Advertisement

Die Deutschen und der Euro

Einstellungen zur gemeinsamen Währung in Zeiten der Schuldenkrise
  • Fabian Endres
Part of the Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft Comparative Governance and Politics book series (ZfVP)

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Aufsatz geht der Frage nach, wie sich Einstellungen deutscher Bürger zur gemeinsamen Währung erklären lassen. Anhand von 2011 erhobenen Online-Daten kann gezeigt werden, dass insbesondere ökonomische Erwägungen und Gruppenbindungen Einfluss auf Einstellungen zum Euro nehmen. Zusätzlich ziehen Bürger bei der Einstellungsbildung außenpolitische Grundorientierungen und Elitensignale heran. Trotz der hohen Salienz der deutschen Euromitgliedschaft in Folge der Staatsschuldenkrise greifen lediglich Bürger mit mittlerer politischer Involvierung auf Elitensignale zurück. Die Ergebnisse legen den Schluss nahe, dass die weitere Unterstützung des Euro zu einem großen Teil von der Entwicklung der wirtschaftlichen Lage und den entsprechenden Deutungen durch die politischen Eliten abhängig ist.

Schlüsselwörter

Euro Europäische Integration Öffentliche Meinung Elitensignale 

The Germans and the Euro

Attitudes toward the common currency in times of crisis

Abstract

This paper investigates the attitudes of German citizens toward the common currency. Drawing on data from 2011, the analysis shows that especially utilitarian considerations and group loyalties shape attitudes toward the Euro. In addition, people take foreign policy beliefs and elite cues into consideration when evaluating the single currency. Despite the high salience of Germany’s Euro membership in the course of the sovereign debt crisis, only citizens with a medium level of political involvement take elite cues into account. The findings suggest that further public support for the common currency in Germany depends to a large extent on the development of the economic situation in the Eurozone and how political elites interpret these developments.

Keywords

Euro European integration Political support Public opinion Cueing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Abdelal, Rawi, Yoshiko M. Herrera, Alastair Iain Johnston, und Rose McDermott. 2006. Identity as a variable. Perspectives on Politics 4 (4): 695–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, Christopher J., und M. Shawn Reichert. 1995. Economic benefits and support for membership in the EU: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Public Policy 15 (3): 231–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banducci, Susan A., Jeffrey A. Karp, und Peter H. Loedel. 2003. The euro, economic interests and multi-level governance: Examining support for the common currency. European Journal of Political Research 42 (5): 685–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banducci, Susan A., Jeffrey A. Karp, und Peter H. Loedel. 2009. Economic interests and public support for the euro. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (4): 564–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brinegar, Adam P., und Seth K. Jolly. 2005. Location, location, location. National contextual factors and public support for European integration. European Union Politics 6 (2): 155–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, Rupert. 2000. Social identity theory: Past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology 30 (6): 745–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruter, Michael. 2003. Winning hearts and minds for Europe: The impact of news and symbols on civic and cultural European identity. Comparative Political Studies 36 (10): 1148–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carey, Sean. 2002. Undivided loyalties. Is national identity an obstacle to European integration? European Union Politics 3 (4): 387–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carrubba, Clifford J. 2001. The electoral connection in European Union politics. The Journal of Politics 63 (1): 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chaiken, Shelly. 1980. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (5): 752–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chittick, William O. und Annette Freyberg-Inan. 2001. The impact of basic motivation on foreign policy opinions concerning the use of force. In Public opinion and the international use of force, Hrsg. Philip P. Everts und Pierangelo Isernia, 31–56. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Chittick, William O., Keith R. Billingsley und Rick Travis. 1995. A three-dimensional model of American foreign policy beliefs. International Studies Quarterly 39 (3): 313–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chong, Dennis und James N. Druckman. 2007. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10 (1): 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Citrin, Jack und John Sides. 2004. More than nationales: How identity choice matters in the new Europe. In Transnational identities. Becoming European in the EU, Hrsg. Richard K. Herrmann, ThomasGoogle Scholar
  15. Risse und Marilynn B. Brewer, 161-185. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Conover, Pamela Johnston und Stanley Feldman. 1989. Candidate perception in an ambiguous world:Google Scholar
  16. Campaigns, cues, and inference processes. American Journal of Political Science 33 (4): 912–940.Google Scholar
  17. Converse, Philip E. 1964. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology and discontent, Hrsg. David E. Apter, 202–261. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. de Vries, Catherine E. und Kees van Kersbergen. 2007. Interests, identity and political allegiance in the European Union. Acta Politica 42 (2): 307–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Delli Carpini, Michael X. und Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Díez Medrano, Juan und Paula Gutiérrez. 2001. Nested identities: National and European identity in Spain. Ethnic and Racial Studies 24 (5): 753–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Downs, Anthony. 1968. Ökonomische Theorie der Demokratie . Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr. Eichenberg, Richard C. und Russell J. Dalton. 1993. Europeans and the European Community: The dynamics of public support for European integration. International Organization 47 (4): 507–534.Google Scholar
  22. Europäische Kommission. 2013. Eurobarometer 75.3 (2011) . Köln: GESIS. ZA5481.Google Scholar
  23. Gabel, Matthew J. 1998. Economic integration and mass politics: Market liberalization and public attitudes in the European Union. American Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 936–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gabel, Matthew J. 2001. Divided opinion, common currency: The political economy of public support for EMU. In The political economy of European monetary unification, Hrsg. Barry Eichengreen und Jeffrey A. Frieden, 49–76. Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gabel, Matthew J. und Simon Hix. 2005. Understanding public support for British membership of the single currency. Political Studies 53 (1): 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gabel, Matthew J. und Kenneth Scheve. 2007. Mixed messages. Party dissent and mass opinion on European integration. European Union Politics 8 (1): 37–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gärtner, Manfred. 1997. Who wants the euro-and why? Economic explanations of public attitudes towards a single European currency. Public Choice 93 (3/4): 487–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hobolt, Sara Binzer. 2005. When Europe matters: The impact of political information on voting behaviour in EU referendums. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties 15 (1): 85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hobolt, Sara Binzer und Patrick Leblond. 2009. Is my crown better than your euro? Exchange rates and public opinion on the European single currency. European Union Politics 10 (2): 202–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holsti, Ole R. 2004. Public opinion and American foreign policy . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hooghe, Liesbet und Gary Marks. 2005. Calculation, community and cues. Public opinion on European integration. European Union Politics 6 (4): 419–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Howarth, David und Charlotte Rommerskirchen. 2013. A Panacea for all times? The German stability culture as strategic political resource. West European Politics 36 (4): 750–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huddy, Leonie. 2001. From social to political identity: A critical examination of social identity theory. Political Psychology 22 (1): 127–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hurwitz, Jon und Mark Peffley. 1987. How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model. The American Political Science Review 81 (4): 1099–1120.Google Scholar
  35. Inglehart, Ronald. 1970. Cognitive mobilization and European identity. Comparative Politics 3 (1): 45–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jupille, Joseph und David Leblang. 2007. Voting for change: Calculation, community, and euro referendums. International Organization 61 (4): 763–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaelberer, Matthias. 2005. Deutschmark nationalism and Europeanized identity: Exploring identity aspects of Germany’s adoption of the euro. German Politics 14 (3): 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kaltenthaler, Karl C. und Christopher J. Anderson. 2001. Europeans and their money: Explaining public support for the common European currency. European Journal of Political Research 40 (2): 139–170.Google Scholar
  39. Krosnick, Jon A. und Laura A. Brannon. 1993. The impact of the Gulf War on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Multidimensional effects of political involvement. The American Political Science Review 87 (4): 963–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kunda, Ziva. 1990. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108 (3): 480–498.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Lau, Richard R. und David P. Redlawsk. 2001. Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science 45 (4): 951–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lodge, Milton und Charles Taber. 2005. The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issues: An experimental test of the hot cognition hypothesis. Political Psychology 26 (3): 455–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marcussen, Martin, Thomas Risse, Daniela Engelmann-Martin, Hans Joachim Knopf und Klaus Roscher. 1999. Constructing Europe? The evolution of French, British and German nation state identities. Journal of European Public Policy 6 (4): 614–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McLaren, Lauren M. 2002. Public support for the European Union: Cost/benefit analysis or perceived cultural threat? Journal of Politics 64 (2): 551–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Müller-Peters, Anke. 1998. The significance of national pride and national identity to the attitude toward the single European currency: A Europe-wide comparison. Journal of Economic Psychology 19 (6): 701–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nelsen, Brent F. und James L. Guth. 2000. Exploring the gender gap: Women, men and public attitudes toward European integration. European Union Politics 1 (3): 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rathbun, Brian C. 2007. Hierarchy and community at home and abroad. Evidence of a common structure of domestic and foreign policy beliefs in American elites. Journal of Conflict Resolution 51 (3): 379–407.Google Scholar
  48. Rattinger, Hans. 1996. Einstellungen zur europäischen Integration in der Bundesrepublik: Ein Kausalmodell. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 3 (1): 45–78.Google Scholar
  49. Rattinger, Hans, Sigrid Roßteutscher, Rüdiger Schmitt-Beck und Bernhard Weßels. 2011. German Longitudinal Election Study - Langfrist-Online-Tracking, T14, 23.05.-03.06.2011 . Köln: GESIS. ZA5347.Google Scholar
  50. Ray, Leonard. 2003. When parties matter: The conditional influence of party positions on voter opinions about European integration. The Journal of Politics 65 (4): 978–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sanders, David und Gabor Toka. 2013. Is anyone listening? Mass and elite opinion cueing in the EU. Electoral Studies 32 (1): 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sanders, David, Harold D. Clarke, Marianne C. Stewart und Paul Whiteley. 2007. Does mode matter for modeling political choice? Evidence from the 2005 British election study. Political Analysis 15 (3): 257–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saris, Willem E. 2004. Different judgement models for policy questions: Competing or complementary? In Studies in Public Opinion. Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, And Change, Hrsg. Willem E. Saris und Paul M. Sniderman, 17–36. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Steenbergen, Marco R., Erica. E. Edwards und Catherine E. de Vries. 2007. Who’s cueing whom? Masselite linkages and the future of European integration. European Union Politics 8 (1): 13–35.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Taber, Charles S. und Milton Lodge. 2006. Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Taggart, Paul. 1998. A touchstone of dissent: Euroscepticism in contemporary western European party systems. European Journal of Political Research 33 (3): 363–388.Google Scholar
  57. van der Eijk, Cees und Mark Franklin. 2004. Potential for contestation on European matters at national elections in Europe. In European integration and political conflict, Hrsg. Gary Marks und Marco R. Steenbergen, 32–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weßels, Bernhard. 1995. Support for integration: Élite or mass-driven? In Public opinion and internationalized governance, Hrsg. Oskar Niedermayer und Richard Sinnott, 137–162. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Westle, Bettina und David Johann. 2010. Das Wissen der Europäer/innen über die Europäische Union. In Information - Wahrnehmung - Emotion, Hrsg. Thorsten Faas, Kai Arzheimer und Sigrid Roßteutscher, 353–374. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zaller, John. 1992. The nature and origins of mass opinion . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer VS | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabian Endres
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für Vergleichende Politische VerhaltensforschungUniversität MannheimMannheimDeutschland

Personalised recommendations