Is there a trade-off between deepening and widening? What do Europeans think?
Year: 2008
Type: preprint
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: Following the negative referenda in France and the Netherlands in 2005, EU traditional enlargement policy has been called into question. Whereas in the past, the so-called ‘deepening and widening’ processes have gone hand in hand, a much more conservative policy and mood about enlargement has now taken hold. With discussions about the Constitutional Treaty and future enlargement rounds dominated by a widespread consensus on the existence of so-called ‘enlargement fatigue’ and concerns about ‘EU absorption capacity’, the question of public support for enlargement has become crucial. With the promise (or threat) to hold national referenda to ratify the accession of new member states, the traditional EU enlargement policy has undergone an important change. Whereas in the past the accession of new members was decided in two parallel series of negotiations (one among existing members, the other between existing members and the candidates), it now seems evident that new enlargement rounds are going to require a third set of agreements (between political elites and the public). Public support for enlargement might affect enlargement policy in two ways, one explicit, the second implicit. In the first case, member states or the Union itself would decide to hold popular referenda to validate new accessions. In the second case, EU leaders would stop or speed up accession processes according to the perceived levels of public support. In both cases, public support will be crucial. The three questions this paper poses are crucial to this debate. First, do citizens share with political elites the perception that there is a trade-off between deepening and widening? Second, how do we explain the variation in levels of support for EU enlargement? Third, what sort of fears are citizens actually harbouring when they express opposition to deepening and widening? What are our findings? We find, first, that despite the recent rise of negative attitudes towards enlargement, there is still a positive correlation between support for deepening and support for widening. Thus the alleged trade-off between both elements is more apparent and real. We also find that negative attitudes towards enlargement are concentrated among older members states. Third, we find that fears about the future (crime, immigration, sovereignty, etc.) explain losses in support for both integration and enlargement. We conclude by questioning whether a more restrictive enlargement policy would increase public support for integration
Source: SSRN Electronic Journal
Language: English
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2135893964