Suchergebnisse

"The United States and the European Union" published on by Oxford University Press.

Increasingly, research on attitudes towards the European project focuses on transnational practices. This article furthers the transnational approach by offering the first systematic analysis of how domestic transnationalism – i.e. transnational practices conducted in the home country – influences the formation of pro-European sentiments. We argue that domestic transnational activities foster recognition of common, transnational interests and identities that support the European integration project. Using a 2013 Eurobarometer, we show the distinct need to pay attention to domestic transnationalism. Individuals engaging in more domestic transnational activities display more pro-European sentiments in four of our five dependent variables. Moreover, the effect of domestic transnationalism is particularly intense among less-educated citizens.

This article summarizes and extends the main lines of theorizing on public opinion on European integration. We test theories of economic calculus and communal identity in a multi-level analysis of Eurobarometer data. Both economic calculus and communal identity are influential, but the latter is stronger than the former. We theorize how the political consequences of identity are contested and shaped - that is to say, politically cued - in national contexts. The more national elites are divided, the more citizens are cued to oppose European integration, and this effect is particularly pronounced among citizens who see themselves as exclusively national. A model that synthesizes economic, identity, and cue theory explains around one-quarter of variation at the individual level and the bulk of variation at the national and party levels.

The author analyses the goals and instruments of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), discusses approaches which theorise its functioning, examines its policy content and develops a framework for its evaluation

European support for integration is shaped by a range of economic, cultural, and political factors. However, in recent decades, scholars have argued that utilitarian calculations have become less important as European integration has advanced, and political entrepreneurs have mobilized nationalist identities. We analyze 24 years of responses to the Eurobarometer (1995–2018) to assess the influence of economic factors on public attitudes toward European integration. We find strong evidence that utilitarian factors are important across the entire panel. The performance of the macro-economy, as measured by unemployment, and an individual's position in the labor market, are consistent predictors of public support for and satisfaction with the European Union. Collective identity is also associated with attitudes toward the European Union. However, an individual's identity is also shaped by economic circumstances.

I extend the standard spatial model of legislative voting to account for vote-specific party inducements and procedural differences. Focusing on voting in the 1999—2004 European Parliament, I find evidence of vote-specific party inducements in a large share of the roll call votes. Furthermore, MEPs position themselves differently across procedures. As most roll call votes are taken on non-legislative votes, these estimates may overemphasize voting pattern on these votes and downplay voting pattern on legislative votes. As such, these estimates may be a poorly suited for studying within party heterogeneity on legislative votes.

Does the n-issue space in domestic European polities reduce to one, two, or more dimensions? How do these dimensions relate to each other? More broadly, how does dimensionality vary across countries? We attempt to advance our understanding of political contestation in Europe by mapping the dimensionality of the political space across 24 countries using Chapel Hill expert survey (CHES) data. We test how well different models of the European political space fit the CHES data and find that three-dimensional models best fit the data in all countries. However, there is considerable cross-national variation in how the three dimensions relate to one another. Given this, we present a new measure of dimensional complexity that captures the degree to which these three dimensions are related. In so doing, we improve our understanding of the complexity of the political space in European countries.

I extend the standard spatial model of legislative voting to account for vote-specific party inducements and procedural differences. Focusing on voting in the 1999-2004 European Parliament, I find evidence of vote-specific party inducements in a large share of the roll call votes. Furthermore, MEPs position themselves differently across procedures. As most roll call votes are taken on non-legislative votes, these estimates may overemphasize voting pattern on these votes and downplay voting pattern on legislative votes. As such, these estimates may be a poorly suited for studying within party heterogeneity on legislative votes. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

This article takes issue with conventional explanations of state preference formation on European integration. It tests the hypothesis that Left-Right ideology is a better predictor than nationality of party views on integration, then tests the relationship between government ideology and government position on several dozen proposals considered during the intergovernmental conference leading up to the signing of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997. It finds no significant relationship between nationality and preferences on integration, posing a challenge for liberal, functional and historical theories of state preference formation. However, there appears to be a significant and robust relationship between party ideology (and the resulting ideology of governments) and their preferences regarding integration generally, and the Amsterdam negotiations specifically.

Over the past two decades the educational practices within EU studies have been challenged by the lack of comprehensive texts on research strategy, design and method useful for study programmes. Since the 'comparative turn' of the 1990s, where we saw a shift towards applying theories, analytical frameworks and research methods known from the study of national political systems, EU studies programs have been faced with two choices when putting together curricula: either to downplay issues of research methodology in the curriculum, or to embark on the troublesome journey of putting together discrete readers of articles and papers from a limited and dispersed scholarly field. The actual practice of EU studies programmes has probably been somewhere in-between. That is, to give a lesser amount of attention to research strategy, design and method through the use of general textbooks combined with, at best, empirical examples derived from actual research projects in EU affairs. Yet, this otherwise pragmatic approach has become increasingly difficult. In this sense EU studies is at a crossroads of the meeting place between many disciplinary interests in Europe, as well as the point in time where the past weaknesses of methodology meet the future challenges of a new research agenda on Europe.

In this 2006 book, Jonas Tallberg offers a novel perspective on some of the most fundamental questions about international cooperation and European Union politics. Offering the first systematic theoretical and empirical exploration of the influence wielded by chairmen of multilateral negotiations, Tallberg develops a rationalist theory of formal leadership and demonstrates its explanatory power through carefully selected case studies of EU negotiations. He shows that the rotating Presidency of the EU constitutes a power platform that grants governments unique opportunities to shape the outcomes of negotiations. His provocative analysis establishes that Presidencies, while performing vital functions for the EU, simultaneously exploit their privileged political position to favour national interests. Extending the scope of the analysis to international negotiations on trade, security and the environment, Tallberg further demonstrates that the influence of the EU Presidency is not an isolated occurrence but the expression of a general phenomenon in world politics - the power of the chair

This article tries to evaluate the impact of domestic and international factors on both deficits and deficit reduction in the European Union. Based on data covering 14 countries and 20 fiscal years (1978-97) we test the major hypotheses in the political economy literature. Beyond the investigation of the causes of cross-sectional variations in budget outcomes, we are also interested in changing patterns of influences over time, resulting from so-called `structural breaks'. On the one hand, our pooled time-series analyses show that very few political and institutional factors influenced the budget outcomes of the EU member states during this period. On the other hand, our estimation results provide suggestive support for our assumption that `Maastricht' amounted to a decisive structural break.

The relationship between public opinion and public policy provides a potential criterion for assessing the democratic quality of the European Union. The few existing time series analyses in this area assume that there exists a European-wide public mood towards integration. Analyzing West-European series of public opinion from 1974 to 2011, this article finds considerable support for this assumption. However, the analysis also points towards a 'periphery-trend', driven by the UK, Ireland and Denmark, in contrast to a 'core-trend', driven by the founders of the European Economic Community (EEC). The analysis further shows that both opinion trends are cointegrated with public policy in this area: European integration appears to be significantly influenced, or constrained, by public opinion both in the core and periphery.