A blessing and a curse? Examining public preferences for differentiated integration

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Lisanne de Blok, Catherine E. De Vries
{"title":"A blessing and a curse? Examining public preferences for differentiated integration","authors":"Lisanne de Blok, Catherine E. De Vries","doi":"10.1177/14651165221133671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines public preferences for two forms of differentiated integration (DI): opt-outs and multi-speed EU. Due to the low salience of DI in domestic politics, we suggest that people use ideological benchmarks when forming opinions about DI mostly relating to their general predispositions towards the EU. While pro-EU citizens are more in favor of DI in the form of multiple speeds as this might pose a solution to overcome gridlock, Euroskeptic citizens display more support for opt-outs as a means to accommodate concerns about national identity and control. These differences are in turn accentuated by people’s left-right ideology. We test our hypotheses using public opinion data from the Eurobarometer between 2004 and 2018 and complete it with novel survey data. Our results suggest that while support for DI has increased in recent years, DI preferences largely coincide with ideological predispositions. Our findings indicate that rather than overcoming preference heterogeneity within the EU, DI might entrench existing fault lines.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"24 1","pages":"143 - 163"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Union Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165221133671","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

This study examines public preferences for two forms of differentiated integration (DI): opt-outs and multi-speed EU. Due to the low salience of DI in domestic politics, we suggest that people use ideological benchmarks when forming opinions about DI mostly relating to their general predispositions towards the EU. While pro-EU citizens are more in favor of DI in the form of multiple speeds as this might pose a solution to overcome gridlock, Euroskeptic citizens display more support for opt-outs as a means to accommodate concerns about national identity and control. These differences are in turn accentuated by people’s left-right ideology. We test our hypotheses using public opinion data from the Eurobarometer between 2004 and 2018 and complete it with novel survey data. Our results suggest that while support for DI has increased in recent years, DI preferences largely coincide with ideological predispositions. Our findings indicate that rather than overcoming preference heterogeneity within the EU, DI might entrench existing fault lines.
福与祸?审查公众对差异化融合的偏好
这项研究考察了公众对两种形式的差异化一体化(DI)的偏好:选择退出和多速欧盟。由于DI在国内政治中的重要性较低,我们建议人们在形成对DI的看法时使用意识形态基准,主要与他们对欧盟的总体倾向有关。虽然亲欧盟的公民更支持以多重速度的形式进行DI,因为这可能是克服僵局的解决方案,但持欧洲怀疑论的公民表现出更多的支持选择退出,以此来解决对国家身份和控制的担忧。这些差异反过来又因人们的左右意识形态而加剧。我们使用2004年至2018年间欧洲晴雨表的民意数据来检验我们的假设,并用新的调查数据来完成。我们的研究结果表明,尽管近年来对DI的支持有所增加,但DI的偏好在很大程度上与意识形态倾向一致。我们的研究结果表明,DI可能会巩固现有的断层线,而不是克服欧盟内部的偏好异质性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Union Politics
European Union Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
21.70%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: European Union Politics is an international academic journal for advanced peer-reviewed research and scholarship on all aspects of the process of government, politics and policy in the European Union. It aims to stimulate debate and provide a forum to bridge the theoretical and empirical analysis on the political unification of Europe. It represents no particular school or approach, nor is it wedded to any particular methodology. In particular it welcomes articles that offer a new theoretical argument, analyze original data in a novel fashion or present an innovative methodological approach. The Editors invite submissions from all sub-fields of contemporary political science, including international relations, comparative politics, public administration, public policy and political theory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信