Abstract
This chapter unites the theoretical models and the contextual analysis of the Euro crisis to lay out the further empirical agenda. It drafts a series of four subsequent studies with their own contribution to answering the guiding research questions of this book: First, how generalized EU support has developed during the period under investigation, second, whether the explanatory power of its determinants has changed, third, how these changes reflect the heterogeneous nature of the crisis’ repercussions on citizens in different member states, and fourth, whether the development and explanation of generalized EU support have also manifested in EU-sceptical electoral behaviour during the 2014 European Parliament elections. This chapter concludes with the presentation of systematic and consolidated explanatory models of the two dependent variables in this book—generalized EU regime support as well as EU-sceptical and EU-supporting electoral behaviour.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Republic of Croatia joined the EU in July 2013 and is therefore excluded from the attitudinal analyses in this study due to its special position given its late accession in the last third of the period under investigation.
- 2.
Details on these instruments will be provided in the subsequent chapters.
- 3.
Especially those determinants that I included in the conceptualization of EU support attitudes.
- 4.
Guiso et al. (2016) discriminate between geographic subgroups of the EU-15: North: Denmark, Sweden, Finland, United Kingdom, Ireland. Centre: Austria, Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg. South: Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal.
- 5.
A more direct measurement of systemic performance evaluations during the Euro crisis would be the perceived effectiveness of crisis management on distinct levels of politics. Also, discriminating those evaluations during the salient phase of the crisis between the respective country groups could be another test of the proposed pyramid of domain heterogeneity. Since study I focuses on the entire period under investigation, those aspects will be focused on in the special analyses of study III.
- 6.
02/2016 to 03/2018.
- 7.
Greece and Cyprus are missing in the F-context since both countries have not left the financial assistance programme until the end of the period under investigation. That is, all findings about context F only concern Spain, Italy, Ireland, and Portugal.
- 8.
Since the utilized surveys of study III do not cover the entire period under investigation, I cannot specify differences for all six crisis contexts and thus focus on the two country groups of donor and crisis countries instead.
- 9.
All survey items, their question wording, and coding are presented in Sect. 8.2 and the appendix.
References
Ares, M., Ceka, B., & Kriesi, H. (2016). Diffuse support for the European Union: Spillover effects of the politicization of the European integration process at the domestic level. Journal of European Public Policy, 24, 1091–1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2016.1191525.
Armingeon, K., & Ceka, B. (2014). The loss of trust in the European Union during the great recession since 2007: The role of heuristics from the national political system. European Union Politics, 15, 82–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116513495595.
Braun, D., & Tausendpfund, M. (2014). The impact of the Euro crisis on citizens’ support for the European Union. Journal of European Integration, 36, 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2014.885751.
Chalmers, A. W., & Dellmuth, L. M. (2015). Fiscal redistribution and public support for European integration. European Union Politics, 16, 386–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116515581201.
Clark, N., & Rohrschneider, R. (2009). Second-order elections versus first-order thinking: How voters perceive the representation process in a multi-layered system of governance. Journal of European Integration, 31, 645–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036330903145906.
Dalton, R. J. (2016). Stability and change in party issue positions: The 2009 and 2014 European elections. Electoral Studies, 44, 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2016.06.008.
De Vries, C. E. (2017). Benchmarking Brexit: How the British decision to leave shapes EU public opinion. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(3), 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12579.
Foster, C., & Frieden, J. (2017). Crisis of trust: Socio-economic determinants of Europeans’ confidence in government. European Union Politics, 18, 511–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116517723499.
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2016). Monnet’s error? Economic Policy, 31, 247–297. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiw003.
Hobolt, S. B. (2016). The Brexit vote: A divided nation, a divided continent. Journal of European Public Policy, 23, 1259–1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2016.1225785.
Hobolt, S. B., & Tilley, J. (2014). Blaming Europe?: Responsibility without accountability in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Magalhães, P. C. (2016). From ideology to performance: Austerity and government defection in the 2014 European parliament elections. Electoral Studies, 44, 492–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2016.04.015.
Okolikj, M., & Quinlan, S. (2016). Context matters: Economic voting in the 2009 and 2014 European parliament elections. Politics and Governance, 4, 145–166. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i1.458.
Schäfer, C., & Debus, M. (2017). No participation without representation. Policy distances and abstention in European parliament elections. Journal of European Public Policy, 15, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1363806.
Scipioni, M. (2017). Failing forward in EU migration policy?: EU integration after the 2015 Asylum and migration crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 53, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1325920.
Serricchio, F., Tsakatika, M., & Quaglia, L. (2013). Euroscepticism and the global financial crisis. Journal of Common Market Studies, 51, 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2012.02299.x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bauer, S. (2020). Studying EU Support During the Euro Crisis: An Integrated Research Agenda. In: Citizens’ Support for the European Union. Contributions to Political Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16461-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16461-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16460-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16461-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)