Pub Date : 2022-07-20DOI: 10.1177/14651165221096801
{"title":"EUP Referees 1 January 2020– 31 March 2022","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/14651165221096801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221096801","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"560 - 563"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43105514","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 : 2022-07-15DOI: 10.1177/14651165221111985
Bartolomeo Cappellina, Anne Ausfelder, Adam Eick, Romain Mespoulet, M. Hartlapp, Sabine Saurugger, Fabien Terpan
What characterizes European Union soft law and what are its implications for the EU multilevel system? What is the proportion of hard and soft law in EU policy? Which types of soft law act are adopted in different policy sectors? This article introduces the conceptual and analytical framework that encompasses the EfSoLaw dataset and explains its methodology, advantages, and limitations. This dataset unites information on thousands of EU hard and soft law acts from seven different policy sectors, drawn from over fifteen years (2004–2019) and from various sources (EUR-Lex, DGs, agencies). We present implementation options of the dataset making it exploitable for other scholars and we propose hypotheses to explain the variation in the adoption of soft law in different policy sectors.
{"title":"Ever more soft law? A dataset to compare binding and non-binding EU law across policy areas and over time (2004–2019)","authors":"Bartolomeo Cappellina, Anne Ausfelder, Adam Eick, Romain Mespoulet, M. Hartlapp, Sabine Saurugger, Fabien Terpan","doi":"10.1177/14651165221111985","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221111985","url":null,"abstract":"What characterizes European Union soft law and what are its implications for the EU multilevel system? What is the proportion of hard and soft law in EU policy? Which types of soft law act are adopted in different policy sectors? This article introduces the conceptual and analytical framework that encompasses the EfSoLaw dataset and explains its methodology, advantages, and limitations. This dataset unites information on thousands of EU hard and soft law acts from seven different policy sectors, drawn from over fifteen years (2004–2019) and from various sources (EUR-Lex, DGs, agencies). We present implementation options of the dataset making it exploitable for other scholars and we propose hypotheses to explain the variation in the adoption of soft law in different policy sectors.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"741 - 757"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45554348","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 : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1177/14651165221107100
I. Jurado
This article analyses the effect of economic assessments on attitudes towards the European Union. The literature has mostly studied this question with observational data (which does not allow to establish a causal link), and has not explored how different countries's experiences during economic hardship shape opinions about the European Union. To account for this, I run a survey vignette experiment in Germany – a creditor countries's during the Great Recession – and Spain – a debtor country. I find that having worse perceptions about the impact of the crisis erodes attitudes towards the European Union. The mechanism is, however, different across countries. In Germany, worse economic evaluations reduce the perception that the European Union is a beneficial project. Conversely, in Spain, negative assessments about the financial crisis are linked to beliefs that democratic representation is limited in the European Union. These results are relevant to understand the conditions and mechanisms by which attitudes towards the European Union are worsened.
{"title":"Economic perceptions and attitudes towards the European Union: A survey experiment","authors":"I. Jurado","doi":"10.1177/14651165221107100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221107100","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the effect of economic assessments on attitudes towards the European Union. The literature has mostly studied this question with observational data (which does not allow to establish a causal link), and has not explored how different countries's experiences during economic hardship shape opinions about the European Union. To account for this, I run a survey vignette experiment in Germany – a creditor countries's during the Great Recession – and Spain – a debtor country. I find that having worse perceptions about the impact of the crisis erodes attitudes towards the European Union. The mechanism is, however, different across countries. In Germany, worse economic evaluations reduce the perception that the European Union is a beneficial project. Conversely, in Spain, negative assessments about the financial crisis are linked to beliefs that democratic representation is limited in the European Union. These results are relevant to understand the conditions and mechanisms by which attitudes towards the European Union are worsened.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"721 - 728"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42110334","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 : 2022-06-19DOI: 10.1177/14651165221098501
Michele Fenzl, Jonathan B. Slapin, Samuel Wilhelm
This study examines the effect of voters’ ideological extremism on turnout in European national and European Parliament elections. Using data from recent European Election Studies, the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, and other national election studies, we find that, relative to centrists, ideological extremists (measured by self-placement on the left–right scales) are more likely to vote in European Parliament elections (2014 and 2019) but not national elections. We argue that these differences stem from the fact that European Parliament elections are second-order races. The results help to explain why the European Parliament has become more polarized, even in the absence of significant changes in overall attitudes among the European public, and why extreme parties have been more successful in recent European Parliament than national elections.
{"title":"From polarization of the public to polarization of the electorate: European Parliament elections as the preferred race for ideologues","authors":"Michele Fenzl, Jonathan B. Slapin, Samuel Wilhelm","doi":"10.1177/14651165221098501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221098501","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the effect of voters’ ideological extremism on turnout in European national and European Parliament elections. Using data from recent European Election Studies, the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, and other national election studies, we find that, relative to centrists, ideological extremists (measured by self-placement on the left–right scales) are more likely to vote in European Parliament elections (2014 and 2019) but not national elections. We argue that these differences stem from the fact that European Parliament elections are second-order races. The results help to explain why the European Parliament has become more polarized, even in the absence of significant changes in overall attitudes among the European public, and why extreme parties have been more successful in recent European Parliament than national elections.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"590 - 611"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45103285","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 : 2022-06-14DOI: 10.1177/14651165221103026
Konstantin Gavras, M. Mader, Harald Schoen
Since the end of the Cold War, the EU aims to advance to a relevant and autonomous actor in international politics—especially concerning security and defense politics. Scholars interested in whether the EU member states actually converge in their security and defense preferences often analyze strategy papers qualitatively, focusing on selected countries at specific points in time. In this article, we propose a dictionary approach for analyzing the development of security and defense preferences within the EU over the last three decades using quantitative text analysis. We make use of 163 strategy papers, published by all EU member states and the EU itself since 1994. The findings show that EU member states react similarly to international events, but do not converge substantially in their preferences. Furthermore, there is no substantial convergence to the position of the EU itself. We finally discuss usefulness and validity of quantitative text analysis in comparative research more broadly.
{"title":"Convergence of European security and defense preferences? A quantitative text analysis of strategy papers, 1994–2018","authors":"Konstantin Gavras, M. Mader, Harald Schoen","doi":"10.1177/14651165221103026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221103026","url":null,"abstract":"Since the end of the Cold War, the EU aims to advance to a relevant and autonomous actor in international politics—especially concerning security and defense politics. Scholars interested in whether the EU member states actually converge in their security and defense preferences often analyze strategy papers qualitatively, focusing on selected countries at specific points in time. In this article, we propose a dictionary approach for analyzing the development of security and defense preferences within the EU over the last three decades using quantitative text analysis. We make use of 163 strategy papers, published by all EU member states and the EU itself since 1994. The findings show that EU member states react similarly to international events, but do not converge substantially in their preferences. Furthermore, there is no substantial convergence to the position of the EU itself. We finally discuss usefulness and validity of quantitative text analysis in comparative research more broadly.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"662 - 679"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46458444","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 : 2022-06-07DOI: 10.1177/14651165221104907
Thomas Winzen
Does differentiated integration undermine the motivation of parliamentarians from less integrated member states to become involved in European Union affairs? Focusing on the European Union's new interparliamentary conferences in economic governance, and justice and home affairs, this study examines whether voluntary and involuntary as well as comprehensive and partial differentiation influence parliamentary involvement, measured as participation in interparliamentary conferences. Based on new data and Coarsened Exact Matching, the results indicate that the effect of differentiation depends on its political origins and design. Only voluntary and comprehensive differentiation depress parliamentary involvement. The results can be seen as favourable regarding the legitimacy of differentiation and compatible with the European Union's ambition to limit the institutional implications of differentiation. They also indicate a targeted parliamentary response to differentiated integration.
{"title":"Does differentiated integration weaken parliamentary involvement? Evidence from the European Union's interparliamentary conferences","authors":"Thomas Winzen","doi":"10.1177/14651165221104907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221104907","url":null,"abstract":"Does differentiated integration undermine the motivation of parliamentarians from less integrated member states to become involved in European Union affairs? Focusing on the European Union's new interparliamentary conferences in economic governance, and justice and home affairs, this study examines whether voluntary and involuntary as well as comprehensive and partial differentiation influence parliamentary involvement, measured as participation in interparliamentary conferences. Based on new data and Coarsened Exact Matching, the results indicate that the effect of differentiation depends on its political origins and design. Only voluntary and comprehensive differentiation depress parliamentary involvement. The results can be seen as favourable regarding the legitimacy of differentiation and compatible with the European Union's ambition to limit the institutional implications of differentiation. They also indicate a targeted parliamentary response to differentiated integration.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"24 1","pages":"42 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43979626","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 : 2022-05-26DOI: 10.1177/14651165221102696
J. Cova
As part of the European Semester, the European Commission issues country-specific recommendations for all member states. I contribute to the literature on this political instrument, by considering the determinants of recommendations calling for greater wage moderation and enhanced cost competitiveness. For the most part, research on European economic governance has either understood the European Commission as a politicized and ‘ideological’ institution or as a de-politicized, technocratic actor. My analysis shows that the European Commission's ideological preferences on labour markets and wage bargaining institutions are more convincing predictors than explanations based on economic indicators. By testing a series of multilevel models, I find that irrespective of developments in competitiveness, countries with stronger social actors are more likely to be recipients of country-specific recommendations calling for wage restraint.
{"title":"Reconsidering the drivers of country-specific recommendations: The Commission's ideological preferences on wage policies","authors":"J. Cova","doi":"10.1177/14651165221102696","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221102696","url":null,"abstract":"As part of the European Semester, the European Commission issues country-specific recommendations for all member states. I contribute to the literature on this political instrument, by considering the determinants of recommendations calling for greater wage moderation and enhanced cost competitiveness. For the most part, research on European economic governance has either understood the European Commission as a politicized and ‘ideological’ institution or as a de-politicized, technocratic actor. My analysis shows that the European Commission's ideological preferences on labour markets and wage bargaining institutions are more convincing predictors than explanations based on economic indicators. By testing a series of multilevel models, I find that irrespective of developments in competitiveness, countries with stronger social actors are more likely to be recipients of country-specific recommendations calling for wage restraint.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"639 - 661"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47851346","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 : 2022-05-24DOI: 10.1177/14651165221101505
Elske van den Hoogen, Stijn Daenekindt, W. de Koster, J. van der Waal
While ample research has scrutinised the causes and consequences of support for the European Union, a pressing question remains: what do people actually mean when they express support for, or opposition to, their country’s membership of the institution? We use Correlational Class Analysis to assess this. Our analysis of high-quality representative Dutch survey data (n = 2053), including novel items informed by in-depth qualitative research, reveals that European Union support comes in three guises: federalist, non-federalist and instrumental-pragmatist Strikingly, many Europhiles are not federalists. In addition, we reveal that the social bases of the three types of support especially differ regarding political competence, political orientation, and media consumption. The implications for ongoing debates on European Union atttidues are discussed.
{"title":"Support for European Union membership comes in various guises: Evidence from a Correlational Class Analysis of novel Dutch survey data","authors":"Elske van den Hoogen, Stijn Daenekindt, W. de Koster, J. van der Waal","doi":"10.1177/14651165221101505","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221101505","url":null,"abstract":"While ample research has scrutinised the causes and consequences of support for the European Union, a pressing question remains: what do people actually mean when they express support for, or opposition to, their country’s membership of the institution? We use Correlational Class Analysis to assess this. Our analysis of high-quality representative Dutch survey data (n = 2053), including novel items informed by in-depth qualitative research, reveals that European Union support comes in three guises: federalist, non-federalist and instrumental-pragmatist Strikingly, many Europhiles are not federalists. In addition, we reveal that the social bases of the three types of support especially differ regarding political competence, political orientation, and media consumption. The implications for ongoing debates on European Union atttidues are discussed.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"489 - 508"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46917489","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 : 2022-05-16DOI: 10.1177/14651165221098487
Markus Gastinger, Eugénia C. Heldt
One key question in the study of the European Union has always been the extent of Commission discretion. We take the discretion index, typically used by principal–agent scholars to measure the Commission's designed discretion, to measure its actual discretion. Commission designed discretion can today be computationally generated with sufficient accuracy across all secondary acts. The study of designed discretion thus reaches considerable maturity. Therefore, we argue that scholars should prioritize studying Commission actual discretion. We present a systematic and transparent investigative technique based on the discretion index, which we use as a roadmap to guide our empirical investigation. The index facilitates the accumulation of knowledge across policy areas and time by providing exact values for Commission discretion. We illustrate our approach with the Development Cooperation Instrument.
{"title":"Measuring actual discretion of the European Commission: Using the discretion index to guide empirical research","authors":"Markus Gastinger, Eugénia C. Heldt","doi":"10.1177/14651165221098487","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221098487","url":null,"abstract":"One key question in the study of the European Union has always been the extent of Commission discretion. We take the discretion index, typically used by principal–agent scholars to measure the Commission's designed discretion, to measure its actual discretion. Commission designed discretion can today be computationally generated with sufficient accuracy across all secondary acts. The study of designed discretion thus reaches considerable maturity. Therefore, we argue that scholars should prioritize studying Commission actual discretion. We present a systematic and transparent investigative technique based on the discretion index, which we use as a roadmap to guide our empirical investigation. The index facilitates the accumulation of knowledge across policy areas and time by providing exact values for Commission discretion. We illustrate our approach with the Development Cooperation Instrument.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"541 - 558"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41583479","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 : 2022-05-13DOI: 10.1177/14651165221098541
Sebastian Blesse, M. Bordignon, P. Boyer, P. Carapella, F. Heinemann, E. Janeba, Anasuya Raj
Using data from a unique survey of members of parliaments in France, Germany and Italy in 2018, we estimate the effects of three dimensions on EU and Euro Area fiscal reform preferences: nationality, political ideology and populism. We predict and confirm that a German populist party on the right is most opposed to a more developed European fiscal union, while a non-populist politician on the political left in France or Italy is most integrationist. Furthermore, the relative position of French and Italian policymakers is issue dependent and the left dimension outweighs the German dimension in two out of seven reform issues. Finally, populism intensifies the polarizing impact of national interests.
{"title":"European fiscal reform preferences of parliamentarians in France, Germany and Italy","authors":"Sebastian Blesse, M. Bordignon, P. Boyer, P. Carapella, F. Heinemann, E. Janeba, Anasuya Raj","doi":"10.1177/14651165221098541","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221098541","url":null,"abstract":"Using data from a unique survey of members of parliaments in France, Germany and Italy in 2018, we estimate the effects of three dimensions on EU and Euro Area fiscal reform preferences: nationality, political ideology and populism. We predict and confirm that a German populist party on the right is most opposed to a more developed European fiscal union, while a non-populist politician on the political left in France or Italy is most integrationist. Furthermore, the relative position of French and Italian policymakers is issue dependent and the left dimension outweighs the German dimension in two out of seven reform issues. Finally, populism intensifies the polarizing impact of national interests.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"529 - 540"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47708262","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：