfaction but instead as an ideological decision based on rational choice models.

Neither here, not there: Bulgaria and Romania in current European politics☆

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor D. Bojkov
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
Eu Enlargement ◽  
Political Transition ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Politics ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Southeast Europe ◽  
The Eu

The article analyses the process of EU enlargement with reference to the progress that Bulgaria and Romania have made within it. It is argued that leaving them out of the wave of accession finalised in May 2004 for ten of the candidate states, has placed them in a situation of double exclusion. Firstly, their geographical belonging to the region of Southeast Europe has been rendered non-essential by their advanced position within the EU enlargement process. Secondly, their achievement in economic and political transition has been removed from the progress of the ten states, which joined the EU in May 2004 by delaying the time of their accession. As a result, any efforts in regional cooperation and integration between Bulgaria and Romania on one hand, and other Southeast European states on the other, have been effectively cancelled. Moreover, in current European politics, the two countries have come to serve the unenviable role of exemplifying on the part of the European Union how progress is being awarded and hesitation punished.

Turkey and Europe: The Role of Migration

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-399
Author(s):  
Pieter Emmer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Full Member ◽  
Turkish Immigrants ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Eu

In spite of the fact that negotiations have been going on for years, the chances that Turkey will eventually become a full member of the European Union are slim. At present, a political majority among the EU-member states headed by Germany seems to oppose Turkey entering the EU. In the Netherlands, however, most political parties are still in favour of Turkey's membership. That difference coincides with the difference in the position of Turkish immigrants in German and Dutch societies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document