Pub Date : 2022-10-11DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1227
Anna Elomäki, Barbara Gaweda
The European Semester, the foundation of postcrisis economic governance in the European Union (EU), has become the locus of struggle between the economic and social goals of the EU. The persistent hierarchy of social and economic goals and subsuming of social policies to market-making logic have been at the centre of scholarly and political discussions about the Semester since its inception. This article examines how the European Parliament (EP), the EU’s representative institution, engages with the social/economic relationship within the technocratic and expert-led Semester and what political and ideological alternatives the EP proposes. We ask where and what are the key conflicts within the EP regarding the social dimension of economic governance and how they affect policy outcomes. By discursively exploring the EP reports on the European Semester for the 2014-19 term and analysing the conflicts between political groups and between the EP committees, the article argues that the EP takes an ambiguous and contradictory position on the relationship between economic and social governance and does not provide a real alternative to the status quo.
{"title":"Looking for the ‘Social’ in the European Semester: The Ambiguous ‘Socialisation’ of EU Economic Governance in the European Parliament","authors":"Anna Elomäki, Barbara Gaweda","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1227","url":null,"abstract":"The European Semester, the foundation of postcrisis economic governance in the European Union (EU), has become the locus of struggle between the economic and social goals of the EU. The persistent hierarchy of social and economic goals and subsuming of social policies to market-making logic have been at the centre of scholarly and political discussions about the Semester since its inception. This article examines how the European Parliament (EP), the EU’s representative institution, engages with the social/economic relationship within the technocratic and expert-led Semester and what political and ideological alternatives the EP proposes. We ask where and what are the key conflicts within the EP regarding the social dimension of economic governance and how they affect policy outcomes. By discursively exploring the EP reports on the European Semester for the 2014-19 term and analysing the conflicts between political groups and between the EP committees, the article argues that the EP takes an ambiguous and contradictory position on the relationship between economic and social governance and does not provide a real alternative to the status quo.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44741216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-11DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1189
M. Westlake
Despite a growing body of academic literature about the European Union’s public administration, there is a dearth of studies about the most senior managers in the institutions, the Secretaries-General. Consideration of the rich life of the late Sir Julian Priestley, an influential Secretary-General (SG) of the European Parliament, 1997-2007, demonstrates not only how Secretaries-General can be interesting subjects of study in their own right, but also how such SGs can, through the decisions they take and the policies they champion, be consequential for their institutions.
{"title":"Sir Julian Priestley (1950-2017), Secretary General of the European Parliament, 1997-2007: A case study of a consequential senior European Union civil servant","authors":"M. Westlake","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1189","url":null,"abstract":"Despite a growing body of academic literature about the European Union’s public administration, there is a dearth of studies about the most senior managers in the institutions, the Secretaries-General. Consideration of the rich life of the late Sir Julian Priestley, an influential Secretary-General (SG) of the European Parliament, 1997-2007, demonstrates not only how Secretaries-General can be interesting subjects of study in their own right, but also how such SGs can, through the decisions they take and the policies they champion, be consequential for their institutions.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41805878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-20DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1210
Cornelia-Adriana Baciu, Dominika Kunertova
Drawing on a Foucauldian philosophy of thought, this article proposes the concept of co-relational power, substantively understood as non-zero sum (positive) power – i. e. the power of one actor is not detrimental to the power of another actor, but it is instead a sum of cooperative interactions between actors. We argue that, in a context of competitive multipolarity, international collaborative security organisations, such as NATO and the EU, seek to adapt and to develop progressive and evolutionary grand strategies that can remain stable over time. Our analysis shows that both NATO and the EU are faced with geopolitical dilemmas while they seek to adapt to the new international order and constellation of threats. The main contribution of this article is that it produces new knowledge about the conceptual underpinnings and practical implications of a concept of non-zero sum (positive) concept of co-relational power, that can help understand how collaborative security organisations can become stabilising and re-enforcing pillars in the international rules-based order (‘building blocks of order’) without entering the spiral of great power competition but instead pursuing strategies that are progressive for a stable international development.
{"title":"Progressive Grand Strategy, Co-Relational Power and Geopolitical Dilemmas. NATO and the EU in A Competitive Multipolar System","authors":"Cornelia-Adriana Baciu, Dominika Kunertova","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1210","url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on a Foucauldian philosophy of thought, this article proposes the concept of co-relational power, substantively understood as non-zero sum (positive) power – i. e. the power of one actor is not detrimental to the power of another actor, but it is instead a sum of cooperative interactions between actors. We argue that, in a context of competitive multipolarity, international collaborative security organisations, such as NATO and the EU, seek to adapt and to develop progressive and evolutionary grand strategies that can remain stable over time. Our analysis shows that both NATO and the EU are faced with geopolitical dilemmas while they seek to adapt to the new international order and constellation of threats. The main contribution of this article is that it produces new knowledge about the conceptual underpinnings and practical implications of a concept of non-zero sum (positive) concept of co-relational power, that can help understand how collaborative security organisations can become stabilising and re-enforcing pillars in the international rules-based order (‘building blocks of order’) without entering the spiral of great power competition but instead pursuing strategies that are progressive for a stable international development. ","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47707542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1243
Angélica Szucko
Following the 2016 British referendum, Theresa May was officially appointed as PM. She was classed as a weak PM, and her legacy was considered a huge failure in Brexit negotiations. Yet, few analyses focus on how she became a PM in such a challenging moment for UK-EU relations. This article explores the paths that lead May to this position, based on the glass cliff literature. Then, May’s brinkmanship strategy on Brexit is analysed in light of Complex Adaptive Systems’ approach to crises. We apply the CDE model to understand May’s response to the Brexit vote. Finally, the concept of men glass cushion will be introduced to explain May’s replacement by Boris Johnson. This work joins efforts to employ perspectives from other areas, such as administration and psychology, to understand women in leadership roles and to bring light to the study of gender in politics.
{"title":"Glass Cliff and Brexit: Theresa May’s legacy as Prime Minister","authors":"Angélica Szucko","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1243","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1243","url":null,"abstract":"Following the 2016 British referendum, Theresa May was officially appointed as PM. She was classed as a weak PM, and her legacy was considered a huge failure in Brexit negotiations. Yet, few analyses focus on how she became a PM in such a challenging moment for UK-EU relations. This article explores the paths that lead May to this position, based on the glass cliff literature. Then, May’s brinkmanship strategy on Brexit is analysed in light of Complex Adaptive Systems’ approach to crises. We apply the CDE model to understand May’s response to the Brexit vote. Finally, the concept of men glass cushion will be introduced to explain May’s replacement by Boris Johnson. This work joins efforts to employ perspectives from other areas, such as administration and psychology, to understand women in leadership roles and to bring light to the study of gender in politics.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43396822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1203
F. Ohler
This paper explains the influence of the European Union (EU) in multilateral chemicals negotiations. Focusing on the Basel Convention, this paper studies two issues negotiated at the Conference of the Parties 2019. Comparing a success and a failure case for the EU, it provides explanations for the EU’s high influence in the negotiations on the management of plastic waste and its low influence in the negotiations on low Persistent Organic Pollutant content values. Using process-tracing, the paper maps the EU’s diplomatic activities from the EU’s initial position to the outcome of the negotiations. Two separate causal mechanisms outline the differences between the success and the failure of the EU. Data is collected through interviews, observations and official documents. The paper shows the crucial role of the EU’s diplomatic activities in multilateral negotiations. The EU can be influential, if it strongly engages in all negotiation forums, is able to adapt its position during the course of negotiations and can propose a compromise acceptable to all parties. It is however uninfluential, if it downscales its diplomatic activities and refuses to compromise.
{"title":"Achieving Ambitious Positions in Multilateral Chemicals Negotiations: How does the European Union influence the Negotiation Outcomes?","authors":"F. Ohler","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1203","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explains the influence of the European Union (EU) in multilateral chemicals negotiations. Focusing on the Basel Convention, this paper studies two issues negotiated at the Conference of the Parties 2019. Comparing a success and a failure case for the EU, it provides explanations for the EU’s high influence in the negotiations on the management of plastic waste and its low influence in the negotiations on low Persistent Organic Pollutant content values. Using process-tracing, the paper maps the EU’s diplomatic activities from the EU’s initial position to the outcome of the negotiations. Two separate causal mechanisms outline the differences between the success and the failure of the EU. Data is collected through interviews, observations and official documents. The paper shows the crucial role of the EU’s diplomatic activities in multilateral negotiations. The EU can be influential, if it strongly engages in all negotiation forums, is able to adapt its position during the course of negotiations and can propose a compromise acceptable to all parties. It is however uninfluential, if it downscales its diplomatic activities and refuses to compromise.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45605887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1262
Mengia Tschalaer
The aim of this article is to discuss how the covid-19 pandemic exacerbates inequalities and social isolation by examining the UK Government approach to providing asylum claimants’ access to safe accommodation and health services on the one hand, and charities support of particularly lesbian, gay, bi- and trans-sexual, queer and intersex (LGBTQI+) claimants to gain/sustain access to social spaces and social support on the other. The data used for the writing of this article is based on 14 semi-structured interviews conducted between August 2020 and April 2021 with social/charity workers, asylum claimants and refugees affiliated with NGO help organisations in Glasgow, Birmingham, Cardiff, Brighton, Belfast, and London. This article argues that that the Home Office’s policies around housing and health during the covid-19 pandemic are closely linked to ‘hostile environment’ policies and amplifying housing and food precarity, isolation, exposure to violence, economic insecurity as well as physical and mental health problems for LGBTQI+ asylum claimants. There is a lack of intersectionality in the governmental approach to refugees and covid-19 and which creates a support gap for particularly LGBTQI+ asylum claimants. This intersectional research on sexuality, gender and asylum in the UK reveals that hostile environment policies render LGBTQI+ persons seeking asylum particularly vulnerable to homelessness, limited support services as well as mental health problems and gender-based and sexual violence.
{"title":"Increasing Isolation of LGBTQI+ Asylum Claimants During Covid-19 in the UK","authors":"Mengia Tschalaer","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1262","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1262","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to discuss how the covid-19 pandemic exacerbates inequalities and social isolation by examining the UK Government approach to providing asylum claimants’ access to safe accommodation and health services on the one hand, and charities support of particularly lesbian, gay, bi- and trans-sexual, queer and intersex (LGBTQI+) claimants to gain/sustain access to social spaces and social support on the other. The data used for the writing of this article is based on 14 semi-structured interviews conducted between August 2020 and April 2021 with social/charity workers, asylum claimants and refugees affiliated with NGO help organisations in Glasgow, Birmingham, Cardiff, Brighton, Belfast, and London. This article argues that that the Home Office’s policies around housing and health during the covid-19 pandemic are closely linked to ‘hostile environment’ policies and amplifying housing and food precarity, isolation, exposure to violence, economic insecurity as well as physical and mental health problems for LGBTQI+ asylum claimants. There is a lack of intersectionality in the governmental approach to refugees and covid-19 and which creates a support gap for particularly LGBTQI+ asylum claimants. This intersectional research on sexuality, gender and asylum in the UK reveals that hostile environment policies render LGBTQI+ persons seeking asylum particularly vulnerable to homelessness, limited support services as well as mental health problems and gender-based and sexual violence. ","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46103931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1205
Frederike Hofmann-van de Poll, Daniela Keilberth
In the light of domestic coordination processes in federal states, this article deals with the interplay of domestic governmental and non-governmental actors in the development of a German position for negotiations in the EU youth policy field. The qualitative single-case study is embedded in the evaluation of the German implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (2010-2018). It focusses on the roles, mutual perceptions, conflicts, and resulting action strategies of the different actors involved in the domestic coordination processes. In doing so, the article adds to the debate on Europeanisation and domestic coordination processes in federalist states by facilitating an understanding of the extent to which differing framework conditions of a specific policy field at the domestic and EU-Level can influence domestic policy coordination and its bottom-up processes. The analysis reveals a discrepancy between the intentions of the actors to work together based on a multi-level governance approach, and a reality in which the Federal Ministry assumes a gatekeeper function. The problems following this discrepancy can be explained on the one hand by different perceptions and expectations the actors have towards the coordination process and on the other hand by a lack of a youth policy culture of debate. The article shows how these problems lead to different action strategies by the domestic actors and the use of different pathways to bring their interests to the EU level. Simultaneously, the findings show that these different strategies of action can successfully lead to a stronger German position, provided these pathways are used in a coordinated manner. The analysis shows that a domestic coordination process involving both governmental and non-governmental actors from different levels working together on an equal footing by using a multi-level governance approach, can only function in federal policy cooperation processes when the actors focus on content-related discussions rather than formal forms of cooperation.
{"title":"Which Way to the EU? The Paths of German Youth Policy Discussions into EU Council Policy","authors":"Frederike Hofmann-van de Poll, Daniela Keilberth","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1205","url":null,"abstract":"In the light of domestic coordination processes in federal states, this article deals with the interplay of domestic governmental and non-governmental actors in the development of a German position for negotiations in the EU youth policy field. The qualitative single-case study is embedded in the evaluation of the German implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (2010-2018). It focusses on the roles, mutual perceptions, conflicts, and resulting action strategies of the different actors involved in the domestic coordination processes. In doing so, the article adds to the debate on Europeanisation and domestic coordination processes in federalist states by facilitating an understanding of the extent to which differing framework conditions of a specific policy field at the domestic and EU-Level can influence domestic policy coordination and its bottom-up processes.\u0000The analysis reveals a discrepancy between the intentions of the actors to work together based on a multi-level governance approach, and a reality in which the Federal Ministry assumes a gatekeeper function. The problems following this discrepancy can be explained on the one hand by different perceptions and expectations the actors have towards the coordination process and on the other hand by a lack of a youth policy culture of debate. The article shows how these problems lead to different action strategies by the domestic actors and the use of different pathways to bring their interests to the EU level. Simultaneously, the findings show that these different strategies of action can successfully lead to a stronger German position, provided these pathways are used in a coordinated manner. The analysis shows that a domestic coordination process involving both governmental and non-governmental actors from different levels working together on an equal footing by using a multi-level governance approach, can only function in federal policy cooperation processes when the actors focus on content-related discussions rather than formal forms of cooperation.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49610943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-19DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1175
Kristin Edquist
Over the past three decades, processes of assessing and governing mental healthcare have emerged at the European Union level. Consisting almost entirely of ‘soft law’ instruments, EU mental health governance (EUMHG) has incorporated policy-makers, mental healthcare providers, research scientists, non-governmental organizations, and patients and families across Europe in processes of mental health governance. This paper explores the role of the European Commission in EUMHG. It proposes that recent attempts to theorise the Commission’s role in European integration over-emphasise EU-level institutional relations and thus neglect the knowledge relations that are central to policy areas such as mental health. It therefore adopts an analytic framework based on Actor Network Theory that enables more accurate understanding of those relations. Applying this framework to EUMHG over time, it identifies three distinct networks that have emerged in EUMHG, all built via Commission initiatives. This analysis reveals the Commission’s central but not independent role in EUMHG’s survival, and illustrates how different kinds of actors held ‘expert’ roles in EUMHG depending on the way in mental (ill) health was problematised in EUMHG. The paper therefore suggests a new concern regarding the nature of ‘soft’ EU law, namely, its influence on knowledge and authority in transnationally constructed policy.
{"title":"Actor-Networking European Union Mental Health Governance, 1999-2019","authors":"Kristin Edquist","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1175","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past three decades, processes of assessing and governing mental healthcare have emerged at the European Union level. Consisting almost entirely of ‘soft law’ instruments, EU mental health governance (EUMHG) has incorporated policy-makers, mental healthcare providers, research scientists, non-governmental organizations, and patients and families across Europe in processes of mental health governance. This paper explores the role of the European Commission in EUMHG. It proposes that recent attempts to theorise the Commission’s role in European integration over-emphasise EU-level institutional relations and thus neglect the knowledge relations that are central to policy areas such as mental health. It therefore adopts an analytic framework based on Actor Network Theory that enables more accurate understanding of those relations. Applying this framework to EUMHG over time, it identifies three distinct networks that have emerged in EUMHG, all built via Commission initiatives. This analysis reveals the Commission’s central but not independent role in EUMHG’s survival, and illustrates how different kinds of actors held ‘expert’ roles in EUMHG depending on the way in mental (ill) health was problematised in EUMHG. The paper therefore suggests a new concern regarding the nature of ‘soft’ EU law, namely, its influence on knowledge and authority in transnationally constructed policy.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42484781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-19DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1161
Ian P. McManus, M. Falkenbach
The Social Democratic victory in the 2019 Danish general election was a surprising and notable event. The election stands out as an important win for Social Democrats as this party family has experienced a significant decline in voter support across Europe in recent decades. At the same time, the election was marked by controversy as Denmark’s Social Democrats not only doubled-down on their traditional support for the welfare state but also took a sharp turn to the right on immigration policies. This article analyses the effects of political systems, ideology and polarisation, as well as issue salience and framing on party strategies. These variables help to account for the abrupt policy shift adopted by the Social Democrats in Denmark and why similar anti-immigration platforms were not embraced by Social Democratic parties in other Nordic countries. Further examination of voter survey data suggests that the adoption of stronger anti-immigration policies is likely to be an ineffective strategy for Social Democrats going forward.
{"title":"A Hollow Victory: Understanding the Anti-Immigration Shift of Denmark's Social Democrats","authors":"Ian P. McManus, M. Falkenbach","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1161","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1161","url":null,"abstract":"The Social Democratic victory in the 2019 Danish general election was a surprising and notable event. The election stands out as an important win for Social Democrats as this party family has experienced a significant decline in voter support across Europe in recent decades. At the same time, the election was marked by controversy as Denmark’s Social Democrats not only doubled-down on their traditional support for the welfare state but also took a sharp turn to the right on immigration policies. This article analyses the effects of political systems, ideology and polarisation, as well as issue salience and framing on party strategies. These variables help to account for the abrupt policy shift adopted by the Social Democrats in Denmark and why similar anti-immigration platforms were not embraced by Social Democratic parties in other Nordic countries. Further examination of voter survey data suggests that the adoption of stronger anti-immigration policies is likely to be an ineffective strategy for Social Democrats going forward.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41712019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-19DOI: 10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1267
E. Brooks
COVID-19 has exposed and exacerbated the health inequalities across and between European Union member states. It has also raised the profile of EU health policy and the highlighted the value of European cooperation in health. Early failures to respond adequately, coupled with this increased salience, have given rise to a series of initiatives designed to strengthen and expand the EU’s role in health. This presents an opportunity to address the imbalances in the EU’s institutional and legal structure which prevent it from addressing health inequalities more effectively. Drawing on changes underway in the public health, internal market and fiscal governance elements of EU health policy, this paper explores the potential for the post-pandemic EU health policy framework to better support the reduction of health inequalities.
{"title":"European Union health policy after the pandemic: an opportunity to tackle health inequalities?","authors":"E. Brooks","doi":"10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1267","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v18i1.1267","url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 has exposed and exacerbated the health inequalities across and between European Union member states. It has also raised the profile of EU health policy and the highlighted the value of European cooperation in health. Early failures to respond adequately, coupled with this increased salience, have given rise to a series of initiatives designed to strengthen and expand the EU’s role in health. This presents an opportunity to address the imbalances in the EU’s institutional and legal structure which prevent it from addressing health inequalities more effectively. Drawing on changes underway in the public health, internal market and fiscal governance elements of EU health policy, this paper explores the potential for the post-pandemic EU health policy framework to better support the reduction of health inequalities.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42993362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：