社会欧洲不为人知的一面:通过焦点小组讨论揭示福利欧洲怀疑论

IF 2.6 2区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Gianna M. Eick
{"title":"社会欧洲不为人知的一面:通过焦点小组讨论揭示福利欧洲怀疑论","authors":"Gianna M. Eick","doi":"10.1111/spol.13023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While the public opinion literature on Social Europe is growing, so far, it relies on quantitative survey evidence that hides some of the arguments and motivations lying behind the standardized results. This article reveals through qualitative research that ‘welfare Euroscepticism’ (i.e., opposition towards Social Europe) needs more attention in the literature and explains why. Specifically, this article uses qualitative focus group discussions on Social Europe collected in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain (134 participants in total). The participants filled out a quantitative survey before the discussions started and these survey results are in line with the usual public opinion literature on Social Europe, that is, relatively supportive of the social dimension of the EU. However, multi‐faceted welfare Eurosceptic attitudes appeared throughout the discussion. While participants may support the general idea of a Social Europe, they are highly critical about how it actually works in practice. The analysis reveals that the public is sceptic towards both harmonizing social policies on the EU level and redistributive social policy instruments on the EU level. Three overarching and partly overlapping rationales appear to drive welfare Euroscepticism: (1) economic self‐interest, (2) cultural ideology and (3) the democratic deficit. The results emphasize the public preferences for more conditional redistributive policies and the need to make Social Europe more visible to the public.","PeriodicalId":47858,"journal":{"name":"Social Policy & Administration","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The hidden side of Social Europe: Revealing welfare Euroscepticism through focus group discussions\",\"authors\":\"Gianna M. Eick\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/spol.13023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While the public opinion literature on Social Europe is growing, so far, it relies on quantitative survey evidence that hides some of the arguments and motivations lying behind the standardized results. This article reveals through qualitative research that ‘welfare Euroscepticism’ (i.e., opposition towards Social Europe) needs more attention in the literature and explains why. Specifically, this article uses qualitative focus group discussions on Social Europe collected in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain (134 participants in total). The participants filled out a quantitative survey before the discussions started and these survey results are in line with the usual public opinion literature on Social Europe, that is, relatively supportive of the social dimension of the EU. However, multi‐faceted welfare Eurosceptic attitudes appeared throughout the discussion. While participants may support the general idea of a Social Europe, they are highly critical about how it actually works in practice. The analysis reveals that the public is sceptic towards both harmonizing social policies on the EU level and redistributive social policy instruments on the EU level. Three overarching and partly overlapping rationales appear to drive welfare Euroscepticism: (1) economic self‐interest, (2) cultural ideology and (3) the democratic deficit. The results emphasize the public preferences for more conditional redistributive policies and the need to make Social Europe more visible to the public.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13023\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Policy & Administration","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管有关社会欧洲的舆论文献日益增多,但迄今为止,这些文献都依赖于定量调查证据,掩盖了标准化结果背后的一些论点和动机。本文通过定性研究揭示了 "福利欧洲怀疑论"(即反对社会欧洲)需要更多的文献关注,并解释了原因。具体而言,本文采用了在德国、荷兰、波兰和西班牙收集到的关于 "社会欧洲 "的定性焦点小组讨论(共有 134 人参加)。参与者在讨论开始前填写了一份定量调查问卷,这些调查结果与有关社会欧洲的通常民意文献一致,即相对支持欧盟的社会维度。然而,在整个讨论过程中出现了多方面的福利欧洲怀疑态度。虽然参与者可能支持社会欧洲的总体理念,但他们对其实际运作方式持高度批评态度。分析表明,公众对欧盟层面的社会政策协调和欧盟层面的再分配社会政策工具都持怀疑态度。推动福利欧洲怀疑论的似乎有三个首要且部分重叠的理由:(1) 经济自身利益,(2) 文化意识形态和 (3) 民主赤字。研究结果强调了公众对更多有条件的再分配政策的偏好,以及让公众更加了解社会欧洲的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The hidden side of Social Europe: Revealing welfare Euroscepticism through focus group discussions
While the public opinion literature on Social Europe is growing, so far, it relies on quantitative survey evidence that hides some of the arguments and motivations lying behind the standardized results. This article reveals through qualitative research that ‘welfare Euroscepticism’ (i.e., opposition towards Social Europe) needs more attention in the literature and explains why. Specifically, this article uses qualitative focus group discussions on Social Europe collected in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain (134 participants in total). The participants filled out a quantitative survey before the discussions started and these survey results are in line with the usual public opinion literature on Social Europe, that is, relatively supportive of the social dimension of the EU. However, multi‐faceted welfare Eurosceptic attitudes appeared throughout the discussion. While participants may support the general idea of a Social Europe, they are highly critical about how it actually works in practice. The analysis reveals that the public is sceptic towards both harmonizing social policies on the EU level and redistributive social policy instruments on the EU level. Three overarching and partly overlapping rationales appear to drive welfare Euroscepticism: (1) economic self‐interest, (2) cultural ideology and (3) the democratic deficit. The results emphasize the public preferences for more conditional redistributive policies and the need to make Social Europe more visible to the public.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Social Policy & Administration is the longest established journal in its field. Whilst remaining faithful to its tradition in academic excellence, the journal also seeks to engender debate about topical and controversial issues. Typical numbers contain papers clustered around a theme. The journal is international in scope. Quality contributions are received from scholars world-wide and cover social policy issues not only in Europe but in the USA, Canada, Australia and Asia Pacific.
×
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