Public opinion and the crisis: the dynamics of support for the euro

Abstract

Further integration in the European Union (EU) increasingly depends on public legitimacy. The global financial crisis and the subsequent euro area crisis have amplified both the salience and the redistributive consequences of decisions taken in Brussels, raising the question of how this has influenced public support for European integration. In this contribution, we examine how public opinion has responded to the crisis, focusing on support for monetary integration. Interestingly, our results show that support for the euro has remained high within the euro area; however, attitudes are increasingly driven by utilitarian considerations, whereas identity concerns have become less important. While the crisis has been seen to deepen divisions within Europe, our findings suggest that it has also encouraged citizens in the euro area to form opinions on the euro on the basis of a cost -benefit analysis of European economic governance, rather than relying primarily on national attachments.

“Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union”. Any support from the citizens?

“…The third is that these factors have been changed by the crisis, partly in favour and partly against integration. Hence, if on the one hand these studies have reverted a pre-crisis tendency to downplay the role of the economic dimension in orientations towards European matters (Braun andTausendpfund 2014, Hobolt andWratil 2015), on the other they do not allow for a firm and univocal conclusion.…”

“…7 Relevant examples are Braun and Tausendpfund (2014), Kuhn and Stöckel (2014), Tosun et al (2014), Hobolt and Wratil (2015), Rose and Borz (2016), Guiso et al (2016).…”

“…During the crisis, EU integration mostly meant more 'austerity' to them: that is, a serious threat to welfare state protections. The shift from an identitarian to a utilitarian approach to EU integration highlighted by Hobolt and Wratil (2015) may remove the hurdle of national identity but may well spur demand for stronger protection from national governments to the extent that the EU policies are perceived as harmful, as has been the case with the EU-W/H-W countries. As pointed out by Rose and Borz (2016), where the economic crisis is salient Europe 'as-it-is' is perceived as part of the problem not of the solution.…”

La gobernanza económica de la Unión Europea: ¿activar los frenos de emergencia? = The economic governance of the European Union: activate the emergency brakes?

“…Las encuestas (EPRS, 2015;Debomy, 2013;Bréchon, 2014;Hobolt, 2015) reflejan al menos cuatro períodos en relación a la oscilación de la opinión pública respecto al proceso de integración europea. A partir de finales de 2007 comienza el cuarto período, en el que nos encontramos, y en el que los indicadores declinan de manera significativa hasta finales de 2013 para comenzar a recuperarse ligeramente desde la primavera de 2014.…”

Politicisation and integration through law: whither integration theory?

“…In other words, in periods of crisis, policies influence politics even more significantly (Wlezien 2005). A higher degree of politicisation, understood as 'an increase in polarisation of opinions, interests, or values and the extent to which they are publicly advanced towards the process of policy formulation within the EU' (de Wilde 2011: 566-7), can be observed during the current economic and financial crisis in the EU (Hobolt and Tilley 2014;Hobolt and Wratil 2015). Heightened politicisation influences the policy positions of member states which seek to renegotiate policies at the EU level.…”