Pub Date : 2021-09-06DOI: 10.1177/14651165211040337
D. Braun, Constantin Schäfer
In light of the unexpectedly high turnout in the 2019 European Parliament election, we explore how major transnational policy issues mobilize voters in European electoral contests. Based on the analysis of two data sets, the Eurobarometer post-election survey and the RECONNECT panel survey, we make three important observations. First, European citizens show a higher tendency to participate in European Parliament elections when they attribute greater importance to the issues ‘climate change and environment’, ‘economy and growth’, and ‘immigration’. Second, having a more extreme opinion on the issue of ‘European integration’ increases people's likelihood to vote in European elections. Third, the mobilizing effect of personal issue importance is enhanced by the systemic salience that the respective policy issue has during the election campaign. These findings show the relevance of issue mobilization in European Parliament elections as well as its context-dependent nature.
{"title":"Issues that mobilize Europe. The role of key policy issues for voter turnout in the 2019 European Parliament election","authors":"D. Braun, Constantin Schäfer","doi":"10.1177/14651165211040337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211040337","url":null,"abstract":"In light of the unexpectedly high turnout in the 2019 European Parliament election, we explore how major transnational policy issues mobilize voters in European electoral contests. Based on the analysis of two data sets, the Eurobarometer post-election survey and the RECONNECT panel survey, we make three important observations. First, European citizens show a higher tendency to participate in European Parliament elections when they attribute greater importance to the issues ‘climate change and environment’, ‘economy and growth’, and ‘immigration’. Second, having a more extreme opinion on the issue of ‘European integration’ increases people's likelihood to vote in European elections. Third, the mobilizing effect of personal issue importance is enhanced by the systemic salience that the respective policy issue has during the election campaign. These findings show the relevance of issue mobilization in European Parliament elections as well as its context-dependent nature.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"120 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42611356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-05DOI: 10.1177/14651165211032766
S. Hobolt, Sebastian A. Popa, Wouter van der Brug, H. Schmitt
What are the effects on public support for the European Union (EU) when a member state exits? We examine this question in the context of Britain's momentous decision to leave the EU. Combining analyses of the European Election Study 2019 and a unique survey-embedded experiment conducted in all member states, we analyse the effect of Brexit on support for membership among citizens in the EU-27. The experimental evidence shows that while information about the negative economic consequences of Brexit had no significant effect, positive information about Britain's sovereignty significantly increased optimism about leaving the EU. Our findings suggest that Brexit acts as a benchmark for citizens’ evaluations of EU membership across EU-27, and that it may not continue to act as a deterrent in the future.
{"title":"The Brexit deterrent? How member state exit shapes public support for the European Union","authors":"S. Hobolt, Sebastian A. Popa, Wouter van der Brug, H. Schmitt","doi":"10.1177/14651165211032766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211032766","url":null,"abstract":"What are the effects on public support for the European Union (EU) when a member state exits? We examine this question in the context of Britain's momentous decision to leave the EU. Combining analyses of the European Election Study 2019 and a unique survey-embedded experiment conducted in all member states, we analyse the effect of Brexit on support for membership among citizens in the EU-27. The experimental evidence shows that while information about the negative economic consequences of Brexit had no significant effect, positive information about Britain's sovereignty significantly increased optimism about leaving the EU. Our findings suggest that Brexit acts as a benchmark for citizens’ evaluations of EU membership across EU-27, and that it may not continue to act as a deterrent in the future.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"100 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45139709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/14651165211038077
{"title":"SAGE Award for the best article published in European Union Politics, Volume 21","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/14651165211038077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211038077","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"586 - 586"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46572731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/1465116520926004
{"title":"Corrigendum to “If you can beat them, confront them: Party-level analysis of opposition behavior in European national parliaments”","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1465116520926004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116520926004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"587 - 587"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1465116520926004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49228976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-05DOI: 10.1177/14651165211035054
A. Pellegata, Francesco Visconti
This article investigates whether public preferences for European solidarity are associated with vote choices in the 2019 European elections. After multiple crises, the politicisation of European Union affairs has increased, polarising voters and parties between those favouring the redistribution of risks across member states and those prioritising national responsibility in coping with the consequences of the crises. We expect pro-solidarity voters to be more prone to vote for green and radical-left parties and less prone to vote for conservative and radical-right parties. Testing these hypotheses in 10 European Union countries with original survey data, we find that green and radical-left parties profited from European solidarity voting only in some countries, while being pro-solidarity reduced the likelihood of voting for both moderate and radical-right parties in each sample country.
{"title":"Voting for a social Europe? European solidarity and voting behaviour in the 2019 European elections","authors":"A. Pellegata, Francesco Visconti","doi":"10.1177/14651165211035054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211035054","url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates whether public preferences for European solidarity are associated with vote choices in the 2019 European elections. After multiple crises, the politicisation of European Union affairs has increased, polarising voters and parties between those favouring the redistribution of risks across member states and those prioritising national responsibility in coping with the consequences of the crises. We expect pro-solidarity voters to be more prone to vote for green and radical-left parties and less prone to vote for conservative and radical-right parties. Testing these hypotheses in 10 European Union countries with original survey data, we find that green and radical-left parties profited from European solidarity voting only in some countries, while being pro-solidarity reduced the likelihood of voting for both moderate and radical-right parties in each sample country.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"79 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211035054","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43978049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-05DOI: 10.1177/14651165211035663
Alexia Katsanidou, A. Reinl, Christina Eder
After more than a decade of consecutive crises, the issue of transnational solidarity is becoming increasingly relevant for the European Union. This research note compares the current coronavirus disease-2019 crisis to previous ones and investigates the willingness of European Union citizens to show solidarity towards fellow member states. We test the influence of socio-political attitudes of citizens on solidarity preferences in three crisis scenarios. We analyse Greece and Germany as cases differently affected by the past decade's crises and cases that chose different crisis management strategies when facing the novel virus. Our findings indicate that solidarity is highest in a pandemic, while for all crisis scenarios it is higher in Greece than in Germany. Despite variations in the degree of solidarity associated relationships with socio-political attitudes remain consistent.
{"title":"Together we stand? Transnational solidarity in the EU in times of crises","authors":"Alexia Katsanidou, A. Reinl, Christina Eder","doi":"10.1177/14651165211035663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211035663","url":null,"abstract":"After more than a decade of consecutive crises, the issue of transnational solidarity is becoming increasingly relevant for the European Union. This research note compares the current coronavirus disease-2019 crisis to previous ones and investigates the willingness of European Union citizens to show solidarity towards fellow member states. We test the influence of socio-political attitudes of citizens on solidarity preferences in three crisis scenarios. We analyse Greece and Germany as cases differently affected by the past decade's crises and cases that chose different crisis management strategies when facing the novel virus. Our findings indicate that solidarity is highest in a pandemic, while for all crisis scenarios it is higher in Greece than in Germany. Despite variations in the degree of solidarity associated relationships with socio-political attitudes remain consistent.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"66 - 78"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211035663","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43387115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-03DOI: 10.1177/14651165211035060
Sara Norrevik
What is the role of economic interdependence with foreign powers when legislators vote on foreign policies? Foreign aid and trade are among the European Union’s most important foreign policy instruments, over which the European Parliament has veto power. Yet, few studies address foreign economic policy voting in European Parliament scholarship. This study presents a new theoretical model about economic interdependence and foreign policy positioning in the European Parliament. I argue that economic interdependence with major foreign powers is associated with legislators’ foreign policy positions. Analysing European Parliament votes concerning aid and trade with Ukraine, I show a statistical association between Members of the European Parliaments with high levels of Russian Foreign Direct Investment in their electoral districts and voting against aid and trade with Ukraine (supporting the pro-Russian policy). These findings offer new insights on Members of the European Parliaments’ position-taking in foreign economic policy decisions that have global economic and political ramifications.
{"title":"Foreign economic policy in the European Parliament and economic interdependence with foreign powers","authors":"Sara Norrevik","doi":"10.1177/14651165211035060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211035060","url":null,"abstract":"What is the role of economic interdependence with foreign powers when legislators vote on foreign policies? Foreign aid and trade are among the European Union’s most important foreign policy instruments, over which the European Parliament has veto power. Yet, few studies address foreign economic policy voting in European Parliament scholarship. This study presents a new theoretical model about economic interdependence and foreign policy positioning in the European Parliament. I argue that economic interdependence with major foreign powers is associated with legislators’ foreign policy positions. Analysing European Parliament votes concerning aid and trade with Ukraine, I show a statistical association between Members of the European Parliaments with high levels of Russian Foreign Direct Investment in their electoral districts and voting against aid and trade with Ukraine (supporting the pro-Russian policy). These findings offer new insights on Members of the European Parliaments’ position-taking in foreign economic policy decisions that have global economic and political ramifications.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"700 - 720"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211035060","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48124181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-03DOI: 10.1177/14651165211034150
Andreas C. Goldberg, Erika van Elsas, Claes H. de Vreese
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.
{"title":"One union, different futures? Public preferences for the EU's future and their explanations in 10 EU countries","authors":"Andreas C. Goldberg, Erika van Elsas, Claes H. de Vreese","doi":"10.1177/14651165211034150","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211034150","url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"721 - 740"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211034150","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46677215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-14DOI: 10.1177/14651165211030428
Eddy S. F. Yeung
A number of studies have established a strong link between anti-immigration and Eurosceptic attitudes. But does this relationship necessarily imply that more immigration would increase public Euroscepticism in member states of the European Union? I evaluate this question by analyzing immigration data and Eurobarometer survey data over the period 2009–2017. The analysis shows no evidence that individual levels of Euroscepticism increase with actual levels of immigration. This result suggests that a strong link between anti-immigration and Eurosceptic attitudes does not necessarily translate into a strong link between immigration levels and public Euroscepticism. Public Euroscepticism can still be low even if immigration levels are high.
{"title":"Does immigration boost public Euroscepticism in European Union member states?","authors":"Eddy S. F. Yeung","doi":"10.1177/14651165211030428","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211030428","url":null,"abstract":"A number of studies have established a strong link between anti-immigration and Eurosceptic attitudes. But does this relationship necessarily imply that more immigration would increase public Euroscepticism in member states of the European Union? I evaluate this question by analyzing immigration data and Eurobarometer survey data over the period 2009–2017. The analysis shows no evidence that individual levels of Euroscepticism increase with actual levels of immigration. This result suggests that a strong link between anti-immigration and Eurosceptic attitudes does not necessarily translate into a strong link between immigration levels and public Euroscepticism. Public Euroscepticism can still be low even if immigration levels are high.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"631 - 654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211030428","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49391094","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-06DOI: 10.1177/14651165211027472
J. Koedam
In a multidimensional environment, parties may have compelling incentives to obscure their preferences on select issues. This study contributes to a growing literature on position blurring by demonstrating how party leaders purposively create uncertainty about where their party stands on the issue of European integration. By doing so, it theoretically and empirically disentangles the cause of position blurring—parties’ strategic behavior—from its intended political outcome. The analysis of survey and manifesto data across 14 Western European countries (1999–2019) confirms that three distinct strategies—avoidance, ambiguity, and alternation—all increase expert uncertainty about a party's position. This finding is then unpacked by examining for whom avoidance is particularly effective. This study has important implications for our understanding of party strategy, democratic representation, and political accountability.
{"title":"Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition","authors":"J. Koedam","doi":"10.1177/14651165211027472","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211027472","url":null,"abstract":"In a multidimensional environment, parties may have compelling incentives to obscure their preferences on select issues. This study contributes to a growing literature on position blurring by demonstrating how party leaders purposively create uncertainty about where their party stands on the issue of European integration. By doing so, it theoretically and empirically disentangles the cause of position blurring—parties’ strategic behavior—from its intended political outcome. The analysis of survey and manifesto data across 14 Western European countries (1999–2019) confirms that three distinct strategies—avoidance, ambiguity, and alternation—all increase expert uncertainty about a party's position. This finding is then unpacked by examining for whom avoidance is particularly effective. This study has important implications for our understanding of party strategy, democratic representation, and political accountability.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"655 - 675"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211027472","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41504674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：