2024-03-28T14:12:24Zhttp://aei.pitt.edu/cgi/oai2
oai:aei.pitt.edu:177
2011-02-15T22:14:52Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Der tschechische EU-Beitritt: Politischer Prozess wider die öffentliche Meinung = The Integration of the Czech Republic into the EU: Political Process against Public Opinion. ZEI Discussion Paper: 2002, C 105
von Schnurbein, Katharina
Czech Republic
enlargement
public opinion
[From the Introduction.} "Europa dem Bürger nahe bringen", ist das gegenwärtige Schlagwort in Europa – nicht erst seit dem EU-Gipfel im belgischen Laeken im Dezember 2001, aber seit diesem besonders. Der unter anderem mit diesem Ziel im März 2002 eingesetzte EU-Konvent soll binnen einem Jahr die Lösung für die Annäherung von EU und Bürger präsentieren. Jüngste Umfragen zeigen, dass in den Mitgliedstaaten durchschnittlich weit weniger als die Hälfte aller Bürger der EU vertrauen. In den Kandidatenstaaten sieht die Situation etwas besser aus, dort vertrauen der EU durchschnittlich immerhin 62 Prozent. Tschechien liegt bei diesen Erhebungen jedoch unter dem Kandidatenstaatendurchschnitt. Nur etwas über die Hälfte der Tschechen, 54 Prozent, setzen Ihr Vertrauen in die Europäische Union, beitreten wollen ihr gegenwärtig 46%. Eine Entfremdung der Politik vom Bürger hat sich in der Geschichte wiederholt als unklug erwiesen. Man denke an die Wirtschaftskrisen, die sich von Südamerika über Russland nach Asien bewegten und nun wieder in Südamerika angekommen sind oder erfreuliche Ereignisse wie die Samtene Revolution 1989, die unter anderem dem Mut und der Initiative unterdrückter Bürger zu verdanken ist. Auch wenn die Situation in Europa weder dem einen noch dem anderen Extrem nahe kommt, ist es an der Zeit, Europa (wieder) bürgernäher zu gestalten. Während den Bürgern der Mitgliedstaaten die EU-Politik vermittelt werden muss, geht es in den Kandidatenstaaten um die Vermittlung der Für und 1 Schlussfolgerung des Vorsitzes, Europäischer Rat (Laeken), 14. und 15. Dezember 2002, inbesondere Annex 1 Zur Zukunft der Europäischen Union. 2 Eurobarometer März 2002, im Durchschnitt vertrauen 41% EU-Bürger der EU. 3 Eurobarometer März 2002. Katharina von Schnurbein Wider eines EU-Beitritts. Während allerdings in den Mitgliedstaaten nie bindend beurteilt werden wird, ob die „Nahebringung“ erfolgreich war, wird in vielen Kandidatenländern, so auch Tschechien, mit aller Wahrscheinlichkeit in der zweiten Jahreshälfte 2003 in einem Referendum die Unterstützung für die EU und die Beitrittswilligkeit der Bürger auf den Prüfstand gestellt.
2002
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/177/1/dp_c105_schnurbein.pdf
von Schnurbein, Katharina (2002) Der tschechische EU-Beitritt: Politischer Prozess wider die öffentliche Meinung = The Integration of the Czech Republic into the EU: Political Process against Public Opinion. ZEI Discussion Paper: 2002, C 105. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/177/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:206
2011-02-15T22:14:58Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666706F6C69746963616C70617274696573
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
The Big Leap to the West: The Impact of EU on the Finnish Political System. ZEI Discussion Papers: 2001, C 89
Raunio, Tapio
Wiberg, Matti
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Finland
European elections/voting behavior
public opinion
political parties
Introduction. When analysing Finland’s integration policy, one is struck by the speed with which the political leadership turned its gaze from the East to the West. Within less than a decade Finland changed his status from a nonaligned country with close political relations with the Soviet Union to a full member of both the European Union (EU) and the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). It was not enough that Finland just joined the EU: the last three Finnish governments, starting from the centre-right coalition cabinet which took office in 1991, have decided that Finland’s place is in the inner core of the union. While rhetorically claiming to be interested in developing the EU as an intergovernmental project, the practical steps taken have shown that the recent governments have been willing to support and also put forward initiatives that strengthen the supranational nature of the Union. Finland has not at any instance seriously questioned the general development of integration: in this sense it has become a harmless participant in the inner core of the Union. Several observers have praised Finland’s commitment to integration. Finns have received credit from their European colleagues for their pragmatic and co-operative approach. For example, according to The Economist: Since joining the EU in 1995, and despite coming from its most distant edge, they [the Finns] have displayed an almost uncanny mastery of its workings. Many point to them as the very model of how a "small country" (vast in land mass, but with only 5.2 m people) should operate within the EU’s institutions: not preachy like the Swedes, not difficult like the Danes, not over-ambitious like the Austrians, merely modest and purposeful, matching a sense of principle with a sense of proportion. Another example was given by the European Voice, which in its leader, titled "Finnish presidency ends on triumphant note", argued among other things that ‘the Finnish presidency has proved once again that small countries are often the most adept at managing the EU’s business’ and that ‘the Finns have shown that a presidency which begins on an unauspicious note can end with plaudits from all sides’. The Finnish determined approach stands in contrast to the hesitant EU policies of both Denmark and Sweden. What explains this pragmatism and commitment to integration? Does the public share the commitment shown by the political elite? We argue that Finnish integration policy is very much driven by the need to secure her place among the Western European countries and to influence EU decisions in order to protect national interests. Support for the deepening of integration or for federalism is weak among the public and the parties, with integration primarily seen as an efficient way of furthering national economic and security objectives. The chapter is divided into six sections. In the next part we present the reasons that led Finland to apply for European Community (EC) membership. The third part focuses on the 1994 referendum and explores its main issues and cleavages. In the fourth section we analyse the impact of membership on party politics and administration. Europeanisation of the Finnish polity and public opinion are examined in section five. In the concluding section we discuss briefly the main aspects of Finnish integration policy, with emphasis on the future development of the Union.
2001
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/206/1/dp_c89_wiberg.pdf
Raunio, Tapio and Wiberg, Matti (2001) The Big Leap to the West: The Impact of EU on the Finnish Political System. ZEI Discussion Papers: 2001, C 89. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/206/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:384
2011-02-15T22:15:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303038
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033394575726F7065616E636974697A656E73686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
European citizenship and European identity: from the Treaty of Maastricht to public opinion attitudes. JMWP No. 03.96, December, 1996
Panebianco, Stefania
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
European citizenship
Maastricht Treaty
public opinion
In order to answer the question whether the establishment of European citizenship helped to develop a European identity, both institutional and empirical aspects of European citizenship and European identity will be taken into account. The distinction between the formal meaning of citizenship as established in the Treaty of Maastricht on the European Union (TEU) and the attitudes of the Europeans is useful as it results from the Eurobarometer (EB) data on whether European public opinion is aware of the attempts to bring the European Union (EU) closer to the citizens. To understand the contemporary debate on the meaning of European identity, issues such as the relationship between European identity and national identity, and the necessity of strengthening the europeanness in order to indirectly increase the public support to the EU, will be addressed. The process of European integration is today faced with contradictory trends. On the one hand, there is increasing economic interdependence, the advantages of a large scale economy, the necessity of co-operation to cope with environmental disasters or epidemics, etc. On the other, there are local movements claiming for independence in the name of a particular local identity. In an era of globalization and fragmentation, the only way to cope with the clash between identities is to develop and spread a broader concept of European identity. The Maastricht Treaty established a "multiple citizenship". In a similar way, we can refer to a European "multiple identity" by considering local, regional, and national identities as compatible without excluding the one from the other. Recent empirical results indicate that the majority of Europeans declare having both a national and a European identity, demonstrating that they consider them compatible. But when asked to make a choice, the national attachment prevails. In reality, in the TEU the citizens are not asked to choose to have either a national identity or a European one. Identity cannot be analysed in terms of zero-sum games.
1996-12
Working Paper
PeerReviewed
text/html
http://aei.pitt.edu/384/1/jmwp03.htm
Panebianco, Stefania (1996) European citizenship and European identity: from the Treaty of Maastricht to public opinion attitudes. JMWP No. 03.96, December, 1996. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/384/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:485
2011-02-15T23:43:39Z
oai:aei.pitt.edu:531
2011-02-15T22:15:41Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Europe Divided? Elites vs. Public Opinion on European Integration. IHS Political Science Series: 2003, No. 88
Hooghe, Liesbet
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
public opinion
This article compares preferences for Europeanizing thirteen policies among European elites, national elites, and public opinion. Elites are more willing to cede national authority in sovereignty areas, but citizens are more favorable to EU social policies. Are there contrasting logics at work? The answer is two-sided. Elites and public preferences are similar in that both are least enthusiastic about Europeanizing high-spending policies. Here is a common distributional logic: shifting authority could de-stabilize vested interests. However, as the single market intensifies labor market volatility, the public seeks to contain this distributional risk through selectively Europeanizing market-flanking policies. In contrast, elite preferences are consistent with a functional rationale, which conceives European integration as an optimal solution for internalizing externalities beyond the national state.
Michalowitz, Irina
2003-04
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/msword
http://aei.pitt.edu/531/1/wp_88_hooghe.doc
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/531/2/pw_88.pdf
Hooghe, Liesbet (2003) Europe Divided? Elites vs. Public Opinion on European Integration. IHS Political Science Series: 2003, No. 88. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/531/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:828
2011-02-15T22:16:26Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D61727469636C65
EU-Finland, First-Year Impressions
Venna, Yrjö
Finland
public opinion
[Introduction]. In Sweden, the EU-sceptic politicians and parties advanced in the European Parliament elections in early October this year. The turn-out was very low by Swedish standards, 41%, which indicates a lack of interest among the general public. The public-opinion ratings have gone down in the course of the year and now, in autumn, only one out of five Swedes believes that the membership of the EU is beneficial for Sweden. In Austria, the opinion polls have demonstrated frustration with the European Union and, if there were a referendum now, the majority would most likely reject membership. Contrary to these trends, the Finns seem to be the happiest out of the three new Member States. In September, 50% of the 927 interviewees would have voted 'Yes' if there had been a new referendum; 38% would have voted 'No', and there were 11% who had not made up their mind. The support has remained on this level throughout the first year of membership. The reasons for the relatively positive opinions of the Finns are partly historical, and partly the positive effects which the man in the street has experienced. A short account of their recent history may explain the Finns' positive attitude towards Europe.
1995
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/828/1/2.htm
Venna, Yrjö (1995) EU-Finland, First-Year Impressions. EIPASCOPE, 1995 (3). pp. 1-3.
http://aei.pitt.edu/828/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:1819
2011-02-15T22:20:12Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Public Opinion and Enlargement: A Gravity Approach. CEPS Working Document No. 192, March 2003
Jones, Erik
Van Der Bijl, Niels
enlargement
public opinion
Popular support for enlargement of the European Union is a function of how close or how far removed the member states are from the candidate countries. In the absence of country fixed effects or special bilateral relationships (e.g. adjacency, historic rivalry, religious conformity), we can explain approximately 14% of the variation in attitudes across member states and with regard to specific candidate countries using factors related to trade, distance, and relative economic size and structure. Taking special bilateral relations into account we can explain approximately 30%. Once country fixed effects are incorporated, the level of explanation increases to 80%.
2003-03
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/1819/1/WD192.pdf
Jones, Erik and Van Der Bijl, Niels (2003) Public Opinion and Enlargement: A Gravity Approach. CEPS Working Document No. 192, March 2003. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/1819/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:1977
2011-02-15T22:20:44Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303230
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Where is the transatlantic divide in public opinion on climate change issues? Evidence for 1989-2002. CEPS Policy Brief No. 35, July 2003
Brewer, Thomas.
EU-US
public opinion
environmental policy (including international arena)
This paper is based on an analysis of the results of more than 40 public opinion surveys taken during the period from 1989 through 2002; special attention is given to surveys taken during 2000-02. The analysis concludes that approximately two-fifths of the public are seriously concerned about global warming. Another two-fifths are moderately concerned; shifts in the opinions of this moderately concerned group would likely alter the future course of government policies. The other one-fifth of the public does not consider global warming much of a problem, does not worry about it very much or not at all, and does not believe that carbon dioxide emissions are a cause of it. A substantial majority of the US public wants the government to do something about the problem of global warming, and they would like the US to participate in the Kyoto Protocol. Most respondents prefer mandatory rather than voluntary emission reductions by industry. A majority of the public supports US economic assistance to fund mitigation projects in developing countries. Gaps between the US public and US leaders are evident, with the public exhibiting more concern and more support for new policies. The level of US public concern is nearly as high as it is among European publics, where there is also opposition to current US policy.
2003-07
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/1977/1/PB35.pdf
Brewer, Thomas. (2003) Where is the transatlantic divide in public opinion on climate change issues? Evidence for 1989-2002. CEPS Policy Brief No. 35, July 2003. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/1977/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2080
2011-02-15T22:21:08Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D46:46303033
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"David and Goliath: Danish public opinion and the future of democracy in the EU"
Eliason, Leslie C.
Denmark
European elections/voting behavior
democracy/democratic deficit
public opinion
The paper begins with a few assertions about certain inherent biases in European Union studies that have tended to obscure the importance of the issues at stake in the Danish EU debate. Then, drawing heavily on recent Eurobarometer surveys, the second section examines various dimensions of Danish voter attitudes in comparison to those of voters in other EU member states. The third section examines some of the key contributions to the Danish political debate leading up to the September 28, 2000 vote on EMU. The final section concludes with some observations about the aftermath of the 2000 vote, prospects for Danish EU participation in the future, and what all this means for EU studies.
2001
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2080/1/002098_1.pdf
Eliason, Leslie C. (2001) "David and Goliath: Danish public opinion and the future of democracy in the EU". In: UNSPECIFIED, Madison, Wisconsin. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2080/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2090
2011-02-15T22:21:11Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666676F7665726E616E6365
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Support, (mostly) yes-but for what? Multilevel governance, policy competencies and European public opinion"
Green, David.
governance: EU & national level
public opinion
[T]o a certain degree our knowledge of public attitudes towards European integration and EU institutions exists at a relatively broad level of focus, not unlike the attitudes of the public themselves, whose tendency is towards generalizations not necessarily based on high levels of knowledge regarding the target of those opinions. Moreover, these broader approaches to attitudes among European citizens do not necessarily move us further in the direction of understanding the degree and content of public support for European integration, nor do they contribute much to the resolution of related theoretical debates, or to the tracking of certain political and social attitudes of more general consequence. This study seeks to fill some of these gaps through an examination of attitudes toward European integration at a more detailed level, with particular attention to public preferences as to which level of governance in Europe should be responsible for various policy competencies. An examination of this data not only reveals public preferences on specific policy questions, but also points to the broader nature of public opinion and concerns in Europe, the possibilities of, and limitations to, further integration, and some clues as to how theoretical debates over the meaning of European integration which have engaged scholars for decades play out on the ground, amongst the citizens who have inherited this new polity.
2001
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2090/1/002106_1.PDF
Green, David. (2001) "Support, (mostly) yes-but for what? Multilevel governance, policy competencies and European public opinion". In: UNSPECIFIED, Madison, Wisconsin. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2090/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2151
2011-02-15T22:21:27Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D41:72656C6967696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Christianity and public support for the European Union: A multivariate analysis"
Nelsen, Brent F.
Guth, James L.
Fraser, Cleveland R.
religion-general (also see EU-Islam)
public opinion
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
This paper considers the relationship between Europeans' religious characteristics and support for the European Union. Using Eurobarometer data from the 1970s through the 1990s, we find that Catholics have been far stronger supporters of European integration than Protestants have, and that the devout in both traditions have been more in favor of the integration process than have nominal adherents. The effects of religion survive both longitudinal and intensive cross-sectional analyses incorporating alternative explanations for support of the EU. These findings suggest that if religion is declining as a social and political force, underlying support for European unity may also be dwindling. Public approval of the European Union may thus depend increasingly on economic performance of national governments and the Union itself.
2001
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2151/1/002139_1.pdf
Nelsen, Brent F. and Guth, James L. and Fraser, Cleveland R. (2001) "Christianity and public support for the European Union: A multivariate analysis". In: UNSPECIFIED, Madison, Wisconsin. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2151/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2216
2011-02-15T22:21:45Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
“Through a Glass Darkly: The Importance of Beliefs and Emotions to International Relations: How the Dutch Perceive Germans and Germany”
Aspeslagh, Robert
Dekker, Henk.
Netherlands
Germany
public opinion
Several questions are dealt with in this contribution: Do beliefs about a foreign country have any effect on behavior? Is it relevant to study beliefs about other countries of citizens, who do not belong to the political elites? Do surveys into beliefs contribute to a better understanding of the nature of international relations? Is emotionality a distinct variable in international relations? What can be the consequences of beliefs for Europe? Can we speak of Germany as a ‘normal’ state and to what extent could ‘normality’ support the disappearance of negative beliefs and emotions vis à vis Germany? In this paper we will present the surveys into Dutch beliefs about the European Union, in particular with respect to Germany and Germans.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2216/1/002656_1.pdf
Aspeslagh, Robert and Dekker, Henk. (1999) “Through a Glass Darkly: The Importance of Beliefs and Emotions to International Relations: How the Dutch Perceive Germans and Germany”. In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2216/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2273
2011-02-15T22:22:00Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303130
7375626A656374733D41:7265736561726368696E6777726974696E6745554954
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
“The Economy, Accountability, and Support for the President of the European Commission”
Gelleny, Ronald D.
Anderson, Christopher J.
researching and writing the EU (see also integration theory in this section)
European Commission
public opinion
This paper seeks to contribute to [the] literature in two ways. First, we examine the effects of utilitarian considerations on public opinion in an area that previously has not been examined by researchers: support for the President of the European Commission. Specifically, we question whether citizens should have such utilitarian considerations in the first place, especially when they are ill-informed about the Commission and its president, and when the President and the Commission cannot be held democratically accountable. Using data on the popularity of Commission President Jaques Delors during his last year in office (1994) collected in the (then) 12 member states of the EU, we find that Europeans are simultaneously utilitarian and ill-informed when it comes to judging the performance of the President of the Commission. While we find that roughly half of all Europeans do not express an opinion on the performance of the Commission President, our analysis also shows that utilitarian considerations powerfully affect whether Europeans approve of the job the President of the Commission has done. The next section reviews the literature on economic and utilitarian effects on public support for European integration and institutions. We argue that there are two ways to view people’s attitudes toward the President of the Commission-utilitarian and uninformed-and that these may affect the formation of attitudes toward the President of the Commission in different ways. We then describe the data and discuss people’s perceptions of the President of the Commission. Next, we develop a model of public support for the President that we estimate with the help of a series of multinomial logistic regressions. We conclude by discussing the results and suggesting avenues for future research.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2273/1/002632_1.pdf
Gelleny, Ronald D. and Anderson, Christopher J. (1999) “The Economy, Accountability, and Support for the President of the European Commission”. In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, PA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2273/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2280
2011-02-15T22:22:02Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
“Can Legitimacy Transfer? A Comparative Study of Public Support for the European Court of Justice and the Bundesverfassungsgericht”
Grosskopf, Anke.
legitimacy
public opinion
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
As the power of constitutional courts all over the world is increasing, we still know very little about support for emergent courts and especially how support for supranational courts develops. To better understand the development of support for constitutional courts, I use a combination of the statistical and the comparative method to analyze the sources of confidence in constitutional courts in four cases. The comparison extends both cross-nationally and cross-institutionally by contrasting public support of a well-established constitutional court-the Federal Constitutional court or Bundesverfassungsgericht in West Germany-to support for three emergent courts, the Bundesverfassungsgericht in East Germany and the European Court of Justice in both West and East Germany. Following David Easton and his notion of an interconnected support universe, the main source of diffuse support considered is support for the other institutions of government. For the supranational court, the European Court of Justice, the possibility of a transfer of support from the national to the supranational level is given special consideration. Analysis of the data reveals that constitutional courts do indeed live in an interconnected support universe. Support for the legislative executive has a consistently strong, positive impact on support for supreme courts both at the national and the supranational level. In addition, there is evidence that support for national supreme courts does indeed translate into support for supreme courts at the supranational level, i.e., for the European Court of Justice. Overall, the similarity of the sources of support for these courts is more striking than the differences.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2280/1/002626_1.pdf
Grosskopf, Anke. (1999) “Can Legitimacy Transfer? A Comparative Study of Public Support for the European Court of Justice and the Bundesverfassungsgericht”. In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, PA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2280/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2304
2011-02-15T22:22:10Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666706F6C69746963616C70617274696573
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"The Awkward Question: Party Approaches to European Integration in Finland and Sweden"
Johansson, Karl Magnus
Raunio, Tapio.
Finland
public opinion
Sweden
political parties
This paper analyzes party responses to European integration in Finland and Sweden. We argue that the responses are shaped by seven explanatory factors: basic ideology, public opinion, factionalism, leadership influence, party competition, transnational links and the development of integration. Each factor can lead to a positive or a negative evaluation of the European Union. In the empirical analysis, the sample includes all parties represented in the respective national parliaments, and the research material consists of party documents, parliamentary votes, statements by leading party figures, public opinion surveys, direct observation and interviews. Leadership influence and ideology are the strongest factors in the Finnish case, while public opinion and factionalism are the strongest factors in Sweden. Issue avoidance combined with the secondary importance of the EU in party politics explain why parties have been relatively successful in containing internal factionalism and discord, especially in Finland.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2304/1/002334.PDF
Johansson, Karl Magnus and Raunio, Tapio. (1999) "The Awkward Question: Party Approaches to European Integration in Finland and Sweden". In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, PA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2304/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2344
2011-02-15T22:22:21Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:4E6F7264696361726561
7375626A656374733D46:46303136
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
“Explaining the Gender Gap: Women, Economic Vulnerability, and Public Attitudes Toward European Integration”
Nelsen, Brent F.
Fraser, Cleveland R.
Guth, James L.
Tillman, Jodie.
Nordic area
welfare state
public opinion
Norway
Do European men and women differ in their attitudes toward European integration? Yes. Using Eurobarometer 42, we demonstrate a consistent difference in attitude toward European integration between women and men across the European Union (EU) and Norway, with women less enthusiastic about the process. How do we explain the gender gap in public attitudes toward integration? Drawing on European welfare state literature and work on women and European integration, particularly in the Nordic countries, we developed an explanatory model that focuses on an individual’s subjective and objective economic vulnerability. We hypothesis that the more economically insecure a respondent is and feels, the less likely he or she will show support for integration. The model we developed includes the following variables: subjective perception of personal and national economic situation, women-friendly nature of the welfare state, education, wealth, social class, number of children, view of traditional gender roles, and age. Using linear regression (OLS) we find perceived economic security to be a powerful predictor of both men’s and women’s attitudes toward integration, but women’s attitudes more so then men’s. Women are also more affected than men by the nature of the welfare state and other objective measures of economic security. Economic uncertainty is the key to understanding women’s skepticism toward integration. A more competitive market and a perceived threat to national welfare states increases anxiety among women and leads to lower levels of support for the process of integration.
1999
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2344/1/002587_1.pdf
Nelsen, Brent F. and Fraser, Cleveland R. and Guth, James L. and Tillman, Jodie. (1999) “Explaining the Gender Gap: Women, Economic Vulnerability, and Public Attitudes Toward European Integration”. In: UNSPECIFIED, Pittsburgh, PA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2344/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2564
2011-02-15T22:22:59Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Public opinion and the future of Europe: Trends and theses"
Deflem, Mathieu
Pampel, Fred C.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
public opinion
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
We analyze trends and sources of support for European unification on the basis of Eurobarometer data gathered from individuals in member states of the European Union over the past two decades. Results indicate that unification of Europe generally receives overwhelming support. However, further analysis reveals important country differences in levels of support. Citizens of most countries of Europe favor unification: support for the EU has over the years been relatively high in most countries and only in a minority of countries (Great Britain, Denmark, and Norway) do citizens reveal substantial anti-European sentiments. Beyond the country differences, in addition, there are socio-demographic and political influences on popular support, but these do not account for country differences. In other words, it is the identification of citizens with estimated advantages or disadvantages of united Europe for their own country which determines their respective sentiments on the EU.
1997
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2564/1/002853_1.PDF
Deflem, Mathieu and Pampel, Fred C. (1997) "Public opinion and the future of Europe: Trends and theses". In: UNSPECIFIED, Seattle, Washington. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2564/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2585
2011-02-15T22:23:05Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D41:72656C6967696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Does religion matter? Christianity and public attitudes toward the European Union"
Fraser, Cleveland
Nelsen, Brent F.
Guth, James L.
religion-general (also see EU-Islam)
public opinion
Does religion matter politically in Europe? Mac Iver (1989) raises the possibility that religious tradition (i.e., Catholic vs. Protestant) may affect attitudes toward the EC, but her data set did not have the denominational variable needed to test this hypothesis. Mac Iver's study leads us to believe that religion may be important to individual attitudes toward integration, adding power to analyses focusing on ideology, political mobilization, and demographic factors. How important is religion in this mix? Can a systematic explanation for attitudes be developed? This study addresses these questions. We begin with a discussion of how we might expect religion to affect attitudes toward integration. Next, we turn to a multivariate examination of religious factors and other variables that have been credited with influencing attitudes toward integration. Then we test these same hypotheses in individual member states. Finally, we close with some observations on the role of religion in shaping European opinion and suggest some lines for further research.
1997
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2585/1/002826_1.PDF
Fraser, Cleveland and Nelsen, Brent F. and Guth, James L. (1997) "Does religion matter? Christianity and public attitudes toward the European Union". In: UNSPECIFIED, Seattle, WA. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2585/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:2861
2011-02-15T22:24:16Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Images of Europe and Europeans: In-group trust and loyalty for European integration"
Genna, Gaspare M.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
public opinion
Prior research on citizen support for European integration has primarily focused on individuals' evaluations of the process of integration or its institutions, with emphasis on the importance of direct benefits and costs integration can confer. These models do not consider individuals' evaluations of other European nationalities or of the member states. This paper will fill the gap in the research by formulating and testing a political cohesion model, which is complementary to preexisting models. The analysis synthesizes systems theory with political psychology to produce a core claim that the probability of supporting integration and developing a European identity increases with greater levels of political cohesion among European citizens and among these citizens and the European Union memberstates. The development of political cohesion, as measured by the amount of trust in Europeans and member-states, is assumed to be reflective of positive images of these two types of subjects. Political cohesion is especially critical when individuals consider nationalities of the southern periphery given their lower economic development. Therefore, trust in southern EU nationalities improves the probability that an individual will have a European identity and support integration, more so than rust in the northern EU nationalities. In addition, integration's development is marked by changes in the allocation of sovereignty that is determined by the relatively more powerful European member-states.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/2861/1/110.pdf
Genna, Gaspare M. (2003) "Images of Europe and Europeans: In-group trust and loyalty for European integration". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, TN. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/2861/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:3053
2011-02-15T22:25:13Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D41:72656C6967696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Religion and Attitudes toward the European Union: The New Member States; A Research Note"
Nelsen, Brent L.
Guth, James F.
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
religion-general (also see EU-Islam)
public opinion
This research note represents a first attempt at exploring the impact of religion on attitudes toward integration in post-communist Europe. Using Central and Eastern Euro-Barometer 2: Current Affairs and the Media, September-October 1991 we develop a multivariate regression model of support for the European Union in Central and Eastern Europe, paying particular attention to the role of religious tradition and church attendance to the formation of attitudes. Alternative theories also tested include: ideology, cognitive mobilization, European identity, economic optimism, urban living and sex. The results show that since religious variables only emerge in multivariate analysis, religion, mainly Catholicism, matters, but not in as direct a way as it does in the West. Cognitive mobilization demonstrates the most powerful impact on attitudes toward integration. The model is also run for each country in the study demonstrating differences between Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant countries.
2005
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/3053/1/EUSA_2005_1.5.pdf
application/msword
http://aei.pitt.edu/3053/2/EUSA_2005_1.5.doc
Nelsen, Brent L. and Guth, James F. (2005) "Religion and Attitudes toward the European Union: The New Member States; A Research Note". In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, Texas. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/3053/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:3124
2011-02-15T22:25:37Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Public Perceptions of the European Power Hierarchy and Support for a Common Foreign and Security Policy"
Genna, Gaspara M.
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
France
Germany
public opinion
Prior research on citizen support for European integration has primarily focused on individuals’ evaluations of the process of integration or its institutions, with emphasis on the importance of direct benefits and costs integration can confer. Explanations focus on overall support for integration and little work has been done on explaining public opinion on specific policy areas, such as the development of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Prior work also does not consider individuals’ evaluations of member states in models. This paper will fill this gap in the research by formulating and testing a political cohesion model, which can be considered complementary to preexisting models. The analysis synthesizes systems theory with social identity theory to produce a core claim that the probability of supporting the CFSP increases with greater levels of political trust in the European Union member-states. The development of political cohesion, as measured by the amount of trust in member-states, is assumed to be reflective of a positive perception. Positive perceptions of member-states are critical because integration’s development is influenced strongly by and dependent upon the resources of the relatively more powerful European member-states. Therefore, positive perceptions of the top EU powers, namely Germany and France, improve the probability of supporting a CFSP, more so than trusting the remaining members. The results hold even when controlling for demographic variables, political values, ideology, and the democratic deficit. Binary logistic regression analysis using pooled repeated cross-sectional data from the Eurobarometer surveys conducted in 1992 through 1997 among individuals of 11 member-states largely support these claims.
2005
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/3124/1/Genna_EUSA_CDFP_2005.pdf
Genna, Gaspara M. (2005) "Public Perceptions of the European Power Hierarchy and Support for a Common Foreign and Security Policy". In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, Texas. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/3124/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:3125
2011-02-15T22:25:37Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6D656469616D65646961
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"News Coverage of the Enlargement of the European Union and Public Opinion: A Case Study of Agenda-Setting Effects in the United Kingdom"
Dursun, Oya
media
U.K.
enlargement
public opinion
While the British government has largely been in favor of the recent round of European Union (EU) enlargement, the British public opinion was mostly against it. To account for the gap between public opinion and official policy on enlargement in the United Kingdom, this project scrutinizes the way the British media treats the issue of enlargement following the Laeken Council of December 2001 up until the day of enlargement – 1st of May 2004. The research is contextualized in agenda-setting theory. This project tests both the first and second-level agenda-setting effects, and the consequences of agenda-setting for public understanding and evaluations of the enlargement of the EU. To what extent the frequency of the coverage of enlargement influences how important people consider it to be? Do the frames the media apply translate into patterns the public uses to interpret those affairs? What are the effects of frames on public opinion toward enlargement? To provide answers to these questions, this paper combines quantitative content analysis and survey data through a comparison of the trends in the Eurobarometer surveys with enlargement-related news coverage in The Times, The Guardian and The Daily Mail.
2005
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
text/plain
http://aei.pitt.edu/3125/1/Oya.txt
application/msword
http://aei.pitt.edu/3125/2/Oya.doc
Dursun, Oya (2005) "News Coverage of the Enlargement of the European Union and Public Opinion: A Case Study of Agenda-Setting Effects in the United Kingdom". In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, Texas. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/3125/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:3149
2011-02-15T22:25:45Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Learning to Trust the European Court of Justice -- Lessons from the German Case"
Grosskopf, Anke.
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
Germany
public opinion
European Court of Justice/Court of First Instance
Even though the European Court of Justice has always played a significant role in European integration, its importance is bound to increase further as the European Union enlarges and the constitutionalization process continues. Yet despite the Court’s growing importance, we still know very little about why and how European publics tolerate the rule of any unelected, let alone a supranational, court. Even less is known about how newly democratized countries first learn to trust institutions such as the ECJ. This paper utilizes a quasi-experimental design to analyze the development of public support for the ECJ by comparing the nature, levels and development of support in West Germany to those in East Germany. Particular attention is given to the question of how support for the Court differs from support for the other institutions of European government and to how support for the supranational institutions compares to support for their national counterparts, as well as how perceptions at both levels square with a popular wish for “stealth democracy.” Based on evidence from two ALLBUS public opinion surveys and a series of focus groups conducted in West and East Germany, it appears that people make a functional connection between the national and the supranational court, evaluating them along similar dimensions. Unlike the other institutions of government both courts are seen as neutral, technical arbiters of the law that are fundamentally trustworthy because they do not benefit from their decisions. The European Court of Justice is considered as the functional equivalent of the Bundesverfassungsgericht at a different level of government. There are some differences between East and West Germany, but they are slight. The evidence suggests that citizens learn to trust supranational courts by first learning to trust the national constitutional court as a disinterested arbiter of political conflict.
2005
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/3149/1/Grosskopf_EUSA_2005_paper_final.pdf
Grosskopf, Anke. (2005) "Learning to Trust the European Court of Justice -- Lessons from the German Case". In: UNSPECIFIED, Austin, TX. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/3149/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6117
2011-02-15T22:40:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
Public Debates over Europe in Britain: Exceptional, Conflict-Driven and Path-Dependent?
Statham, Paul
Gray, Emily.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
U.K.
public opinion
This article undertakes an analysis of the British public debate over European integration through recourse to an original data-set on political claims-making. The public sphere is conceptualised as a space where citizens interact through their acts of public communication. Such public communications are seen as a potentially important source of the Europe-building process, by providing public input to the elite-led processes of European political institutional integration. Our empirical findings show that British public debates are internalised within the nation-state rather than creating links to supra- or trans-national European polities. In addition, we find relatively low levels of civil society engagement compared to that of political elites, and a high level of political competition between the two major political parties, Labour and Conservative. Overall, we argue that elite ambivalence to Britain’s position within the European Union has created this climate of uncertainty, and political competition over Europe. With respect to the proposed referendum on the Constitution, we argue that it will be difficult for public actors, including the Labour government, to make the pro-European case. This is because, first, the opt-out and non-committed stance of previous governments on European integration has legitimated political Euroscepticism, and second, pro-European stances have so far made far fewer attempts to frame their arguments on this political terrain than their Eurosceptic opponents.
2004
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6117/1/stathamgray.pdf
Statham, Paul and Gray, Emily. (2004) Public Debates over Europe in Britain: Exceptional, Conflict-Driven and Path-Dependent? In: UNSPECIFIED, Sheffield, UK.
http://aei.pitt.edu/6117/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6747
2011-02-15T22:44:17Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Preview of the 2004 European Parliament Elections: Results of an EPIN Survey of National Experts. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 11, 1 May 2004
Kurpas, Sebastian
Incerti, Marco
Crum, Ben.
European Parliament
European elections/voting behavior
public opinion
[Executive Summary]. The upcoming election for the European Parliament appears in many respects less like one European-wide election than like 25 parallel elections in each of the EU member states. Rather than identifying clearly discernible patterns running across the whole of the European Union, we find different trends emerging in different countries in the principal aspects of the elections: namely campaign issues, likely voter turn-out, the kinds of candidates whose names will appear on the slates and the eventual outcome. The findings presented in this paper are based on the results of a survey conducted among national experts associated with the European Policy Institutes Network (EPIN). As such they are inherently subjective, but well-informed. While the actual outcomes of the election are bound to prove our findings wrong in one or another respect, they do indicate some interesting trends that in the end do not hinge on the predictions being exactly right for one country or the other. Rather, it is the recognition of a slow, faltering but at times undeniable emergence of a European political dynamic that is the main object of this study.
2004-05
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6747/1/1121_11.pdf
Kurpas, Sebastian and Incerti, Marco and Crum, Ben. (2004) Preview of the 2004 European Parliament Elections: Results of an EPIN Survey of National Experts. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 11, 1 May 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6747/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6749
2011-02-15T22:44:17Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Update on the Ratification Debates: What Prospects for the European Constitutional Treaty? Results of and EPIN Survey of National Experts. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 13, 1 May 2005
Kurpas, Sebastian
Incerti, Marco
Schönlau, Justus
De Clerck-Sachsse, Julia.
Constitution for Europe
public opinion
Since EPIN’s first monitoring report in January, the issue of the European Constitution has grown in relevance and visibility in many member states. Yet there continue to be important differences in how the individual aspects of the text are perceived in the various national debates. This update of EPIN’s survey on the progress and obstacles to ratification of the European Constitutional Treaty provides a snapshot of the approval processes in the different EU member states at a crucial point in time, just before the vote in France and the Netherlands. The paper draws from EPIN network experts in the 25 EU countries and offers a reassessment of the probability of ratification.
2005-05
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6749/1/1223_13.pdf
Kurpas, Sebastian and Incerti, Marco and Schönlau, Justus and De Clerck-Sachsse, Julia. (2005) Update on the Ratification Debates: What Prospects for the European Constitutional Treaty? Results of and EPIN Survey of National Experts. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 13, 1 May 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6749/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6750
2011-02-15T22:44:18Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
A Citizens Compact: Reaching out to the Citizens of Europe. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 14, 1 September 2005
Kurpas, Sebastian
Ricard-Nihoul, Gaëtane
Torreblanca, José I.
Keohane, Daniel
Koopmann, Martin
Langdal, Fredrik
Crum, Ben
Incerti, Marco
Schönlau, Justus
De Clerck-Sachsse, Julia
de Klauman, Anna
Vestergaard, Anne Mette
Kràl, David.
Constitution for Europe
public opinion
[Executive Summary]. How can the deadlock after the ‘no’ to the European Constitutional Treaty in France and the Netherlands be overcome? What should be the aim of the ‘period of reflection’ that has been agreed by the European Council? The authors of this paper propose the adoption of a ‘Citizens Compact’, which should directly address the larger malaise among citizens that underlies the Constitutional crisis. It should contribute to the reduction of the EU’s democratic deficit without treaty reform. The following measures should be envisaged: • National parliaments should participate more strongly in the controversies on core European issues through earlier and intensive debates about EU initiatives. • Every six months governments should explain their positions on the priorities of the EU-presidency in their national parliaments. • EU-actors (MEPs, Commissioners and top officials) should participate more intensively in national debates about European issues and contribute to a better understanding of the European political processes among citizens. • National governments should regularly publish information bulletins about the latest EU initiatives and –decisions. • Public fora about European issues should be established in every member state with speakers coming from national politics, from the EU level and other member states as well as representatives from civil society. • Uncontroversial elements of the Constitutional Treaty that strengthen EU democracy could already be adopted through inter-institutional agreements. • A White Paper on the establishment of a ‘European Democratic and Civic Space’ in the EU should be elaborated. • In the future important legislative acts should contain an impact assessment of the consequences on citizens’ lives.
2005-09
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6750/1/1263_14.pdf
Kurpas, Sebastian and Ricard-Nihoul, Gaëtane and Torreblanca, José I. and Keohane, Daniel and Koopmann, Martin and Langdal, Fredrik and Crum, Ben and Incerti, Marco and Schönlau, Justus and De Clerck-Sachsse, Julia and de Klauman, Anna and Vestergaard, Anne Mette and Kràl, David. (2005) A Citizens Compact: Reaching out to the Citizens of Europe. CEPS EPIN Working Papers No. 14, 1 September 2005. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/6750/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:6928
2011-02-15T22:45:18Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Citizen Support for the European Parliament: Knowledge and the Democratic Deficit"
Flickinger, Richard S.
Bennett, Linda L.M.
Bennett, Stephen E.
democracy/democratic deficit
European Parliament
public opinion
Our paper is concerned with citizens' knowledge of European institutions and decision processes, and how that knowledge is related to expressed levels of citizen support for the European Parliament (EP). Prior research on the causes of political information and sophistication suggests that basically three factors affect political awareness: cognitive ability, opportunity, and motivation. Those with more "cognitive ability," whether measured in terms of formal schooling or "intelligence," are better informed about politics than those with less. People with greater opportunity to acquire political information, usually because they are better situated within the social structure and/or because they are exposed to more information flowing through media channels, typically know more about politics than those less favorably located. Finally, the more people are motivated to learn, the more they know. Working from this base of understanding we have developed two models. The first attempts to predict citizen knowledge of the European Union. The second attempts to predict citizen support for the European Parliament.
1995
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/6928/1/flickinger_richard_s.pdf
Flickinger, Richard S. and Bennett, Linda L.M. and Bennett, Stephen E. (1995) "Citizen Support for the European Parliament: Knowledge and the Democratic Deficit". In: UNSPECIFIED, Charleston, South Carolina. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/6928/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7274
2011-02-15T22:47:18Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"European Integration, Public Opinion and Immigration Policy: Testing the Impact of National Identity"
Luedtke, Adam.
immigration policy
public opinion
This paper empirically tests the theory that national identity causes opposition to EU control over immigration policy. The EU has been gaining more control over immigration policy in recent years, but this has been a controversial, uneven, and politically sensitive process as many member states are reluctant to cede control over this area of policy. What accounts for member state opposition to EU control over immigration? This paper argues that public opinion in the member states is important in explaining such oppostion and proposes a theory of national identity to explain this public opinion, arguing that those who identify with their nation-states (vis-à-vis Europe) are less likely to support EU control over immigration policy that those who identify, at least partially, with "Europe". This tendency is shown to be stronger than calculated support for or against European integration. Other competing hypotheses are also tested, including economic cost/benefit calculation, country of residence, social class, political ideology, and a range of social characteristics and political beliefs. The empirical test operationalizes and measures the variables using Eurobarometer survey data and employs a logistic regression model to test the hypotheses for an EU-wide sample and 15 individual country samples.
2003
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7274/1/Luedtke.pdf
Luedtke, Adam. (2003) "European Integration, Public Opinion and Immigration Policy: Testing the Impact of National Identity". In: UNSPECIFIED, Nashville, Tennessee. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7274/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7323
2011-02-15T22:47:36Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65666167656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Exploring the Relationship between Economic Growth and Public Attitudes toward European Integration"
Mahler, Vincent,
Taylor, Bruce,
Wozniak, Jennifer.
general
public opinion
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
[From the introduction] The intention of this paper is to explore trends in public attitudes toward the EU over the last two decades using cumulative data available from the Eurobarometer series of public opinion polls. The basic question addressed in the paper is whether trends in public opinion are affected by trends in economic well-being. The expectation of those who believe that the EU has already achieved a substantial degree of supranational authority, particularly in the area of economic policy, is that momentum toward greater integration is unlikely to be slowed by economic downturns--that, in fact, the public is as likely to seek supranational as national solutions to economic problems. Those who are more doubtful that supranationalism has truly superseded national sovereignty disagree, arguing that in economic hard times supranational institutions will be undermined by intense competition among nation-states and the public will increasingly look to the national level for relief.
1995
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7323/1/003014_1.pdf
Mahler, Vincent, and Taylor, Bruce, and Wozniak, Jennifer. (1995) "Exploring the Relationship between Economic Growth and Public Attitudes toward European Integration". In: UNSPECIFIED, Charleston, South Carolina. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7323/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7399
2012-04-06T17:10:26Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
European Public Opinion and Turkey's Accession: Making Sense of Arguments For and Against. EPIN Working Paper, No. 16, 3 May 2007
Ruiz-Jiménez, Antonia M.,
Torreblanca, José I.
enlargement
public opinion
Turkey
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
2007-05
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7399/2/7399.pdf
Ruiz-Jiménez, Antonia M., and Torreblanca, José I. (2007) European Public Opinion and Turkey's Accession: Making Sense of Arguments For and Against. EPIN Working Paper, No. 16, 3 May 2007. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/7399/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7912
2011-02-15T22:50:55Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6D656469616D65646961
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
"Constructions of Multilevel Legitimacy in the European Union: A Study of German and British Media Discourse"
Hurrelmann, Achim.
European Parliament
Constitution for Europe
European elections/voting behavior
enlargement
Germany
media
U.K.
legitimacy
public opinion
[From the introduction]. While academic debates about the EU’s normative legitimacy have reached a relatively high level of conceptual sophistication, and most of the remaining points of contention can be traced back to ultimately irreconcilable differences between various views of democracy, considerably less is known about the Union’s empirical legitimacy. In spite of the regular Eurobarometer reports, there is little reliable data on what Europeans value about the EU, why they accept or oppose its institutions, and on what criteria they base such assessments. Are different evaluative benchmarks used when people judge the legitimacy of the EU, as opposed to the nation state? Are democratic standards less important compared to output- and performance-oriented criteria? In which relevant respects is the EU seen as doing well, and which aspects of its activities are seen as generating legitimacy problems? In this paper, I argue that the most promising way to answer these questions is to focus on the construction and transformation of legitimacy in public discourse. In other words, the dominant strand of empirical legitimacy research in the EU – public opinion surveys such as the Eurobarometer – should be complemented by an approach that focuses on political communication (see also Schneider, Nullmeier and Hurrelmann 2007). After sketching how a focus on communication might help to alleviate some of the deficiencies of existing research on the EU’s empirical legitimacy (Section 2), I apply this approach in a study of British and German media debates surrounding EU enlargement, the Draft Constitution, and the 2004 election to the European Parliament (Sections 2 to 4). The paper yield insights into the construction of legitimating and delegitimating arguments about EU institutions, as well as into the ways in which these are related to evaluations of the member states.
2007
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7912/1/hurrelmann%2Da%2D02h.pdf
Hurrelmann, Achim. (2007) "Constructions of Multilevel Legitimacy in the European Union: A Study of German and British Media Discourse". In: UNSPECIFIED, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7912/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:7984
2011-02-15T22:51:23Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
In the shadow of the Constitution: adapting to a changing external environment
Nickel, Dietmar,
Quille, Gerrard.
democracy/democratic deficit
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
Constitution for Europe
public opinion
[From the introduction]. This paper is not a textual analysis of opinion polls, but an interesting question comes forward: do such opinions show support for the original EU approach to CFSP ie speaking softly and carrying a big wallet, or are they also endorsing the developments since 1999 of the more muscular ESDP? The authors of this paper do not need to be convinced of the added-value ESDP is playing today and will undoubtedly play in the future. Nor do they need to be convinced that ESDP is an important new "instrument" in the foreign policy "toolbox" to respond to the demands of the contemporary security environment or to avoid the inaction and hesitancy of the past. However, the authors put forward a number of issues in this paper that should be discussed more widely if the development of ESDP is to be a real added value for the pursuit of the Union's CFSP and sustainable in the face of future external crises and internal political debate. In this respect the authors argue for the need to address the so-called double-democratic deficit where there is a need for improved transparency, debate and democratic scrutiny of ESDP, which will otherwise remain in the shadow of the constitution.
2007
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/7984/1/nickel%2Dd%2D08d.pdf
Nickel, Dietmar, and Quille, Gerrard. (2007) In the shadow of the Constitution: adapting to a changing external environment. In: UNSPECIFIED, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/7984/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:8122
2011-02-15T22:52:15Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303033
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The Constitution and the Citizens – (Not) Much Ado about Nothing. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 4 No. 7, August 2004
Thiel, Markus.
democracy/democratic deficit
Constitution for Europe
European Convention
public opinion
While the Convention on the Future of Europe and its product, the Draft Constitution, might be considered a successful endeavor by many European policy-makers and other academic and socio-economic elites, it received little positive attention by the citizens. Aside from being a highly specialized and, for the ordinary citizen, complicated matter, few people actually are aware of the Convention process and the content of the Constitution. In this paper, I will locate the public awareness of the Constitution among the EU’s population, lay out some basic ideas about the democratic legitimacy this act entails and look at ways that could facilitate the Constitution’s acceptance in the future. Finally, I argue that, given the institutional structure of the EU and organizational constraints of the Convention, so far the democratic legitimacy has been sufficient but still awaits the challenge of ratification.
2004-08
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/8122/1/thielfinal.pdf
Thiel, Markus. (2004) The Constitution and the Citizens – (Not) Much Ado about Nothing. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 4 No. 7, August 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/8122/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:8193
2011-02-15T22:52:44Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Constraints on the Development of European Identity: Territorial and Demographic Challenges for EU Public Support. EUMA Papers, Vol. 4 No. 11 May 2007
Thiel, Markus
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
public opinion
[From the introduction]. European integration has transformed in the past few years from an elitist process into an elite-driven mechanism with substantial public oversight and pressure by the citizen and the media, as examples such as the constitutional impasse have shown. The development of public support and identification with the EU is dependent upon a multitude of economic, political and social factors resulting in affective and utilitarian attitudesi which are contingent upon member states’ as well as overarching Union policies. In addition, there exist a number of related factors such as immigration, demographic changes and the enlargement process, that are consistently under-analyzed in the field of EU studies, yet potentially exert significant influence over public opinion and a common identification and hence, the integration process more generally. I will adhere to this conceptual distinction by using the term identification when referring to the gradual processes of civic identification with the EU resulting in affective support, as compared to the mainly utilitarian components of public support – both of which moved to the forefront in the post-Maastricht integration period.
2007-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/8193/1/Thiel_Constraints_EUMA2007.pdf
Thiel, Markus (2007) Constraints on the Development of European Identity: Territorial and Demographic Challenges for EU Public Support. EUMA Papers, Vol. 4 No. 11 May 2007. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/8193/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9039
2011-02-15T22:58:30Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Why European Citizens Will Reject the EU Constitution. CES Working paper, no. 116, 2004
de Vreese, Claes H.
immigration policy
Constitution for Europe
enlargement
European elections/voting behavior
public opinion
This study tests competing hypotheses about popular support for European integration. It introduces antiimmigration sentiments as a key variable for understanding reluctance towards integration. Drawing on survey data, it is found that anti-immigration sentiments, economic considerations, and the evaluation of domestic governments are the strongest predictors of both support for integration and individuals’ propensity to vote “Yes” in a referendum on the enlargement of the EU. When extrapolating the findings to future referendums on issues of European integration, it may be predicted that such referendums will result in a “No” outcome under the conditions of high levels of anti-immigration sentiments, pessimistic economic outlooks, and/or unpopularity of a government.
2004
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9039/1/deVreese.pdf
de Vreese, Claes H. (2004) Why European Citizens Will Reject the EU Constitution. CES Working paper, no. 116, 2004. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9039/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9056
2011-02-15T22:58:38Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303136
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:436F6E7374346575726F7065
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:4C6973626F6E547265617479
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303131
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
7375626A656374733D46:46303135
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Recovering from the constitutional failure. An analysis of the EU reflection period. ZEI Discussion Paper C182 2008
Amado, Diana
Buchmann, Tobias
Colella, Aurore
Deyanova, Lili
Dienhart, Michaela
Dojcinova, Hristina
Flamm, Laura
Gulbinowicz, Ewelina
Soo-Yeon Jin, Laura
Judge, Niall
Konigs, Claus
Lafitte, Elodie
Muller, Anke
Niemann, Anna
Ozgur, Deniz
Prata, Cristina-Gabriela
Richter, Robert
Roese, Claudia
Rothfuss, Annette
Schroder, Sonja Ana Luise
Speciale, Fabio
Stanojevic, Milos
Staszkiewicz, Maria Zofia
Tosevski, Filip
Trias, Ana
Tunick, Meredith Catherine
Varavkin, Vladimir
France
Netherlands
European Commission
Lisbon Treaty
European Council
European Parliament
Constitution for Europe
European Council-Presidency
European elections/voting behavior
public opinion
[From the Introduction]. After the rejection of the European Union’s (EU) Constitutional Treaty in Spring 2005 by both France and the Netherlands, the heads of state and government called for a “reflection period” to provide opportunities to resolve constitutional difficulties, and to further engage Member State citizen populations, national parliaments and political parties. The ultimate aim was to provide sufficient time for Member States to further the Constitutional debate and garner enough support to continue the ratification process. Initially, the reflection period had not been intended to last longer than a year, but in June 2006 the European Council outlined a timeline to reach a solution, extending the deadline until the end of 2008. Through a six-part analysis, this paper will examine how the European Union used its self-imposed “reflection period” to overcome the constitutional deadlock. To begin, the paper will provide a historical overview, including origins of the Constitutional Treaty and the initial signs of tribulations during the referenda process. Given the significance of the treaty rejections in France and the Netherlands, the second part of this paper devotes special attention to public opinion polls and attempts to identify the motivations of French and Dutch voters in their decisions to vote “no.” In the third part, this paper takes a closer look at the three main EU institutions, European Commission, European Parliament and European Council, and attempts to illustrate the actions that were taken in response to their call to “reflect.” This section also briefly describes Member States’ activities during this time. These include various strategies to ensure EU institutions remain both accountable and reliable and establish a long-lasting link between the Union and its citizens. An overview of several academic contributions to the reflection period debate is presented in the fourth section. Research activities related to this discussion are presented in summary form from a selection of key European research institutes. In the fifth section of analysis, the EU Council Presidency debates are addressed. This section attempts to highlight the discrepancies that existed between the public debate and the negotiations occurring behind the “closed doors” of Member State governments. As the Lisbon Treaty (i.e. Reform Treaty) was the result of this government bargaining process, the sixth and final section of this paper summarizes the content of the Lisbon Treaty and provides a short comparison of its changes to the modifications envisaged in the Constitutional Treaty.
Niemann, Anna
Schroeder, Sonja Ana Luise
Tunick, Meredith Catherine.
von der Osten, Denise-Christine
Yu, Wan Tung Perlie
Yanarisik, Oguzhan.
2008
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9056/1/dp_c182_master.pdf
Amado, Diana and Buchmann, Tobias and Colella, Aurore and Deyanova, Lili and Dienhart, Michaela and Dojcinova, Hristina and Flamm, Laura and Gulbinowicz, Ewelina and Soo-Yeon Jin, Laura and Judge, Niall and Konigs, Claus and Lafitte, Elodie and Muller, Anke and Niemann, Anna and Ozgur, Deniz and Prata, Cristina-Gabriela and Richter, Robert and Roese, Claudia and Rothfuss, Annette and Schroder, Sonja Ana Luise and Speciale, Fabio and Stanojevic, Milos and Staszkiewicz, Maria Zofia and Tosevski, Filip and Trias, Ana and Tunick, Meredith Catherine and Varavkin, Vladimir (2008) Recovering from the constitutional failure. An analysis of the EU reflection period. ZEI Discussion Paper C182 2008. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9056/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9309
2011-02-15T23:46:41Z
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9380
2012-04-03T16:22:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Closing the Community Deficit in the EU. CEPS Policy Brief No. 169, 9 September 2008
Etzioni, Amitai.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
legitimacy
public opinion
This paper argues that the main challenge currently facing the EU is a community deficit: the low valuation the majority of its citizens accord the evolving collectivity. To deal with this community deficit, the author, Amitai Etzioni, warns that the EU must either introduce strong measures of community building or else significantly scale back its plans for collective action. He first cites illustrative data to show that there is a considerable level of disaffection from the EU project and the EU institutions and then turns to examine the first set of measures needed to reduce the strain on the EU by scaling back for the near future those provisions that alienate many citizens. He then introduces a second set of measures that are needed to build up citizens’ commitment to the EU, by fostering public dialogue, developing a common European media and language, and holding EU-wide election.
2008-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9380/2/9380.pdf
Etzioni, Amitai. (2008) Closing the Community Deficit in the EU. CEPS Policy Brief No. 169, 9 September 2008. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9380/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9401
2012-04-06T17:11:03Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Is there a trade-off between deepening and widening? What do Europeans think? EPIN Working Papers. No. 17, 2 April 2008
Ruiz-Jimenez, Antonio M.
Torreblanca, Jose I.
enlargement
public opinion
Using post-enlargement Eurobarometer data, this paper explores public support for deepening and widening across the EU. In particular, it tries to answer the following questions: 1) Do citizens perceive a trade-off between deepening and widening? 2) Is there a gap between elite discourses and citizen perceptions regarding deepening and widening? 3) What fears lay behind citizens’ preferences for deepening versus widening? The first section looks at the historical trend in public support for enlargement and the second section looks at elite views and assessments of the 2004 enlargement and its consequences during the current constitutional crisis. Section three examines to what extent European citizens perceive a trade-off between deepening and widening and section four takes a closer look at the factors, mainly fears, behind negative attitudes for both integration and enlargement. The paper then explore whether, and how those fears affect the perception of a trade-off between the processes of deepening and widening, and to what extent these perceptions are similar among citizens and elites. The concluding section summarises the authors findings and discusses their policy implications.
2008-04
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9401/2/9401.pdf
Ruiz-Jimenez, Antonio M. and Torreblanca, Jose I. (2008) Is there a trade-off between deepening and widening? What do Europeans think? EPIN Working Papers. No. 17, 2 April 2008. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/9401/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:9468
2012-04-06T17:35:30Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E646572706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
74797065733D6F74686572
Public Opinion on Pension Systems in Europe. ENEPRI Research Reports No. 36, 5 July 2007
Janky, Bela
Gal, Robert I.
immigration policy
labour/labor
welfare state
public opinion
gender policy/equal opportunity
Various polls reveal that Europeans, even if aware of the looming pension crisis, generally resist pension reforms. In this research report, we show that resistance may be general but it is not uniform. People may oppose reforms but they reject different components of the reform proposals depending on their labour market position, income and age. We analyse the attitudes of nearly 16,000 respondents from the EU-15 countries towards the role of funded pillars, retirement age, the labour market participation of older workers, gender equality and immigration, as well as preferences towards intra- and intergenerational redistribution in the pension systems.
2007-07
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/9468/2/9468.pdf
Janky, Bela and Gal, Robert I. (2007) Public Opinion on Pension Systems in Europe. ENEPRI Research Reports No. 36, 5 July 2007. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/9468/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10820
2011-02-15T23:10:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737077656C666172657374617465
74797065733D6F74686572
Towards sustainable but still adequate pensions in the EU: Theory, trends and simulations. ENEPRI Research Report No. 67, 28 April 2009
Draxler, Juraj
Mortensen, Jorgen.
welfare state
public opinion
This report is a summary of the research project on the “Adequacy and Sustainability of Old-Age Income Maintenance” (AIM). Thirteen institutes from across the EU have collaborated on the task of assessing the situation of today’s pensioners and providing insights into future trends and policy options for securing adequate income for EU pensioners. The AIM project produced several state-of-the-art additions to the debate on EU pension reforms. Among others, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research in the UK calculated cohort spending for a sample of European countries to show how much countries need to save to take care of future pensioners. The team led by the Belgian Federal Planning Bureau developed the first EU, multi-country, dynamic simulation model for pension expenditure called MIDAS. A group of research institutes led by the Netherlands Institute for Social Research provided a current map of the social exclusion of the elderly in the EU. The report starts with a discussion on what pensions we can consider adequate. Indicators of adequacy are proposed. Then, to determine the different pension mechanisms in existence in the EU and the prevalence of various kinds of schemes, the report provides an up-to-date classification of pension systems. This classification section is followed by an analysis of public opinion on pension reforms. While the public is generally in favour of the status quo, certain segments of the population fear and resist changes for diverse reasons. The bulk of the study entails a statistical description of the material situation of the elderly in the EU-15 and the new member states, simulations of assorted policy scenarios and discussions on incentives to retire or stay in the labour force. The broad conclusion of the report is that the pension incomes of future generations are under threat everywhere, mostly owing to demographic developments. Yet policy-makers have a range of reform options at their disposal that, when implemented with careful regard for the political and social context, can ensure adequate incomes of the elderly in the future.
2009-04
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10820/1/1836.pdf
Draxler, Juraj and Mortensen, Jorgen. (2009) Towards sustainable but still adequate pensions in the EU: Theory, trends and simulations. ENEPRI Research Report No. 67, 28 April 2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/10820/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11231
2011-02-15T23:13:29Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:7472616E73706172656E6379616363657373646F63756D656E7473
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
If citizens have a voice, who's listening? Lessons from recent citizen consultation experiments for the European Union. CEPS EPIN Working Paper No. 24, 12 June 2009
Boucher, Stephen.
transparency/access to documents
democracy/democratic deficit
public opinion
Are European Union institutions, as they claim, really listening to citizens thanks to more ‘deliberative’ consultation tools? The European Commission and the European Parliament in particular have committed themselves to engaging in a dialogue with citizens in recent years. But to what effect? This paper notes how official policies have adopted language borrowed from the deliberative democracy school of thinking, but denounces the lack of clarity in the role assigned to deliberation with citizens in EU policy-making processes. It also invites EU policy-makers to think more critically about recent and future experiments that present themselves as ‘deliberative’. It does so by highlighting areas for improvement in recent initiatives. Finally, it makes a number of recommendations for the future of dialogue with citizens, suggesting in particular the creation of a European Observatory for Democracy and Opinion, as well as a list of criteria to assess the design and role of such activities, and the concentration of efforts on one high-quality, high-impact initiative per year.
2009-06
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11231/1/1856.pdf
Boucher, Stephen. (2009) If citizens have a voice, who's listening? Lessons from recent citizen consultation experiments for the European Union. CEPS EPIN Working Paper No. 24, 12 June 2009. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11231/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11334
2011-02-15T23:13:58Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303335:737067656E6572616C
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The Effects of the Financial Crisis on Systemic Trust. CEPS Working Document No. 316, 17 July 2009
Roth, Felix.
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
Germany
general
public opinion
The financial crisis had a significant impact on the levels of trust that citizens place in the system and its institutions. Recent data from Eurobarometer show a significant fall in confidence on the part of European citizens in the EU’s institutions. For the first time since its creation, a majority of European citizens no longer trust the European Central Bank. However, confidence levels in national governments have actually risen, supporting a contrasting trend between confidence levels in European and national institutions. This decrease in confidence towards the ECB is flanked in the case of Germany by strong anti-capitalist sentiments and a sharp decline in support for the social market economy.
2009-07
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11334/1/1877%2D1.pdf
Roth, Felix. (2009) The Effects of the Financial Crisis on Systemic Trust. CEPS Working Document No. 316, 17 July 2009. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11334/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:13695
2011-02-15T23:28:38Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D696E647573747269616C6C61626F757272656C6174696F6E73
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726C61626F72
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Prove di democrazia in Europa: la Flessicurezza nel lessico ufficiale e nella pubblica opinione europea = Evidence of democracy in Europe: Flexicurity in the official language and in European public opinion. WP C.S.D.L.E. "Massimo D'Antona" .INT - 59/2008
Caruso, Bruno
Massimiani, Clemente.
democracy/democratic deficit
labour/labor
public opinion
industrial/labour relations
No abstract.
2007
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/13695/1/caruso_massimiani_n59%2D2008int.pdf
Caruso, Bruno and Massimiani, Clemente. (2007) Prove di democrazia in Europa: la Flessicurezza nel lessico ufficiale e nella pubblica opinione europea = Evidence of democracy in Europe: Flexicurity in the official language and in European public opinion. WP C.S.D.L.E. "Massimo D'Antona" .INT - 59/2008. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/13695/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14489
2011-02-15T23:34:03Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D41:414E474F73
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:69646F7067:69646F706768646F63
7375626A656374733D41:41303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6C6F626279696E67696E746572657374726570726573656E746174696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6D656469616D65646961
74797065733D746865736973
Die Europa-Union in der westdeutschen Tagespresse in den 1950er Jahren – Kontinuitäten und Wandel in der Berichterstattung über einen Europaverband = The Europa-Union in the West German Daily Press in the 1950s - Continuities and Changes in the Press Coverage on a European Pressure Group
Grussendorf, Johan S. U.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
Germany
historical development of EC (pre-1986)
media
lobbying/interest representation
public opinion
civil society
NGOs
The Europa-Union was the most important association working for a united Europe in postwar Germany. During the 1950’s, it received extensive press coverage by German newspapers. This master’s thesis examines the way in which in these articles constant motives of criticism show up during this period. Furthermore, it focuses on the changes in the comments on the association by journalists of the daily press. Especially the reactions on internal reorganizations resulting in a change of the presidency in 1954 caught the attention. Ernst Friedlaender and his successor Friedrich Carl von Oppenheim had a more positive attitude towards western integration than the former president, Eugen Kogon. Ernst Friedlaender also lead the association in the conflict with the European umbrella-organization Union Européenne des Fédéralistes (UEF). The examined part of the debates on the novel European Integration leads to a better understanding of our European self-conception today.
2007-10
Thesis
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14489/1/grussendorf.pdf
Grussendorf, Johan S. U. (2007) Die Europa-Union in der westdeutschen Tagespresse in den 1950er Jahren – Kontinuitäten und Wandel in der Berichterstattung über einen Europaverband = The Europa-Union in the West German Daily Press in the 1950s - Continuities and Changes in the Press Coverage on a European Pressure Group. ["eprint_fieldopt_thesis_type_M.A. thesis" not defined] thesis, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin.
http://aei.pitt.edu/14489/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:15449
2011-02-15T23:40:53Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303233
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D46:46303138
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Eurozone crisis and its effects on citizens' trust in national parliaments. CEPS Commentary, 8 December 2010
Roth, Felix.
Portugal
Ireland
Spain
public opinion
EMU/EMS/euro
Greece
Citing evidence that the levels of net trust in the national parliaments have dropped to -50% in three of the four troubled periphery eurozone countries (Ireland, Spain and Greece), this Commentary warns that the European and national policy-makers’ strategy of the three no’s – no bail-out, no default and no exit –appears to threaten political stability in these countries.
2010-12
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/15449/1/Effect_of_the_crisis_on_trust.pdf
Roth, Felix. (2010) The Eurozone crisis and its effects on citizens' trust in national parliaments. CEPS Commentary, 8 December 2010. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/15449/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:15772
2011-02-15T23:42:54Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Has the financial crisis shattered citizens' trust in national and European government institutions? CEPS Working Document No. 343/February 2011
Roth, Felix
Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas
Otter, Thomas.
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
The financial crisis has differently affected trust in national and European governmental institutions. Our paper analyses the determinants of trust in national and European institutions over the last decade – with particular focus on the 2007-09 period – and comes to the conclusion that citizens’ declining trust in national governments is related to an increase in unemployment in the EU-15 and EU-25. In the EU-25, falling trust levels in national parliaments are also associated with an increase in government debts. Trust in the European Commission and European Parliament seems strongly associated with the situation in the real economy (growth of GDP per capita). Furthermore, our analysis confirms that trust in national institutions has actually increased in the direct aftermath of the financial crisis.
2011-02
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/15772/1/WD_343_Roth_et_al_on_trust.pdf
Roth, Felix and Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas and Otter, Thomas. (2011) Has the financial crisis shattered citizens' trust in national and European government institutions? CEPS Working Document No. 343/February 2011. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/15772/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:30043
2011-03-21T12:38:13Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Politicians online! MEP communication strategies in the Internet era. EPIN Working Paper No. 29/September 2010
Braghiroli, Stefano.
European Parliament
public opinion
The last decades have witnessed a dramatic growth of internet-based
communication. This phenomenon and its still partially unexplored potential have
increasingly attracted the attention of a growing number of political entrepreneurs.
This paper analyses to what extent it has characterised vertical communication
between politicians and voters looking at a very particular group: the Members of
the European Parliament (MEPs).
To conduct the analysis, this study categorised an impressive number of MEPs’
individual websites in the 6th European Parliament (EP) according to their structural,
graphic and informative/communicative features. Accordingly, quantitative and
qualitative cross-country and cross-party variance have been explored taking into
consideration a wide array of potential explanatory dimensions, including sociodemographic,
country-level, ideological, and electoral factors. The paper also
presents some preliminary figures concerning the most recent developments in the
current EP and possible future trajectories.
This study proposes a categorisation of different MEP types on the basis of their e-activism:
those who are still reluctant to embrace internet-based communication,
those looking at the web only as a complementary tool alongside more traditional
forms of communication (e-MEPs) and those who invest a fairly amount of
resources in these new forms of communication (MEPs 2.0). Our findings show that,
despite the relevant cross-country and cross-party variance, the last group of MEPs
2.0 is dramatically growing vis-à-vis the other two.
When it comes to the analysis of MEPs’ personal web-pages, our study shows that,
by and large the features of the sites and the communication strategies adopted are
generally specifically designed to target MEPs’ ‘electorate of reference’ in terms of
expected demand and proposed offer.
2010-09
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/30043/1/EPIN_WP29_Braghiroli_e%2Dversion.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/politicians-online-mep-communication-strategies-internet-era
Braghiroli, Stefano. (2010) Politicians online! MEP communication strategies in the Internet era. EPIN Working Paper No. 29/September 2010. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/30043/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32300
2011-08-17T18:11:23Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Opinion polls support a more European approach to the crisis. CEPS Commentary, 11 August 2011
Lannoo, Karel.
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
In his latest Commentary, Karel Lannoo expresses frustration over the inconsistency between the latest Eurobarometer survey indicating is a clear indication of public support for EU institutions to more aggressively take the lead in resolving the economic crisis and the timidity of those institutions, with the possible exception of the ECB, to do so.
2011-08
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32300/1/AugKLOpinionActiveECB.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/opinion-polls-support-more-european-approach-crisis
Lannoo, Karel. (2011) Opinion polls support a more European approach to the crisis. CEPS Commentary, 11 August 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/32300/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32612
2011-10-21T01:18:20Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
74797065733D626F6F6B
Building Confidence in Peace: Public Opinion and the Cyprus Peace Process. CEPS Paperbacks. October 2008
Kaymak, Erol
Lordos, Alexandros
Tocci, Nathalie
Greece
Cyprus
Turkey
public opinion
Building Confidence in Peace reports and analyses the results of the first public opinion survey in Cyprus carried out by the Centre for European Policy Studies in collaboration with Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot partners. In the new atmosphere of relaunched negotiations in 2008, this book investigates what Cypriots think of each other, of the peace process and of possible solutions to the conflict. On the basis of our findings, a double need starkly emerges. First, it is essential to act, in parallel with the negotiating process, to raise public confidence in the peace process, in order to ensure that as and when an agreement is reached, the people will go along with it and make its ratification and implementation a success. Second, precisely because of persistent areas of divergence, a set of confidence-building measures (CBMs) should be envisaged to help narrow the gaps separating the two communities. This does not entail shifting attention from negotiations to CBMs. On the contrary, unilateral CBMs or non-controversial measures oriented towards inter-societal reconciliation may have a very positive impact and add momentum to the peace process within a strategic context of renewed negotiations. It is precisely in this spirit that we note the ongoing efforts to build confidence in parallel with the negotiations, first and foremost with the opening of the Ledra Street/Lokmacı gate crossing on 3 April 2008.
Centre for European Policy Studies
2008-10
Book
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32612/1/51._Building_Confidence_in_Peace.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/building-confidence-peace
Kaymak, Erol and Lordos, Alexandros and Tocci, Nathalie (2008) Building Confidence in Peace: Public Opinion and the Cyprus Peace Process. CEPS Paperbacks. October 2008. Series > Centre for European Policy Studies (Brussels) > CEPS Paperbacks <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/SMCEPSPaperbacks.html> . Centre for European Policy Studies. ISBN 9789290798217
http://aei.pitt.edu/32612/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32618
2011-10-21T00:47:17Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303330
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
74797065733D626F6F6B
A People's Peace in Cyprus: Testing Public Opinion on the Options for a Comprehensive Settlement. CEPS Paperbacks. April 2009
Lordos, Alexandros
Kaymak, Erol
Tocci, Nathalie
Greece
Cyprus
Turkey
public opinion
The year 2009 may well be a make-or-break year for the protracted Cyprus conflict. While strategic assessments and elite incentives bode cautiously well for a settlement, ultimately an agreement will have to be approved by the two Cypriot communities and above all it will have to be implemented by them on the ground. In view of the centrality of the people in this peace process, CEPS, in collaboration with Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot partners, launched a project in late 2007 investigating, through successive opinion polls, what Cypriots think of each other, of the peace process and of possible solutions to the conflict. In this book the authors present the results of their second survey, conducted simultaneously in the southern and northern parts of the island in January and February 2009. It delves into the Cypriots’ views on the thorniest questions of the conflict and assesses whether and how, once we leave the abstract level of labels and slogans and enter into the specifics of a package deal, convergence between Greek and Turkish Cypriots is possible.
Centre for European Policy Studies
2009-04
Book
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32618/1/57._A_People's_Peace_in_Cyprus.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/peoples-peace-cyprus-testing-public-opinion-options-comprehensive-settlement
Lordos, Alexandros and Kaymak, Erol and Tocci, Nathalie (2009) A People's Peace in Cyprus: Testing Public Opinion on the Options for a Comprehensive Settlement. CEPS Paperbacks. April 2009. Series > Centre for European Policy Studies (Brussels) > CEPS Paperbacks <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/SMCEPSPaperbacks.html> . Centre for European Policy Studies. ISBN 9789290798644
http://aei.pitt.edu/32618/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32963
2011-11-15T15:58:00Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303038
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
7375626A656374733D46:46303131
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
What's wrong with technocrats? CEPS Commentary, 15 November 2011
Incerti, Marco
Greece
Italy
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
[From the Introduction]. A lot has been made of the recent appointment of Lucas Papademos and Mario Monti
as Prime Ministers in pectore of their respective countries.
In particular, the public debate has focused on their status as unelected officials who allegedly constitute a break of the democratic continuum.
2011-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32963/1/MI_on_technocrats.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/what%E2%80%99s-wrong-technocrats
Incerti, Marco (2011) What's wrong with technocrats? CEPS Commentary, 15 November 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/32963/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33113
2012-08-19T13:51:58Z
7374617475733D756E707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6C6F626279696E67696E746572657374726570726573656E746174696F6E
74797065733D636F6E666572656E63655F6974656D
Euroscepticism Revisited - Regional Interest Representation
in Brussels and the Link to Citizen Attitudes towards European Integration
Olsson, Anna
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
lobbying/interest representation
public opinion
Recent scholarship has suggested that nation-states will gradually fade away in favor of regions
and super-regions as the main actors within a European Union characterized by strong regional
identities. At the same time, recent developments have shown that citizen support for European
integration is essential for any future development of the Union. The puzzle inspiring this paper
is the finding that the greatest support for the EU increasingly stems from minority nationalist, or
strong identity regions seeking to bypass their central states to achieve their policy goals at the
EU level. This paper empirically tests this suggestion, while shedding light on the relationship
between the quality of representation of regional interests at the EU level and positive citizen
attitudes towards the EU. In particular, it finds two explanations for cross-regional variation in
the relationship between Euroscepticism and representation: (1) a cultural explanation, embodied
by differences in the nature and quality of representation between regions that are linguistically
distinctive and regions that are not; and (2) an institutional explanation, embodied by differences
in the nature and quality of representation between regions from federal and non-federal member
states. The paper uses an eclectic methodological approach, first utilizing multivariate regression
analysis, estimating logistic and ordinal logit models that help explain variation in
Euroscepticism at the regional level. The results are then complemented by the findings of indepth
elite interviews of regional representatives—more specifically the directors of a selection
of the many regional information offices present in Brussels. This paper takes the study of
Euroscepticism to a new level, as most previous scholarly work has focused on explanations at
the individual or at the member state level. At the same time it strengthens the notion of a
growing importance of a “Europe of the regions.”
2009
Conference or Workshop Item
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33113/1/olsson._anna.pdf
http://www.euce.org/eusa2009/papers.php
Olsson, Anna (2009) Euroscepticism Revisited - Regional Interest Representation in Brussels and the Link to Citizen Attitudes towards European Integration. In: UNSPECIFIED. (Unpublished)
http://aei.pitt.edu/33113/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33169
2011-12-21T22:53:00Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Do Germans support the Euro? CEPS Working Document No. 359, 15 December 2011
Gros, Daniel.
Roth, Felix.
Germany
EMU/EMS/euro
public opinion
This paper analyses public support for the euro in Germany. Drawing from the results of
regular Eurobarometer surveys, it finds that the ongoing financial and sovereign debt crisis
has reduced support for the euro among German citizens, but not dramatically so – at least
not yet. In the 1990s, the German public was sceptical towards the euro. But since the
introduction of euro banknotes and coins, a clear majority of citizens supports the euro –
despite the financial and sovereign debt crisis. Moreover, on average, support for the euro is
at a similar level in Germany as it is elsewhere in the euro area.
This salient finding, however, appears to contradict the results of a survey conducted by the
Allensbach Institute, an influential public opinion polling centre in Germany, which
concludes that an overwhelming majority of Germans do not trust the euro any more.
We suggest that this striking difference in findings could be due to three factors: a) the fact
that the Allensbach Institute and Eurobarometer were measuring different concepts: trust in
the euro and support for the euro, respectively; b) the Allensbach Institute’s results might be
biased, given the scaling of their trust question and c) the fact that Eurobarometer frames its
survey questions explicitly in a European context, whereas the Allensbach surveys have a
purely national context.
2011-12
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33169/1/WD359_Do_Germans_support_the_euro.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/do-germans-support-euro
Gros, Daniel. and Roth, Felix. (2011) Do Germans support the Euro? CEPS Working Document No. 359, 15 December 2011. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/33169/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33170
2011-12-21T22:59:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The Enduring popularity of the Euro throughout the crisis. CEPS Working Document 358, 15 December 2011
Roth, Felix.
Jonung, Lars
Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas
EMU/EMS/euro
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
This paper analyses the evolution of public support for the euro from 1990 to 2011, using a
popularity function approach, focusing on the most recent period of the financial and
sovereign debt crisis. Exploring a huge database of close to half a million observations
covering the 12 original euro area member countries, we find that the ongoing crisis has only
marginally reduced citizens’ support for the euro – at least so far. This result is in stark
contrast to the sharp fall in public trust in the European Central Bank. We conclude that the
crisis has hardly dented popular support for the euro while the central bank supplying the
single currency has lost sharply in public trust. Thus, the euro appears to have established a
credibility of its own – separate from the institutional framework behind the euro.
2011-12
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33170/1/WD358_Roth_et_al_Enduring_Popularity_of_the_Euro.pdf
Roth, Felix. and Jonung, Lars and Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas (2011) The Enduring popularity of the Euro throughout the crisis. CEPS Working Document 358, 15 December 2011. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/33170/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33493
2012-02-21T03:56:01Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303434
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666706F6C69746963616C70617274696573
74797065733D61727469636C65
Engaging Citizens: How can Public Institutions Take Advantage of ICT for More Inclusion? EIPAscope 01/2011
Archmann, Sylvia
Guiiffart, Astrid
information technology policy
political parties
public opinion
Information and communication technologies (ICT) have supported the emergence of online citizens’ communities and non-institutional actors involved in politics, who have shaped public opinion on a number of issues. In parallel to a relative decline in formal civic engagement – both in terms of voters’ turnout or political party membership – new kinds of participation fostered by digital media are influencing policy initiatives and government behaviour1. The new possibilities offered by the internet enable ordinary citizens or civil society stakeholders to voice their opinions, to organise and mobilise themselves as well as to interact with public officials2.
Public institutions- referred to as bodies from all levels of government, national, local, regional or European- have a substantial role to play in the fostering of citizens’ involvement in public affairs through digital communication channels- regularly used by an increasing number of people around the globe. Information technology, by reason of its networking and linkage capacity is a crucial factor in strengthening civic engagement and ensuring a link between governmental organisations and grassroots. What is the relevance of digital media in the public participation challenge? How can public institutions use information technology to revive citizens’ interest in public affairs? Our view is that governments may build on the connectivity effect of online tools to encourage constituents’ participation in the policy process and get engaged in a two-way interaction with the public to better serve those who elect them.
European Institute of Public Administration
2011-01
Article
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33493/1/20110912121953_EipascopeSpecialIssue_Art3.pdf
http://publications.eipa.eu/en/eipascope/downloadarticle/&tid=1777
Archmann, Sylvia and Guiiffart, Astrid (2011) Engaging Citizens: How can Public Institutions Take Advantage of ICT for More Inclusion? EIPAscope 01/2011. EIPAScope, 2011 (1). pp. 21-24. ISSN 1025-6253
http://aei.pitt.edu/33493/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:39380
2013-01-26T00:34:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324555415345414E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Student's cross-perception of the economic crises in the European Union and in Southeast Asia. EU Centre in Singapore Working Paper No. 11, December 2012
Blizkovsky, Petr
EU-ASEAN
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
The financial crisis of 1997-1998 in Southeast Asia and the European Union’s financial crisis of 2008
followed by the sovereign debt crisis represented major policy events in the regions and beyond. The
crises triggered policy adjustments with implications on economic and other policies. This paper aims at evaluating the perception of university students in the European Union (EU) and Southeast Asia on the management of these crises. It strives to confirm several ex ante assumptions
about the relationship between students’ background, their policy orientation and their knowledge of
the European Union and ASEAN policies. It also provides an analysis of the students’ evaluation of the
geopolitical importance of the global regions and the EU and ASEAN policies.
The paper is based on opinion surveys conducted during the first part of 2012 at four universities, two in
the EU and two in ASEAN countries. In the eyes of EU and ASEAN students, the EU crisis is not being managed appropriately. The citizens of the EU surveyed were even significantly more critical of the EU’s anti-crisis measures than any other surveyed group. Their ASEAN counterparts were generally more positive in their evaluations.
2012-12
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/39380/1/WP11.StudentsCrossPerception.pdf
http://eucentre.sg/articles/420/downloads/WP11.StudentsCrossPerception.pdf
Blizkovsky, Petr (2012) Student's cross-perception of the economic crises in the European Union and in Southeast Asia. EU Centre in Singapore Working Paper No. 11, December 2012. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/39380/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:44481
2013-10-02T13:50:57Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Economic Basis of Attitudes towards the European Community: Familiarity Breeds Content. Institute for Advanced Studies Political Science Series, 12 April 1994
Bosch, Augusti
Newton, Kenneth
public opinion
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the economic basis of mass support for, and opposition to the European Community. In other words the main question is: to what extent, and in what ways, is popular support or opposition to the EC dependent upon economic circumstances and considerations? Behind this research question lies the matter of the legitimacy of the EC in the eyes of citizens across Europe. In some respects the results of this study are frustrating and inconclusive. In other respects, however, the results suggest some clear generalizations and conclusions. First, we have found rather little evidence that the EC or European unification are evaluated in primarily economic terms. Secondly, support seems to be associated more strongly with social and attitudinal variables of a non-economic kind. Thirdly, the figures suggest that diffuse and somewhat idealistic reasons for supporting unification and EC membership tend to outweigh more specific reasons. Fourthly, a solid foundation of inertia, custom, and national tradition seem to maintain support and make it grow.
1994-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/44481/1/1264675645_pw_12.pdf
http://www.ihs.ac.at/vienna/IHS-Departments-2/Political-Science-1/Publications-18/Political-Science-Series-2/Publications-19/publication-page:13.htm
Bosch, Augusti and Newton, Kenneth (1994) The Economic Basis of Attitudes towards the European Community: Familiarity Breeds Content. Institute for Advanced Studies Political Science Series, 12 April 1994. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/44481/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:52090
2017-07-31T18:01:12Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
The Securitization of Development Policy or the Developmentalization of Security Policy?: Legitimacy, Public Opinion, and the EU External Action Service (EAS)
Anderson, Stephanie
Williams, John.
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
legitimacy
public opinion
The EU has strained to find its identity as a security and defense power. The
EU, historically, has more experience and credibility in the area of its development policy.
Given the EU’s history of development promotion and recent efforts to expand and clarify
its foreign policy objectives, it should not be surprising that development and security
goals often resemble each other. This paper argues that the conflation of traditional
security concerns with the overall development policy of the EU indicates an expansion of
and an effort to legitimize the EU’s foreign and security policy. However, the lack of a
clear distinction between security and development strategies acts as both a hindrance, in
terms of operational clarity, and an asset, in terms of justification, to the formulation of a
more coherent EU foreign policy, especially after the passage of the Lisbon Treaty.
2011
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/52090/1/ANDERSON.pdf
Anderson, Stephanie and Williams, John. (2011) The Securitization of Development Policy or the Developmentalization of Security Policy?: Legitimacy, Public Opinion, and the EU External Action Service (EAS). [Conference Proceedings]
http://aei.pitt.edu/52090/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:52642
2019-11-29T19:22:41Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
Public Confidence in the EU: A Multivariate Analysis of the World Values Survey's Fifth Wave
Constantelos, John
Diven, Polly J.
public opinion
We analyze public confidence in the EU using the recently released fifth wave (2005-2008) of the World Values Survey. We argue that confidence in the European Union depends on an underlying trust in social and political institutions, and that confidence in the EU does not differ substantially from confidence in other international organizations. In a multivariate regression analysis of individual-level data, we also examine the impact of economic variables, knowledge, and territorial identity.
2011
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/52642/1/CONSTANTELOS.pdf
Constantelos, John and Diven, Polly J. (2011) Public Confidence in the EU: A Multivariate Analysis of the World Values Survey's Fifth Wave. [Conference Proceedings]
http://aei.pitt.edu/52642/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:52831
2020-01-05T15:25:53Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D6F74686572
Sticking Together Because We're Stuck Together: Solidarity, Indivisibility, and Collective Action in the European Union
Fogarty, Edward A.
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
public opinion
Starting from the premise that popular support is increasingly a necessary condition for European Union initiatives, this paper utilizes the concept of solidarity to attempt to better specify the nature of “we feeling” in Europe and its relationship to support for institutionalized collective action through the EU. Building on the Europeanization literature’s examination of the socialization of individuals toward European norms, the paper distinguishes between shared identities and common fate, arguing that the literature has tended to privilege the former over the latter. Using recent Eurobarometer public opinion surveys, this paper explores the different measures of identity and common fate and their apparent relationship to support for collective action across a range of issue areas.
2011
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/52831/1/FOGARTY.pdf
Fogarty, Edward A. (2011) Sticking Together Because We're Stuck Together: Solidarity, Indivisibility, and Collective Action in the European Union. UNSPECIFIED. (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/52831/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57940
2014-12-06T21:55:59Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
What do the Maidan protests tell us about Ukraine? Diagnosis and prospects for Ukrainian politics. OSW Commentary No. 125, 22.01.2014
Kononczuk, Wojciech
Olszanski, Tadeusz A.
Ukraine
public opinion
The outbreak of the protests in the Maidan in Kyiv, and also periodically in other Ukrainian
cities, has come as a surprise to both the government and the opposition. These rallies have
now been ongoing for several weeks and their most striking feature is their focus on citizenship
and their apolitical nature and, by extension, a clear attempt to dissociate the protests from
Ukraine’s political opposition. Neither Batkivshchyna, UDAR nor Svoboda have managed to take
over full control of the demonstrations. On the one hand, this has been linked to the fact that
the protesters have little confidence in opposition politicians and, on the other hand, to disputes
over a joint strategy and to rivalry between the three parties. As a result, the citizen-led movement
has managed to retain its independence from any political actors. As a consequence of
the radicalisation and escalation of the protests following 19 January, the political opposition
has lost a significant proportion of the control it had been in possession of until then.
Maidan should also be seen as the first clear manifestation of a new generation of Ukrainians
– raised in an independent Ukraine, well-educated and familiar with new social media, but
nonetheless seeking to ground themselves in national tradition. After the initial shock and
a series of failed attempts to quell the protests, the government has seemingly opted to wait
out the unrest. At the same time, however, it has been creating administrative obstacles for
both the political and the civil opposition, restricting their access to the media and severely
limiting the legal possibility to organise demonstrations.
2014-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57940/1/commentary_125.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2014-01-17/what-do-maidan-protests-tell-us-about-ukraine-diagnosis-and
Kononczuk, Wojciech and Olszanski, Tadeusz A. (2014) What do the Maidan protests tell us about Ukraine? Diagnosis and prospects for Ukrainian politics. OSW Commentary No. 125, 22.01.2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/57940/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57985
2014-12-06T22:23:14Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
74797065733D6F74686572
Unity stronger than divisions. Ukraine's internal diversity. OSW Point of View Number 40, March 2014
Olszanski, Tadeusz A.
Ukraine
public opinion
Ukraine is deeply divided internally, although as a result of the changes that have taken place since its independence, the country’s internal divisions now have less and less to do with territorial divides, and the split into historical ‘sub-Ukraines’ has become less pronounced, especially for the younger generation. Ukraine is not a country of two competing regional identities, one in the west, the other in the east. The western identity, in which the unity of Ukraine is a key value, coexists with the multiple and diverse local patriotisms of the different regions in the east and the south of the country. The present protest movement has consolidated the country’s sense of unity. Its opponents have also been championing the indivisibility of Ukraine, even while they demanded a thorough decentralisation of the country, which was often mistaken for separatism. Russia has been stirring up separatist tendencies in Ukraine, but with little success. Crimea is an exception here, because in most respects it has remained unaffected by the dynamics of the social processes transforming mainland Ukraine – separatist tendencies are indeed deeply rooted in the peninsula.
Labuszewska, Anna
2014-03
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57985/1/pw_40_unity_stronger_than_divisions_net.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/point-view/2014-03-07/unity-stronger-divisions-ukraines-internal-diversity
Olszanski, Tadeusz A. (2014) Unity stronger than divisions. Ukraine's internal diversity. OSW Point of View Number 40, March 2014. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/57985/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:74035
2020-01-17T20:40:38Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:676C6F62616C69736174696F6E676C6F62616C697A6174696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
The Economic Risks of Globalization: Expert and Public Opinion Survey Results. Global Choices 1/2012
Arpe, Jan
Glockner, Holger
Hauschild, Helmut
Petersen, Thieß
Schaich, Andreas
Volkmann, Tim
globalisation/globalization
public opinion
The world is changing at breathtaking speed. Global challenges, from climate change to cyber crime, are growing increasingly complex. Emerging economic powers in Asia and Latin America are assuming greater roles in geopolitical matters. The shift of economic power to the east is creating new dependencies. In short, the ground rules of international cooperation are being rewritten.
The “Global Choices” publication series takes a closer look at these changes and how they affect politics, business and society. By facilitating an informed understanding of these changes, this series aims to contribute constructively to debates regarding the principles of a new global order and the reforms needed to improve international cooperation. “Global Choices” is also a call to action because globalization is not a
matter of immutable fate; its trajectory can be shaped. “Global Choices” therefore underscores the fact that the power to make sound choices lies within our hands.
2012
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/74035/1/Global_Choices_01_2012_ST%2DNW_Economic_Risks_of_Globalization.pdf
Arpe, Jan and Glockner, Holger and Hauschild, Helmut and Petersen, Thieß and Schaich, Andreas and Volkmann, Tim (2012) The Economic Risks of Globalization: Expert and Public Opinion Survey Results. Global Choices 1/2012. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/74035/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:74131
2019-10-31T19:33:25Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
What Do the People Want? Opinions, Moods and Preferences
of European Citizens
de Vries, Catherine
Hoffmann, Isabell
public opinion
The Eurozone crisis has pushed reform of the European Union (EU) to the forefront of political debate. How can a Union of 28 states with a population of over half a billion be reformed to weather future economic crises and political challenges? Finding an answer to this question is extremely difficult not only because current reform proposals are so varied, but even more so because we
lack insights into the preferences for reform amongst national elites and publics. Although EU support has interested scholars for over three decades now, we virtually know nothing about public support for EU reform. Current research focuses almost exclusively on the causes of support for the current project and fails to provide a sufficient basis for effective reform decisions. Surely, the feasibility and sustainability of EU reform crucially hinges on the support amongst national publics. In this report, we examine public support for EU reform by developing a theoretical model and employing cutting-edge data collection techniques. Our findings will aid policy makers to craft EU reform proposals that can secure widespread public support. We aim to meet this objectives by crafting a novel multidimensional model, which posits that support for EU reform consists of four dimensions: a functional, communal, utilitarian and institutional dimension, and employing novel data collection techniques, such as a conjoint experiment.
2015
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/74131/1/What_do_the_people_want.pdf
de Vries, Catherine and Hoffmann, Isabell (2015) What Do the People Want? Opinions, Moods and Preferences of European Citizens. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/74131/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:76458
2020-02-04T12:04:12Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:4430627265786974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
74797065733D6F74686572
Keep calm and carry on. What Europeans think about a possible Brexit. Bertelsmann eupinion #2016/2
de Vries, Catherine
Hoffmann, Isabell
Brexit
U.K.
public opinion
From the Executive Summary. A majority of Europeans would like the UK to remain a member of the
European Union (EU), but at the same time they do not think that a
Brexit would be the end of Europe. Whereas age or gender do not have
a pronounced effect on how one views these matter, one factor clearly
does: the more people support their own country’s membership in the EU, the
more they want the UK to remain a member as well. The opposite is not true,
however. Eurosceptics are not rooting for the UK to leave. These public opinion
trends are demonstrated by the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s latest eupinions survey.
eupinions conducts regular polls in all European member states to explore what
European citizens think about current political issues. The latest wave of the survey
is devoted to their views on the British referendum on membership in the EU.
2016-06
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/76458/1/Survey_EZ_Keep_calm_and_carry_on_2016.pdf
http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/keep-calm-and-carry-on/
de Vries, Catherine and Hoffmann, Isabell (2016) Keep calm and carry on. What Europeans think about a possible Brexit. Bertelsmann eupinion #2016/2. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/76458/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:79006
2017-07-12T19:16:34Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039:443030323030395553
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6C6F626279696E67696E746572657374726570726573656E746174696F6E
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Interest groups and public opinion
Eliasson, Leif Johan
TTIP
lobbying/interest representation
public opinion
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) constitutes an attempt to improve job creation and boost the economies on both sides of the Atlantic. Yet economic benefits and standard setting impacts notwithstanding, policy makers and legislators assess trade and investment agreements by a different metric. Politics, not economics, will determine the fate of TTIP, and opponents appear to have made some inroads with the public. This paper looks at the influence of interest groups and public opinions on developments in TTIP. This initial study finds correlations between public interest group activity, public opinion, and changes in TTIP.
Key words: Transatlantic trade, public opinion, web trends, public interest groups.
2015
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/79006/1/Eliasson.1.pdf
Eliasson, Leif Johan (2015) The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Interest groups and public opinion. [Conference Proceedings] (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/79006/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:79026
2018-11-29T13:37:53Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D46:46303235
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303234
7375626A656374733D46:46303031
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
Authority transfer or membership conflict?
Explaining politicization of European integration in public debates
on major integration steps
Grande, Edgar
Hutter, Swen
Austria
France
Germany
Sweden
Switzerland
U.K.
public opinion
While there is increasing evidence that European integration has been politicized, knowledge
on the driving forces of this process is still limited. In this paper, we contribute to this research
by examining the importance of authority transfers to the EU as drivers of
politicization. It innovates in two ways: First, we extend the authority transfer argument by
highlighting the mobilizing power of membership conflicts; and, second, we analyze the
relevance of national opportunity structures, referenda in particular, and actors’ mobilizing
strategies for politicization. Our findings show that the authority transfer argument needs to
be extended and integrated into a broader framework of political conflict. Empirically, we
trace politicization in public debates on every integration step (treaty reforms and
enlargement) from the 1970s to the late 2000s in six West European countries (France,
Germany, Britain, Austria, Sweden, and Switzerland) based on a relational content analysis of
newspaper coverage.
2015
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/79026/1/Grande.pdf
Grande, Edgar and Hutter, Swen (2015) Authority transfer or membership conflict? Explaining politicization of European integration in public debates on major integration steps. [Conference Proceedings] (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/79026/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:85766
2020-01-17T20:36:10Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
Supportive but wary. How Europeans feel about the EU
60 years after the Treaty of Rome. eupinions #2017/1
de Vries, Catherine
Hoffman, Isabell
public opinion
The Eurozone crisis has pushed reform of the European Union (EU) to the forefront
of political debate. How can a Union of 28 states with a population of over half a
billion be reformed to weather future economic crises and political challenges?
Finding an answer to this question is extremely difficult not only because current
reform proposals are so varied, but even more so because we lack insights into the
preferences for reform amongst national elites and publics. Although EU support
has interested scholars for over three decades now, we virtually know nothing
about public support for EU reform. Current research focuses almost exclusively
on the causes of support for the current project and fails to provide a sufficient
basis for effective reform decisions. Surely, the feasibility and sustainability of
EU reform crucially hinges on the support amongst national publics. eupinions
examines public support for EU reform by developing a theoretical model and
employing cutting-edge data collection techniques. Our findings will aid policy
makers to craft EU reform proposals that can secure widespread public support.
2017-03
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/85766/1/EZ_eupinions_2017_01_ENG.pdf
http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/supportive-but-wary-1/
de Vries, Catherine and Hoffman, Isabell (2017) Supportive but wary. How Europeans feel about the EU 60 years after the Treaty of Rome. eupinions #2017/1. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/85766/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:88055
2017-07-18T18:57:24Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Some Issues in the Methodology of Attitude Research. ESRI Policy Series No. 3. November 1980
Davis, E. E.
Sinnott, R.
Ireland
public opinion
Following the publication of the paper Attitudes in the Republic of Ireland Relevant to the Northern Ireland Problem (ESRI Paper No. 97), by E. E. Davis and R. Sinnott, the Executive Committee of the lnstitute proposed that a paper be devoted to the subject which would enable the authors to respond fully to criticisms of Paper No. 97, and would allow the methodological and scholarly Issues that arise to be discussed in an appropriate academic forum. The
present paper is the outcome.
1980
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/88055/1/PRS3.pdf
Davis, E. E. and Sinnott, R. (1980) Some Issues in the Methodology of Attitude Research. ESRI Policy Series No. 3. November 1980. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/88055/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:88327
2017-07-18T19:03:15Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Roscommon Commuter Survey. ESRI Memorandum Series No. 149 1981
Author, No
Ireland
public opinion
The Roscommon Commuter Survey was designed to survey the attitudes of Roscommon people working in Dublin who came home at the week-ends. The questionnaire administered of its nature had to be simple and set out to discover some of the salient characteristics of these travellers. It did not sample Roscommon people living in Dublin who did not travel back by CIE. A study by Noirin Ni Bhroin some years ago showed that over two-thirds of typists interviewed in the Civil Service offices who came from outside Dublin would have preferred employment in their home areas. Such a
finding is an additional ingredient in any interpretation of the present survey. The first characteristic recorded showed that 53 of the 227 respondents were male and 174 female so that girls were more prone to travel home by CIE. This could mean that girls were less likely to drive cars, that marriage prospects were perceived to be better for them in a home environment or that they felt closer to their families, found Dublin more lonely at week-ends than men. It could even mean that when boys leave Roscommon they go further than Dublin or perhaps that fewer boys leave than girls. If we knew more about these facts we would
know what the finding signifies. As it stands whatever the reason 3 girls travelled home for every boy.
1981
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/88327/1/MEMO149.pdf
Author, No (1981) The Roscommon Commuter Survey. ESRI Memorandum Series No. 149 1981. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/88327/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:88850
2017-08-22T17:00:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303032
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Integration vs. contestation: Belgian perspectives on the future of Europe. Egmont Commentary, 30 June 2017
Mattelaer, Alexander
Belgium
public opinion
The Future of Europe study conducted by Chatham House across different EU member states offers revealing insights on the splits both within and between elites and the general public in their attitudes towards the EU. When zooming in on the Belgian dataset, these divides are loud and clear. The Belgian general public is considerably less enthusiastic about the EU than the average of European elites. Moreover, both elite and public opinion display deep internal splits.
2017-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
other
http://aei.pitt.edu/88850/1/index.html
http://www.egmontinstitute.be/integration-vs-contestation-belgian-perspectives-on-the-future-of-europe/
Mattelaer, Alexander (2017) Integration vs. contestation: Belgian perspectives on the future of Europe. Egmont Commentary, 30 June 2017. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/88850/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:93647
2018-11-28T20:13:39Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166664575726F7065616E656C656374696F6E73
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Europe's Great Divide. A geo-economic-political
map. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 101/2015 December 2015
Farina, Francesco
Tamborini, Roberto
EMU/EMS/euro
European elections/voting behavior
public opinion
It is now widely agreed that an important driver of the European economic crisis has been the
faulty original design of the Monetary Union, and that substantial steps are urgently needed
towards the creation of truly European fiscal institutions. The notorious stumbling block
along this path is political will. By cross-referencing the results of the 2014 elections of the
European Parliament with Eurobarometer opinion polls and an indicator of economic pain,
we argue that Europe experiences an unresolved tension between "more Europe" and "less
Europe" at the level of European peoples. Data analysis at the country level reveals a surge of
what we call Europe's Great Divide, a geo-economic-political cleavage across the EU and
across the EZ as well. This is more complex, and perhaps worse, than the simplistic divide
between "North" and "South" or "Core" and "Periphery", and it seriously undermines support
for ‘more Europe’ "from below".
2015-12
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/93647/1/LEQSPaper101.pdf
http://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/research/leqs-discussion-paper-series/papers
Farina, Francesco and Tamborini, Roberto (2015) Europe's Great Divide. A geo-economic-political map. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 101/2015 December 2015. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/93647/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:93660
2018-11-28T20:51:50Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
Producing salience or keeping silence? An exploration of topics and non-topics of Special Eurobarometers. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 88/2015 February 2015
Haverland, Markus
de Ruiter, Minou
Van de Walle, Steven
public opinion
Public opinion does not fall out of the sky. What passes for public opinion in the European
Union is largely the answers of its citizens to questions posed in surveys commissioned and
controlled by the European Commission. This paper presents the first systematic mapping of
the topics and non-topics of the 400 so-called Special Eurobarometers: reports based on
batteries of questions about specific policy issues posed in face-to-face interviews to about
25,000 citizens, constituting nationally representative samples of all member states. This
exploration is especially relevant against the background of the increased politicisation of the
EU; both given the potential value of public opinion as a “substitute” for a more direct link to
the electorate and as a power resource in decision-making. We chart the frequency of Special
EBs over time, identify the topics (and non-topics) using the Comparative Agenda Project’s
EU codebook, and relate their frequency to the distribution of competencies between the EU
and its member states. We also document the variation across DGs in their effort to gauge
public opinion. We conclude that the Commission is increasingly seeking public opinion and
that it does so in a very broad range of policy areas. We find a curvilinear relationship
between the degree of EU competencies and the frequency of Special EBs. Citizen input is less
sought in areas where the EU already has far reaching competencies and in areas which are
clearly in the national (or even sub-national) domain. The lion’s share of Special EBs is
conducted in the realm of shared competencies, with an emphasis on those areas where the
EU got involved relatively recently. We also detected only two Special EBs specifically related
to the redistribution of resources (e.g., cohesion policy) and none on immigration. We also
find a large variation across the DGs on whose behalf Special EBs are conducted. Three DGs
are responsible for half of all EBs and nine DGs for less than five percent. These results open
up promising avenues for research on the responsiveness of the European Commission and
its agenda setting strategies and legitimacy seeking behaviour.
2015-02
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/93660/1/LEQSPaper88.pdf
http://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/research/leqs-discussion-paper-series/papers
Haverland, Markus and de Ruiter, Minou and Van de Walle, Steven (2015) Producing salience or keeping silence? An exploration of topics and non-topics of Special Eurobarometers. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 88/2015 February 2015. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/93660/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:93665
2018-08-08T01:17:28Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
‘Monnet’s Error?’. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 83/2014 November 2014
Guiso, Luigi
Sapienza, Paola
Zingales, Luigi
public opinion
Do partial steps toward European integration generate support for further steps or do
they create a political backlash? We try to answer this question by analyzing the cross
sectional and time series variation in pro-European sentiments in the EU 15 countries.
The two major steps forward (the 1992 Maastricht Treaty and the 2004 enlargement)
seem to have reduced the pro-Europe sentiment as does the 2010 Eurozone crisis.
Yet, in spite of the worst recession in recent history, the Europeans still support the
common currency. Europe seems trapped in catch-22: there is no desire to go backward,
no interest in going forward, but it is economically unsustainable to stay still.
2014-11
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/93665/1/LEQSPaper83.pdf
http://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/research/leqs-discussion-paper-series/papers
Guiso, Luigi and Sapienza, Paola and Zingales, Luigi (2014) ‘Monnet’s Error?’. LEQS Discussion Paper No. 83/2014 November 2014. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/93665/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:98544
2019-11-29T21:50:26Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
SATISFACTION WITH LIFE IN EUROPE. ESRI Research Bulletin 2010/2/2
Watson, Dorothy
public opinion
What makes Europeans satisfied with their lives? Do supportive relationships and the quality of public services matter? Do some things matter more to poor than to rich European citizens? These were some of the questions addressed in a recent report** using data on 31 countries from the 2007 European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS).
2010
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/98544/1/RB20100202.pdf
Watson, Dorothy (2010) SATISFACTION WITH LIFE IN EUROPE. ESRI Research Bulletin 2010/2/2. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/98544/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102422
2020-02-07T21:24:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:4430627265786974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
74797065733D6F74686572
We’ll be fine.
How People in the EU27 View Brexit. eupinions brief | February 2019
de Vries, Catherine E
Hoffmann, Isabell
Brexit
U.K.
public opinion
The political drama called Brexit leaves observers in London fascinated, appalled
or exhausted. Whereas in the UK, the tension seems to intensify with every twist
and turn the British take on their way out of the European Union, Europeans on the
continent seem to be surprisingly detached. They support their country’s
membership in the EU in ever greater numbers, and calmly carry on with their daily
business. Don’t they think that they will be affected by Brexit? We decided to ask
them
2019-02
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102422/1/eupinions_brief_Brexit_engl.pdf
de Vries, Catherine E and Hoffmann, Isabell (2019) We’ll be fine. How People in the EU27 View Brexit. eupinions brief | February 2019. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102422/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102423
2020-02-07T21:38:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
Je t’aime. Moi non plus = I love you. Neither do I. eupinions brief | February 2019
de Vries,, Catherine E.
Hoffmann, Isabell
France
public opinion
When Emmanuel Macron won the French presidential election with a risky strategy
and against all odds in May 2017, spring seemed to break out in Paris.
New faces, new dynamics, and the promise to do many things differently and thus
better, were in the air and inspired large swathes of the French public.
But the protests of the "yellow vests" have in their intensity and perseverance now
shaken the last optimist. And they’ve reminded us of how deep the trenches
between the political interests in France are – as well as how much energy and
effort it takes to navigate them.
2019-02
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102423/1/eupinions_brief_France.pdf
de Vries,, Catherine E. and Hoffmann, Isabell (2019) Je t’aime. Moi non plus = I love you. Neither do I. eupinions brief | February 2019. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102423/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102424
2020-02-07T21:53:31Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:656661454D55454D536575726F
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D6F74686572
Great expectations The New European Commission,
its Ambition and European Public Opinion. eupinions 2019/2
de Vries,, Catherine E.
Hoffmann, Isabell
European Commission
EMU/EMS/euro
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
The Eurozone crisis has pushed reform of the European Union (EU) to the forefront
of political debate. How can a Union of 28 states with a population of over half a
billion be reformed to weather future economic crises and political challenges?
Finding an answer to this question is extremely difficult not only because current
reform proposals are so varied, but even more so because we lack insights into the
preferences for reform amongst national elites and publics.
Although EU support
has interested scholars for over three decades now, we virtually
know nothing
about public support for EU reform. Current research
focuses
almost
exclusively
on the causes of support for the current project and fails to provide a sufficient
basis for effective reform decisions. Surely, the feasibility
and sustainability of
EU reform crucially hinges on the support amongst national
publics. eupinions
examines public support for EU reform by developing a theoretical model and
employing cutting-edge data collection techniques. Our findings will aid policy
makers to craft EU reform proposals that can secure widespread public support.
2019
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102424/1/eupinions_expectations.pdf
de Vries,, Catherine E. and Hoffmann, Isabell (2019) Great expectations The New European Commission, its Ambition and European Public Opinion. eupinions 2019/2. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102424/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102425
2020-02-07T22:00:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
74797065733D6F74686572
The Power of the Past How Nostalgia Shapes
European Public Opinion. eupinions #2018/2
de Vries, Catherine
Hoffmann, Isabell
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
public opinion
The Eurozone crisis has pushed reform of the European Union (EU) to the forefront
of political debate. How can a Union of 28 states with a population of over half
a billion be reformed to weather future economic crises and political challenges?
Finding an answer to this question is extremely difficult not only because current
reform proposals are so varied, but even more so because we lack insights into the
preferences for reform amongst national elites and publics.
Although EU support
has interested scholars for over three decades now, we virtually
know nothing
about public support for EU reform. Current research
focuses
almost
exclusively
on the causes of support for the current project and fails to provide a sufficient
basis for effective reform decisions. Surely, the feasibility
and sustainability of
EU reform crucially hinges on the support amongst national
publics. eupinions
examines public support for EU reform by developing a theoretical model and
employing cutting-edge data collection techniques. Our findings will aid policy
makers to craft EU reform proposals that can secure widespread public support.
2018
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102425/1/eupinions_Nostalgia.pdf
de Vries, Catherine and Hoffmann, Isabell (2018) The Power of the Past How Nostalgia Shapes European Public Opinion. eupinions #2018/2. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102425/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102428
2020-02-07T22:23:10Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
74797065733D6F74686572
Cold Love eupinions Brief | January 2018
de Vries, Catherine
Hoffmann, Isabell
EU-US
public opinion
The 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, has been highly
controversial ever since he took office over a year ago. His isolationist message of
‘America First’, his decision to pull out of the Paris climate agreement and to move
the US embassy to Jerusalem are just some of his actions that have created great
controversy on the global stage. While his predecessor Barack Obama was hugely
popular among the European public, how do Europeans view President Donald
Trump and the future of the transatlantic partnership?
2018-01
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102428/1/EZ_eupinions_Brief_Trump_englisch.pdf
de Vries, Catherine and Hoffmann, Isabell (2018) Cold Love eupinions Brief | January 2018. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102428/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102445
2020-02-11T14:00:48Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Local infrastructure and economic opportunities: What do Europeans think about their neighbourhood? Bertelsmann Policy Brief
Schmidt, Sylvia
Wortmann, Marcus
Germany
public opinion
In a recent eupinions survey, we set out to explore what people in Europe think about
their neighbourhood, the quality of local infrastructure and of economic opportunities
in their area. Overall, the results show a generally high degree of satisfaction with
living conditions “on the ground”, but satisfaction levels differ for example between
respondents living in rural and those living in urban areas. What stands out however
is the pessimistic judgement of economic opportunities for young people.
2019-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102445/1/2019.pdf
Schmidt, Sylvia and Wortmann, Marcus (2019) Local infrastructure and economic opportunities: What do Europeans think about their neighbourhood? Bertelsmann Policy Brief. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102445/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102471
2020-02-20T16:34:06Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C6166666169727367726F777468
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:676C6F62616C69736174696F6E676C6F62616C697A6174696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303138:656C6D6C61626F75726D6967726174696F6E
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
RESISTING DEGLOBALISATION: THE CASE OF EUROPE. Bruegel Working Paper Issue 1 3 February 2020
Darvas, Zsolt
economic growth
labour migration, intra-EU
globalisation/globalization
public opinion
Global trade and finance data indicates that the pre-2008 pace of economic
globalisation has stalled or even reversed. The European Union has defied
this trend, with trade flows and financial claims continuing to grow after the
recovery from the 2008 global economic and financial crisis. Immigration,
including intra-EU mobility, has also continued to increase.
Our analysis of public opinion in EU countries shows that support for
globalisation, free trade and immigration, is on the rise. EU public opinion on
these issues does not differ greatly from the rest of the world.
Our panel-model estimates for EU countries from 2009 to 2019 find a strong
association between the unemployment rate and the prevailing view on
whether globalisation is an opportunity for economic growth. A regression for
19 non-EU countries shows the unemployment rate is significantly associated
with public support for trade. These findings suggest that cyclical economic
factors partially drive views about globalisation. Our analysis suggests younger
and better-educated people in the EU view globalisation more positively, as
do those in better economic situations, those who feel politically included
and those with a positive view of the EU. Increased support for globalisation
among EU citizens might also have been boosted by policies to improve social
fairness, and by some success in containing asylum-seeker pressure. However,
the EU continues to have pressing social problems, concentrated in some
member countries with weaker economic outlooks. With global and European
economic growth slowing and the risk of a European recession increasing,
unemployment tensions could re-emerge, which might reverse recent
increases in support for globalisation.
2020-02
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102471/1/WP%2D2020%2D01%2DZsolt%2DDarvas%2DResisting%2DDeglobalization%2Dthe%2Dcase%2Dof%2DEurope.pdf
Darvas, Zsolt (2020) RESISTING DEGLOBALISATION: THE CASE OF EUROPE. Bruegel Working Paper Issue 1 3 February 2020. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102471/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102547
2020-03-01T20:01:55Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:4430627265786974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303236
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Hello, Goodbye. Bertelsmann Stiftung eupinions brief | January 2020
de Vries,, Catherine E.
Hoffmann, Isabell
Brexit
U.K.
public opinion
As the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union all eyes are on the eminent
economic effects and future trade negotiations. How the British people feel about
the state of their country at this defining moment of their political history has
received less attention. In this eupinions brief, we examine how British citizens
evaluate the state of their national democracy and the direction of their home
country. We also ask what they expect for their personal lives.
2020-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102547/1/eupinions_brief_Hello_Goodbye.pdf
de Vries,, Catherine E. and Hoffmann, Isabell (2020) Hello, Goodbye. Bertelsmann Stiftung eupinions brief | January 2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102547/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102575
2020-03-07T21:48:37Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
European Citizens’ Panel on the future of Europe Bertelsmann Stiftung Evaluation Report
Hierlemann, Dominik
Huesmann, Christian
public opinion
New forms of democratic participation are
gaining ground rapidly. Many EU Member
States have reacted to their citizens’ increasing
demands for participation. There are more and
more new ways to participate in political discussions
and decision-making on both local and
national level. By participating in the European
Citizens’ Initiative, online consultations by the
Commission, or European Citizens’ Dialogues,
EU citizens can also take an active part in policymaking
at the European level.
A wide range of different citizens’ consultations
began in EU Member States in spring 2018 on the
instigation of the President of the French Republic,
Emmanuel Macron, with the support of the
other European heads of state and government
and the European Commission. With European
Parliament elections coming up in May 2019, this
has prompted a transnational discussion about
the future of the EU.
As part of this debate, the Citizens’ Panel on
the future of Europe, which was organised by
the Commission and took place from 4 – 6 May
2018 (5 May: Europe Day), brought together 100
citizens from all EU27 Member States to discuss
the future of Europe. Kantar, a service provider
in the field of market research, working together
with different organisations in the field of participation,
was assigned with the the organisation
and facilitation of the process. For example,
participants from all over Europe were selected
at random in order to represent the diversity
of Europe and its citizens. The Bertelsmann
Stiftung acted as an academic partner and was
responsible for evaluating the event.
The aim of the Citizens’ Panel was to develop 12
questions for an online survey on the future of
Europe – created by EU citizens for EU citizens.
Open and closed questions were combined in
such a way that citizens could complete the
questionnaire quickly and easily.
The online survey was launched in all EU languages
on 6 May 2018. Initial results are scheduled
for discussion by heads of state and government
in December 2018. A definitive report
will be submitted on 9 May 2019 during the EU27
Summit in Sibiu, Romania.
2018
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102575/1/224%2D2018_BST_Evaluationsberich_Citizens_Panel_final.pdf
Hierlemann, Dominik and Huesmann, Christian (2018) European Citizens’ Panel on the future of Europe Bertelsmann Stiftung Evaluation Report. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102575/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102582
2020-03-11T18:13:59Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
What Europe Knows and Thinks About Algorithms
Results of
a Representative Survey. Bertelsmann Stiftung eupinions February 2019
Grzymek, Viktoria
Puntschuh, Michael
Germany
public opinion
We live in an algorithmic world. Day by day, each of us is affected by decisions that algorithms make for and about
us – generally without us being aware of or consciously perceiving this. Personalized advertisements in social
media, the invitation to a job interview, the assessment of our creditworthiness – in all these cases, algorithms
already play a significant role – and their importance is growing, day by day.
The algorithmic revolution in our daily lives undoubtedly brings with it great opportunities. Algorithms are masters
at handling complexity. They can manage huge amounts of data quickly and efficiently, processing it consistently
every time. Where humans reach their cognitive limits, find themselves making decisions influenced by the day’s
events or feelings, or let themselves be influenced by existing prejudices, algorithmic systems can be used to
benefit society. For example, according to a study by the Expert Council of German Foundations on Integration and
Migration, automotive mechatronic engineers with Turkish names must submit about 50 percent more applications
than candidates with German names before being invited to an in-person job interview (Schneider, Yemane and
Weinmann 2014). If an algorithm were to make this decision, such discrimination could be prevented. However,
automated decisions also carry significant risks: Algorithms can reproduce existing societal discrimination and
reinforce social inequality, for example, if computers, using historical data as a basis, identify the male gender as
a labor-market success factor, and thus systematically discard job applications from woman, as recently took place
at Amazon (Nickel 2018).
2019-02
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102582/1/WhatEuropeKnowsAndThinkAboutAlgorithm.pdf
Grzymek, Viktoria and Puntschuh, Michael (2019) What Europe Knows and Thinks About Algorithms Results of a Representative Survey. Bertelsmann Stiftung eupinions February 2019. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102582/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102595
2020-03-19T16:06:05Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
74797065733D6F74686572
Citizens’ Consultations on Europe:
French Citizens’ Panel
October 25 to 27, 2018, Paris
Review report
Diebold, Céline
Hierlemann, Dominik
France
public opinion
The following document analyses the French Citizens’ Panel, held in the context
of Citizens’ Consultations on Europe. The report first presents the project, by
stressing the method used to select the participants, then it takes into account
the feedback of the participants as part of the evaluation and finally it gives some
guidelines to think about the lessons to be learnt from this first French Citizens’
Panel.
2018-10
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102595/1/review_report.pdf
Diebold, Céline and Hierlemann, Dominik (2018) Citizens’ Consultations on Europe: French Citizens’ Panel October 25 to 27, 2018, Paris Review report. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102595/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102637
2020-03-23T15:02:25Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6D656469616D65646961
74797065733D6F74686572
Perceptions of the EU in the Singapore media in 2011. EU Centre in Singapore Research Brief (October 2011)
Hoe-Yeong, Loke
Mohr, Cathrin
media
public opinion
The EU Centre in Singapore is a partner in the Jean Monnet research project ‘After Lisbon: the EU as an exporter of values and norms through ASEM’ (2011-12), led by the National Centre for Research on Europe (NCRE) at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, and supported by the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF). The project seeks to study how the European Union (EU) is perceived at different levels of society in Australia, China, India, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Russia, South Korea, Singapore and Thailand.
2011-10
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102637/1/ResearchBrief%2DNo1.pdf
Hoe-Yeong, Loke and Mohr, Cathrin (2011) Perceptions of the EU in the Singapore media in 2011. EU Centre in Singapore Research Brief (October 2011). UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/102637/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103226
2020-09-29T14:21:57Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303436
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
A Return of Trust? Future of Democracy 01.2020 May 2020.
Vehrkamp, Robert
Bischoff, Lars
public health policy (including global activities)
Germany
public opinion
The initial phase of the corona crisis has led to a
significant improvement in the levels of confidence
that Germans have in their state and government.
More than two-thirds of all people in Germany
currently regard the state as being “rather strong”
or “very strong.” This means that the level of trust
has risen by 23 percentage points since the end of
2019. At the same time, less than a quarter (23%)
still think the state is “rather weak” or “very weak.”
That is only about half as many people as at the
end of 2019. In addition, more than twice as many
people (49%) compared to last year, consider our
government to be “strong enough,” and only half
as many currently view the political system and
political stability as weaknesses. Satisfaction
with the government has also reached a high level
as compared to other countries. Thus, the initial
phase of combating the pandemic has led to a
massive return of trust in the state’s and the
government’s ability to act. The current trust levels
are the highest seen in more than twenty years.
Although there was still talk at the end of 2019 of an
“erosion of trust,” public sentiment has turned completely
around during the first phase of the crisis.
But how stable are these figures? In any case, one
thing is certain: The measured confidence levels
are situation-related “performance evaluations.”
In other words, they depict sentiments related to
an ongoing event. If the assessed event changes,
trust levels can also change again. In the process,
short-term setbacks are just as imaginable as
further consolidation or improvement. Therefore,
the measured values represent situation-specific
sentiments rather than basic convictions independent
of current events. Nevertheless, they do show
that the first phase of combating the pandemic has
led to a significant increase in popular trust in the
government. This freshly gained capital could still
be needed in subsequent phases, so it must not be
carelessly squandered in the phase of initial easing
that is just now beginning.
2020-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103226/1/ZD_Einwurf_1_2020_A_Return_of_Trust%2D1.pdf
Vehrkamp, Robert and Bischoff, Lars (2020) A Return of Trust? Future of Democracy 01.2020 May 2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103226/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103565
2021-09-10T14:08:22Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:443030313033396D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46303130
74797065733D6F74686572
Hidden versus revealed attitudes: A list experiment on support for minorities in Ireland. ESRI Report July 2020.
McGinnity, Frances
Creighton, Mathew
Fahey, Éamonn
migration Policy
Ireland
public opinion
immigration policy
New research published today reveals the gap between what people say in public about their attitudes to minorities in Ireland, and what they say when afforded anonymity. The study challenges previous assumptions about people’s views, and has implications for policy approaches to foster interculturalism.
2020-07
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103565/1/BKMNEXT372_1.pdf
McGinnity, Frances and Creighton, Mathew and Fahey, Éamonn (2020) Hidden versus revealed attitudes: A list experiment on support for minorities in Ireland. ESRI Report July 2020. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/103565/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103732
2021-11-18T17:27:05Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666707569657075
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
“Una casa para todos”: Observations from the first European Citizens’ Panel of the Conference on the Future of Europe. EPC Report 24/09/2021.
Stratulat, Corina
Greubel, Johannes
public opinion
political union & integration/European Political Union
Last weekend, 180 citizens from all over the European Union gathered in Strasbourg for the first European Citizens’ Panel of the Conference on the Future of Europe. EPC analysts Johannes Greubel and Corina Stratulat were there to observe. They share their first impressions in a special report for the Conference Observatory.
Besides a comprehensive description of the process and the overall atmosphere in Strasbourg, the report assesses the chosen methods and procedures. It also highlights a few kinks that could – and should - be ironed out in the course of the Conference.
Despite some of the shortcomings mentioned in the report, the authors saw signs of hope and optimism. The organisers went to great lengths to design a process that considers fundamental elements of deliberative exercises. This ECP also confirms the potential of such activities to actively engage participants, broaden their perspectives and knowledge, and leave a long-lasting impression on them. The mood of the citizens in the final plenary of this first ECP session was overwhelmingly positive. They were excited about the experience they had lived through over the weekend, all the people they met, everything they learned, and the opportunity they were offered to make their voices heard.
2021-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103732/1/1st_CoFoE_Citizens_Panel.pdf
Stratulat, Corina and Greubel, Johannes (2021) “Una casa para todos”: Observations from the first European Citizens’ Panel of the Conference on the Future of Europe. EPC Report 24/09/2021. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103732/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103789
2022-02-02T18:20:37Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:7061666664656D6F637261637964656D6F63726174696364656669636974
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166666C65676974696D616379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Protest suspended – Belarusian society one year after the presidential elections. OSW Commentary Number 401 3.08.2021.
Kłysiński, Kamil
Belarus
democracy/democratic deficit
legitimacy
public opinion
The progressive decline in living standards in Belarus and the authorities' dismissive attitude towards the COVID-19 pandemic have intensified public disillusionment with Alyaksandr Lukashenka. This led to an increase in the civic activity of Belarusians – previously seen as passive – in the campaign prior to the presidential election on 9 August last year. The revival of social life was accompanied by a growing national consciousness. Both processes mostly concerned the relations between the authorities and civil society, and to a lesser extent the geopolitical orientation, although later polls revealed the first signs of waning trust in Russia and a greater openness towards the West. The forged results of the vote this time gave rise to unprecedented protests, and the violent reaction by law enforcement only fuelled greater resistance among citizens. The lack of concessions shown by the authorities and the weariness of the demonstrators resulted in the demonstrations being brought to a halt at the end of 2020. At the same time, the authorities started to systemically and thoroughly eliminate independent media and third sector structures to discourage citizens from any manifestations of opposition. Despite the use of instruments characteristic of a totalitarian regime, there are numerous indications that the grievances have not been permanently suppressed. The Belarusian citizens who opposed the authorities last year mostly retained their pro-democratic views and aspirations to structure the state according to the Western model. They will rise rapidly to greater prominence as the oppressive regime backed by Russia continues to lose its credibility.
2021-08
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103789/1/Commentary_401.pdf
Kłysiński, Kamil (2021) Protest suspended – Belarusian society one year after the presidential elections. OSW Commentary Number 401 3.08.2021. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103789/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103813
2022-02-10T17:47:33Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:706166667075626C69636F70696E696F6E
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Belarusians on Poland, Russia and themselves. OSW Commentary Number 373 29.01.2021.
OSW, Team
Belarus
public opinion
political affairs
Belarus is the only country in Europe where public opinion polls are not published on a regular basis. This is a result of repressive policy of the Belarusian government, which has effectively banned sociological research related to politically ‘sensitive’ topics such as political ratings. This means that little is known about the attitudes of the Belarusian people or their views on political issues. At the request of the OSW and on the basis of questions it prepared, Belarusian interviewers conducted a telephone survey between 26 November and 16 December 2020 with a representative sample of 1000 respondents, the aim of which was to examine Belarusian opinions about selected countries, including Poland and Russia. It should be emphasised that no one has conducted a similarly comprehensive public survey for many months.
2021-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103813/1/Commentary_373_0.pdf
OSW, Team (2021) Belarusians on Poland, Russia and themselves. OSW Commentary Number 373 29.01.2021. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103813/