scholarly journals What asylum and refugee policies do Europeans want? Evidence from a cross-national conjoint experiment

2021 ◽  
pp. 146511652110068
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Jeannet ◽  
Tobias Heidland ◽  
Martin Ruhs
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Conjoint Experiment ◽  
Refugee Policies ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees ◽  
Cross National

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.

scholarly journals One union, different futures? Public preferences for the EU's future and their explanations in 10 EU countries

2021 ◽  
pp. 146511652110341
Author(s):  
Andreas C Goldberg ◽  
Erika J van Elsas ◽  
Claes H de Vreese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Structural Position ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
The Past ◽  
National Differences ◽  
European Union Countries ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
Cross National

Most studies of public opinion towards the European Union focus on attitudes regarding the past and present of the European Union. This study fills a gap by addressing attitudes towards the European Union's future. We expand on a recently developed approach measuring preferences for eight concrete future European Union scenarios that represent the ongoing political and public debate, employing original survey data collected in 2019 in 10 European Union countries. We assess cross-national differences in the distribution of future European Union preferences, as well as in citizens’ motivations to prefer different variants of Europe in the future. The findings show citizens’ fine-grained future European Union preferences, which are meaningfully related to common explanations of European Union support. We also find cross-national differences linked to countries’ structural position within the European Union.

Political Cleavages across Nations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell J. Dalton
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Union Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Social ◽  
European Election ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Cross National

This chapter focuses on the variations in cleavage politics across the European Union member states. The analyses compare the structure of issue positions across nations to see if the set of issues defining the economic and cultural cleavages are comparable. While there is some cross-national variation, both cleavages are evident across the European Union. The social group positions on both cleavages are also broadly similar across nations. The chapter then examines the social correlates of cleavage positions to see if factors such as the economic structure or the religious composition of societies affect group alignments. The results emphasize the commonality of the basic patterns for the EU overall to the pattern in specific member states. The analyses are primarily based on the 2009 European Election Study.

The failure of regional refugee protection and responsibility sharing: Policy neglect in the EU and ASEAN

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-209
Author(s):  
Tamara Tubakovic
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
East Asian ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Policies ◽  
The Eu

The concurrent refugee crises affecting the European Union (EU) and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) brought to the fore long-standing issues regarding regional cooperation on refugee protection and responsibility sharing. This article argues that these crises are a culmination of years of policy neglect. By comparing the EU and ASEAN, this article demonstrates the weaknesses of regional bodies in responding to refugee challenges, regardless of the level of institutionalization of refugee norms and practices. In both instances, procedural norms privileging member state interests and consensus have hindered the development of durable regional refugee policies.

scholarly journals The Development of the Asylum Law and Refugee Protection Regimes in Portugal, 1975–2017

Refuge ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-37
Author(s):  
Lúcio Sousa ◽  
Paulo M. Costa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Asylum Law ◽  
Refugee Policies ◽  
Active Policy

This article examines the development of the legislation on asylum law and refugee policies in Portugal. The assessment begins in 1975, the year when democracy was re-established in the country, following the 1974 Carnation Revolution, and ends in 2015, the year the European asylum crisis started. We want to discuss whether, during this period, the policies established indicate an open regime, with an integrationist perspective, or whether they proclaim a closed regime with an exclusivist position; in other words, whether the asylum system promoted an active policy of receiving and integrating refugees, or whether the policies pursued intended to limit the access of refugees to the borders of the state. In order to understand these developments, we analyze asylum application figures and asylum laws, trying to understand the main circumstantial contexts that influence them, namely Portugal’s integration in the European Union.

scholarly journals Castaño avoids a clash between the ECtHR and the CJEU, but erodes Soering. Thinking human rights transnationally

2020 ◽  
pp. 203228442097974
Author(s):  
Sibel Top ◽  
Paul De Hert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Union Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
European Union Member States

This article examines the changing balance established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between human rights filters to extradition and the obligation to cooperate and how this shift of rationale brought the Court closer to the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in that respect. The article argues that the ECtHR initially adopted a position whereby it prioritised human rights concerns over extraditions, but that it later nuanced that approach by establishing, in some cases, an obligation to cooperate to ensure proper respect of human rights. This refinement of its position brought the ECtHR closer to the approach adopted by the CJEU that traditionally put the obligation to cooperate above human rights concerns. In recent years, however, the CJEU also backtracked to some extent from its uncompromising attitude on the obligation to cooperate, which enabled a convergence of the rationales of the two Courts. Although this alignment of the Courts was necessary to mitigate the conflicting obligations of European Union Member States towards both Courts, this article warns against the danger of making too many human rights concessions to cooperation in criminal matters.

scholarly journals The #Brexit on the Facebook pages of the European institutions

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanase Tasente
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Online Environment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Public Events ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Facebook Pages ◽  
High Engagement

The Brexit referendum was among the first major public events where online users had no "slacktivism" reactions and they led the entire debate and popular will from the inside of the online world to the real world. It is becoming increasingly clear that Social Media is becoming an increasingly powerful tool in political debates, and during the parliamentary, presidential, European parliamentary or even referendum elections, it becomes the channel that can decide the final outcome. However, the debate in the online environment can be altered by two important factors: (1) political bots - which can manipulate public opinion by posting in a large number of fake news and (2) "slacktivism" reactions from online users. , who are content only to quickly distribute unverified information or to push impulse driven on the "like" button and to scroll further. This study focused on analyzing the frequency with which European institutions spoke about Brexit on their Facebook pages and on identifying and analyzing the messages that generate high engagement from users. Thus, we will analyze all the posts published by the three major European institutions - the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union - starting on the first day after the Brexit Referendum in the UK (24 June 2016) until 24 June 2019.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document