Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Should European integration go further? A survey of French, German and Italian members of national parliaments

Authors: Boyer, Pierre, C; Gerschel, Elie; Raj, Anasuya;

Should European integration go further? A survey of French, German and Italian members of national parliaments

Abstract

Summary:The European economic union is incomplete, which makes it vulnerable to macroeconomic shocks. The opportunity to move forward in the integration process was highly debated even before the Covid-19 crisis.Yet the diverging views among countries and political groups are often considered as an obstacle on the path to required agreements for completing the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). We present the results of a survey conducted in 2018 among members of national parliaments (MPs) in France, Germany and Italy on European integration in policy fields related to risk-sharing and budgetary institutions, asking for their opinion on proposals such as the creation of a European Unemployment Insurance (EUI), Eurobonds, or an EU tax. We find that nationality and political groups are key determinants of support for such proposals, the latter being the strongest. We describe how opinions are divided and try to identify policy proposals which could gather enough political support. The agreement reached on July 21st, 2020 at the last European summit includes financial transfers between States and the creation of Eurobonds, thus representing an important institutional move and an application of some of the reforms suggested by our survey. Yet what has been decided upon is only temporary and leaves open the question of the future of European integration.Key points: At first glance, the answers show diverging opinions on most questions between countries with Italy supporting more integration, and Germany opposing it for most proposals. France has an intermediate position, leaning towards Italy. A breakdown of the results by party affiliation shows a more nuanced picture. For cross-country comparisons, we build a party indicator using the affiliation of national parties to European political groups. National MPs associated with the group of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) at the European level show strong support for the creation of new fiscal institutions and a new EU tax, and for risk sharing institutions (European Unemployment Insurance, Eurobonds). On the contrary, MPs associated with the European People’s Party (EPP) are mildly positive or against risk-sharing and fiscal institutions. National MPs affiliated to Renew Europe hold similar views to S&D MPs, but are less supportive of risk-sharing mechanisms. There is a substantial diversity of positions between the German AfD, the Italian Lega and the 5-star movement: the three parties have diverging views on the future of integration. Our econometric analysis shows that party affiliations have more explanatory power than nationality for all questions. This clearly shows that outcomes of national parliamentary elections could change the overall support for any issue.; Summary:The European economic union is incomplete, which makes it vulnerable to macroeconomic shocks. The opportunity to move forward in the integration process was highly debated even before the Covid-19 crisis.Yet the diverging views among countries and political groups are often considered as an obstacle on the path to required agreements for completing the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). We present the results of a survey conducted in 2018 among members of national parliaments (MPs) in France, Germany and Italy on European integration in policy fields related to risk-sharing and budgetary institutions, asking for their opinion on proposals such as the creation of a European Unemployment Insurance (EUI), Eurobonds, or an EU tax. We find that nationality and political groups are key determinants of support for such proposals, the latter being the strongest. We describe how opinions are divided and try to identify policy proposals which could gather enough political support. The agreement reached on July 21st, 2020 at the last European summit includes financial transfers between States and the creation of Eurobonds, thus representing an important institutional move and an application of some of the reforms suggested by our survey. Yet what has been decided upon is only temporary and leaves open the question of the future of European integration.Key points: At first glance, the answers show diverging opinions on most questions between countries with Italy supporting more integration, and Germany opposing it for most proposals. France has an intermediate position, leaning towards Italy. A breakdown of the results by party affiliation shows a more nuanced picture. For cross-country comparisons, we build a party indicator using the affiliation of national parties to European political groups. National MPs associated with the group of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) at the European level show strong support for the creation of new fiscal institutions and a new EU tax, and for risk sharing institutions (European Unemployment Insurance, Eurobonds). On the contrary, MPs associated with the European People’s Party (EPP) are mildly positive or against risk-sharing and fiscal institutions. National MPs affiliated to Renew Europe hold similar views to S&D MPs, but are less supportive of risk-sharing mechanisms. There is a substantial diversity of positions between the German AfD, the Italian Lega and the 5-star movement: the three parties have diverging views on the future of integration. Our econometric analysis shows that party affiliations have more explanatory power than nationality for all questions. This clearly shows that outcomes of national parliamentary elections could change the overall support for any issue.

Country
France
Related Organizations
Keywords

[SHS.ECO]Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance

Blesse, S., P.C. Boyer, F. Heinemann, E. Janeba and A. Raj (2019a). “European Monetary Union reform preferences of French and German parliamentarians”, European Union Politics, 20(3), 406-424.

Blesse, S., M. Bordignon, P.C. Boyer, P. Carapella, F. Heinemann, E. Janeba and A. Raj (2019b). “United we stand?

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
  • citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    Powered byBIP!BIP!
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Funded by
ANR| IPS
Project
IPS
Idex Paris-Saclay
  • Funder: French National Research Agency (ANR) (ANR)
  • Project Code: ANR-11-IDEX-0003
Related to Research communities
Corona Virus Disease
moresidebar

Do the share buttons not appear? Please make sure, any blocking addon is disabled, and then reload the page.