The EU's Information Deficit: Comparing Political Knowledge across Levels of Governance

Nicholas Clark
{"title":"The EU's Information Deficit: Comparing Political Knowledge across Levels of Governance","authors":"Nicholas Clark","doi":"10.1080/15705854.2014.896158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Over the last 20 years, several scholars have argued that the legitimacy of the European Union (EU) suffers from an alarming level of public apathy toward EU affairs. Such critiques often assume that the public is largely ignorant about EU politics. However, we have yet to empirically determine the extent to which Europeans understand the EU or to identify the conditions that lead the public to become better informed about European politics. Given the higher salience of national issues and the greater media attention devoted to national politics, I theorize that most individuals indeed know more about their national government than the EU. Using data from Eurobarometer 61.0 and the 2009 European Election Study, I find individuals indeed perform worse on knowledge batteries at the European level. To better explain the public's understanding of EU affairs, I then model a number of micro- and macro-level predictors of knowledge and find that some of the usual suspects (such as education and the media) influence EU knowledge. Implications are drawn for the study of political behaviour in multilevel political systems.","PeriodicalId":186367,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on European Politics and Society","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on European Politics and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15705854.2014.896158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Abstract Over the last 20 years, several scholars have argued that the legitimacy of the European Union (EU) suffers from an alarming level of public apathy toward EU affairs. Such critiques often assume that the public is largely ignorant about EU politics. However, we have yet to empirically determine the extent to which Europeans understand the EU or to identify the conditions that lead the public to become better informed about European politics. Given the higher salience of national issues and the greater media attention devoted to national politics, I theorize that most individuals indeed know more about their national government than the EU. Using data from Eurobarometer 61.0 and the 2009 European Election Study, I find individuals indeed perform worse on knowledge batteries at the European level. To better explain the public's understanding of EU affairs, I then model a number of micro- and macro-level predictors of knowledge and find that some of the usual suspects (such as education and the media) influence EU knowledge. Implications are drawn for the study of political behaviour in multilevel political systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟的信息赤字:跨治理水平的政治知识比较
在过去的20年里,一些学者认为,欧盟(EU)的合法性受到公众对欧盟事务冷漠程度的影响。这类批评往往假设公众对欧盟政治基本上一无所知。然而,我们还没有从经验上确定欧洲人对欧盟的了解程度,也没有确定导致公众更好地了解欧洲政治的条件。考虑到国家问题的高度突出和媒体对国家政治的更多关注,我的理论是,大多数人确实比欧盟更了解他们的国家政府。使用Eurobarometer 61.0和2009年欧洲选举研究的数据,我发现个人在欧洲层面的知识电池方面确实表现较差。为了更好地解释公众对欧盟事务的理解,我随后对一些微观和宏观层面的知识预测因素进行了建模,并发现一些常见的怀疑因素(如教育和媒体)影响了欧盟的知识。这对研究多层次政治系统中的政治行为具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board page The EU as a global security actor: a comprehensive analysis beyond CFSP and JHA The Coverage of the Eurozone Economic Crisis in the British Press Instrumental Europeans? Minority Nationalist Parties’ Discourse on the European Union: The Case of UK Meso-Elections 1998–2011 Official Discrepancies: Kosovo Independence and Western European Rhetoric
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1