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

Abstract

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.

Disentangling (new) labour market divides: outsiders’ and globalization losers’ socio-economic risks in Europe

“…Finally, this study confirms that there are more outsiders in the European periphery, particularly in Southern European countries, than in the core, and that in the European periphery labour market institutions and social protection systems tend to amplify rather than reduce socio-economic risks (Ferrera 1996 ; Schwander & Häusermann 2013 ). This result is relevant for at least two reasons: firstly, because, according to their intensity, new labour market divides may have had different political consequences in different European countries, contributing to explaining the emergence of varieties of populism (Caiani & Graziano 2019 ) and the different re-structuring of party systems in Europe (Hutter et al 2018 ); secondly, and relatedly, because this ‘double dualization’ of Europe—the second referring to socio-economic vulnerabilities in peripheral and core countries drifting apart (Heidenreich 2016 ; Palier et al 2018 )—by increasing European countries’ socio-economic divergence, may have enduring consequences for the process of European integration and, in particular, for the political feasibility of a more social Europe (Ferrera 2017 ).…”

The Politics of European Union’s Social Investment Initiatives

“…The European Union's social investment ideas have been influenced by various European intellectuals and experts and by what appeared to be the "successful" models provided by different EU countries. Perspectives depended on the economic context: relative economic growth during the late 1990s and the early 2000s, deep economic crisis in 2008 and 2009 followed by the EU debt crisis starting in 2010, and the subsequent dualization of Europe (Palier et al, 2018). In these various contexts, countries fared differently, providing a succession of "models" that were perceived as having been successful.…”

“…The political response to austerity policy in the south has been the strengthening of far-left parties, while the north has seen a strong shift to populist-nationalist movements (Palier et al, 2018). In this context, several actors in and around the Commission sought to develop alternative policy responses to austerity, such as social investment, but also social rights, to respond to increasing political dissatisfaction in countries strongly affected by the financial crisis.…”

Widening double dualisation? Labour market inequalities and national social policy responses in Western Europe during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic

“…The decennium horribilis that followed the sovereign debt crisis revealed the limits of the European (social) governance and national welfare institutions in promoting social and political cohesion, leaving a still visible scar on the European integration process. In this regard, some authors highlighted the point that, before the Coronavirus outbreak, the European Union (EU) was witnessing a 'double dualisation' process, whereby inequalities increased at the individual level between more sheltered and more precarious workers, and, at the country level, between 'core' and 'peripheral' member states (Heidenreich, 2016;Palier et al, 2018). Double dualisation is the result of the combined effect of two phenomena.…”