Cleavage theory meets Europe’s crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the transnational cleavage

Hooghe, Liesbet; Marks, Gary

doi:10.1080/13501763.2017.1310279

Cited by 856 publications

(711 citation statements)

References 94 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

603

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is also substantiated empirically in our pooled data where the correlation between peopleÕs attitudes towards EU freedom of movement and attitudes towards immigration from outside the EU is very low (r=.12) (see McLaren 2001). That being said, European integration, freedom of movement, and immigration, all contribute towards a change in demographics and the weakening of territorial boundaries (Hooghe and Marks 2018). While developing our hypotheses, we thus draw upon research on Euroscepticism and anti-immigration sentiment, while at the same time showing where expectations regarding attitudes towards freedom of movement differ.…”

Section: Modelling Public Attitudes Towards Eu Freedom Of Movementsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Citizens in different socio-economic situations may experience different costs and benefits from European integration (Hooghe and Marks 2018;Kriesi et al 2012). The EU divides citizens between those who win from transnationalism and thus support the EU, and those who lose from the same process and prefer demarcation.…”

Section: Economic Self-interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The division between those who support and those who oppose the EU is increasingly one of identity, openness and tolerance (Hooghe and Marks 2018). Individuals who feel a strong bond with their community tend to perceive the EU as a source of threat to national integrity, culture, and the nation-stateÕs control over resources.…”

Section: Identity and Perceived Threats To In-groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Opportunity or threat? Public attitudes towards EU freedom of movement

Vasilopoulou

Talving

2018

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the effect of individual and contextual variables on preference formation towards European Union (EU) freedom of movement. Our multilevel analyses of Eurobarometer data show that citizens with low levels of human capital and strong feelings of national identity are more likely to oppose intra-EU migration. However, we argue that in order to fully grasp variation in public preferences, we need to consider the domestic context. Utilitarian and affective theories have more explanatory power in richer countries, but in less affluent member states support for free movement is evenly high irrespective of individual dispositions. Our findings have implications for the progress of European integration, especially at a time when the EU is in the process of deciding on a course of action about its future direction.

show abstract

Section: Modelling Public Attitudes Towards Eu Freedom Of Movementsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Economic Self-interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Identity and Perceived Threats To In-groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Opportunity or threat? Public attitudes towards EU freedom of movement

Vasilopoulou

Talving

2018

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research suggests a certain European homogeneity, as political issues pertaining to European integration, immigration, and international trade become increasingly intertwined, and politically salient across the continent. This transnational cleavage seems to be arising across the EU (Hooghe and Marks 2017).…”

Section: The Political Divide -Dualization Of Radicalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Disunion? Social and Economic Divergence in Europe, and their Political Consequences

Palier¹,

Rovny²,

Rovný³

2018

Oxford Scholarship Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter demonstrates the economic and political dualization of Europe, and a growing divergence between two groups of countries as a result of the economic crisis. The first group of countries in the north of Europe, concentrated around Germany, Austria, and the Nordic countries, along with certain eastern European countries having close economic ties to Germany, has steadily emerged from the crisis and resumed a positive economic and social path. The second group, however, comprised mainly of the southern and eastern periphery, remains stuck in negative economic and social situations following the crisis. The chapter shows that despite the seemingly uniform rise of populist anti-EU challengers across Europe, these challengers differ significantly in the grievances they raise. Radical right parties are dominant in the center of Europe, while radical left parties outperform the radical right in the periphery, a dynamic that constitutes a second, political, dualization of Europe.

show abstract

“…As demonstrated by the revival of aspects of neo-functionalist theorizing (Hooghe/Marks 2018;Stone Sweet/Sandholtz 2010), on the one hand, and propositions for deploying a new intergovernmentalist approach to better account for changes in politics and policy-making in the post-Maastricht EU (Bickerton et al 2015b;Hodson/Puetter 2016; for a critique see Schimmelfennig 2015), on the other, robust and competent assessments of critical junctures in the process of European integration depend on the field's capability to adopt not a single, but a range of distinct theoretical standpoints. This, however, would expect EU scholars to look beyond their disciplinary confines and draw on insights garnered from the International Relations discipline more broadly.…”

Section: Comparing the Approaches Of The Mosaicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking Stock of Integration Theory

Wiener

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nutzungsbedingungen:Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine Weiterverbreitung -keine Bearbeitung) The KFG Working Paper Series serves to disseminate the research results of the Kolleg-Forschergruppe by making them available to a broader public. It means to enhance academic exchange as well as to strengthen and broaden existing basic research on internal and external diffusion processes in Europe and the European Union.All KFG Working Papers are available on the KFG website at www.transformeurope.eu or can be ordered in print via email to transform-europe@fu-berlin.de. The second section addresses the absence of security crises in the book's contributions. To explore, how security crises may be brought into focus in integration theory, it distinguishes the impact of integration along two dimensions. These include first, the horizontal regional comparative perspective and the 'litmus test' of the applicability of integration theory to other regions; and second, the vertical dimension which connects normative crises in EU sub-units with global conflicts. And the concluding third section asks how integration theory fares sixty years on from the Treaty of Rome, and points out potential issues and themes for the future of European integration theory.

show abstract

Cleavage theory meets Europe’s crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the transnational cleavage

Cited by 856 publications

References 94 publications

Opportunity or threat? Public attitudes towards EU freedom of movement

Opportunity or threat? Public attitudes towards EU freedom of movement

European Disunion? Social and Economic Divergence in Europe, and their Political Consequences

Taking Stock of Integration Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About