For the very first time in EU history, the 2014 EP elections provided citizens with the opportunity to influence the nomination of the Commission President by casting a vote for the main Europarties' 'lead candidates'. By subjecting the position of the Commission President to an open political contest, many experts have formulated the expectation that heightened political competition would strengthen the weak electoral connection between EU citizens and EU legislators, which some consider a root cause for the EU's lack of public support. In particular, this contest was on display in the so-called 'Eurovision Debate', a televised debate between the main contenders for the Commission President broadcasted live across Europe. Drawing on a quasi-experimental study conducted in 24 EU countries, we find that debate exposure led to increased cognitive and political involvement and EU support among young citizens. Unfortunately, the debate has only reached a very small audience.

No abstract

Purpose The economic situation in Europe is improving, nevertheless in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) entrepreneurs and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are still lacking in finances. In this situation, public funding can play an important role. Besides grants, the use of financial instruments (FIs) has become increasingly popular lately in CEE as well. This paper aims to examine the micro-level effects of the different financial tools to understand which type of finance could be most recommended for policymakers in relation to improving access to finance for SMEs, and thus achieving long-term, sustainable economic growth. Design/methodology/approach The database used is a panel with firm-years as the units of analysis, the variables contain firm-level characteristics, yearly aggregated information on European Union (EU) subsidies and yearly aggregated information on credits received by the firms. The analyses are done using propensity score matching. The ultimate goal is to show whether the EU funds – grants and FIs – have contributed to the development of the Hungarian post-communist economy at micro level or not. Findings The result shows that the use of subsidies has a positive impact on employment, sales and in certain settings on productivity. It is very important to notice, that grants seem to be used effectively. However, the results also show that the provision of the FI holds more direct relevance to advanced productivity. The conclusion is that FIs have more positive impact on the Hungarian economy. Originality/value At the time of the programming for the EU 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework, the paper presents original research in the field of access to finance showing evidence and evaluating the effect of using grants versus FIs, emphasiing differences between the two development tools. It is providing an invaluable insight to the policymaker for planning policy tools and use of funds in a most effective and efficient way.

Engaging in political action can ensure adequate political representation for citizens. Except for voting, however, only a nonrepresentative, small group of people regularly engages in political action. Social psychological theories provide individual, group, and system‐level explanations for why people could remain inactive. However, they often focus only on personally held attitudes and do not fully consider the dynamics of attitude formation in interactions. Based on 26 focus group discussions conducted in Brazil, Hungary, and the Netherlands, we explored how citizens explain political inaction. We used latent thematic analysis, informed by social psychological theories, to understand how people form opinions about their own and others’ political inaction. In all three countries, the prevalent norm in the focus group discussions was that political inaction should be reduced but a lack of political efficacy constituted a core theme in explaining why people remain politically inactive. Depending on the sociopolitical context and how people self‐categorized within the discussions, people blamed unresponsive governments, or cited personal fears of repercussions and cultural differences within and between countries as reasons for inaction. The findings and interpretations are discussed within a framework that extends and integrates previous perspectives on why people remain politically inactive.

No abstract