Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The puzzle of public opposition to TTIP in Germany

  • Alexsia T. Chan and Beverly K. Crawford
Abstract

Germany is pivotal to the success of any trade agreement between the European Union and the United States. As the third largest exporter in the world, Germany is dependent on open markets; throughout the post-war period, government support for free trade has been unequivocal. Despite these positive incentives for expanding free trade, both German business and the wider public voiced fierce opposition to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). TTIP became a flash point for the German public to overcome collective action problems and create a broad protest movement against a free trade agreement for the first time in German history. This movement enabled the public to successfully exercise influence on German foreign economic policy-making, which had long been protected from public pressure. By 2015, the success of that pressure in penetrating the policy-making apparatus combined with growing government concern about the potential of international firms to undermine national policy. As a result of the confluence of these two forces, German leaders changed their position in TTIP negotiations.

Copyright
Corresponding author
* Corresponding author: Alexsia T. Chan, 198 College Hill Road, Department of Government, Hamilton College, Clinton, NY 13323. Email: axchan@hamilton.edu
Beverly K. Crawford, 101 Stephens Hall, International and Area Studies, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720. Email: bev@berkeley.edu
References
Hide All
Aggarwal, Vinod and Dupont, Cedric. 2013. “Collaboration and Co-ordination in the Global Political Economy” In Global Political Economy, 4th edition, edited by Ravenhill, John. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Attorney-General's Department, Australian Government. 2011. “Tobacco plain packaging—investor-state arbitration.” (Accessed on 8 April 2015) http://www.ag.gov.au/tobaccoplainpackaging.
Auerswald, David P. 1999. “Inward Bound: Domestic Institutions and Military Conflict.” International Organization 53: 469504.
Bauer, Matthias. 2015. “The Spiral of Silence – How Anti-TTIP Groups Dominate German Online Media and Set the Tone for TTIP Opinion,” European Center for International Political Economy.
Chamberlin, J. 1974. “Provision of Collective Goods as a Function of Group Size.” American Political Science Review 68 (June): 707–16.
Chong, Dennis. 1991. Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cottrell, Chris. 2015. “Free trade deals highlight discord over investor protection,” Deutsche Welle. (Accessed on 9 September 2016) http://www.dw.de/free-trade-deals-highlight-discord-over-investor-protection/a-18315662.
Crawford, Beverly. 2007. Power and German Foreign Policy: Embedded Hegemony in Europe. London: Palgrave.
Dalton, Russell J., Flanagan, Scott E., Beck, P.A., and Alt, J.E.. 1984. Electoral change in advanced industrial democracies: Realignment or dealignment? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
De Nardo, James. 1985. Power in Numbers. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Deutsche Welle . 2015. “German Social Democrats fear free trade.” (Accessed on 22 September 2016) http://www.dw.com/en/german-social-democrats-fear-free-trade/a-18275595.
Deutsche Welle . 2016. “German SMEs Join Protest Against TTIP.” (Accessed on 7 August 2017) http://www.dw.com/en/german-smes-join-protests-against-ttip/a-19066010.
Dullien, Sebastian. 2015. “Why we favour ditching investment protection in TTIP.” European Council on Foreign Relations. (Accessed on 9 September 2016) http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_why_we_favour_ditching_investment_protection_in_ttip422.
EurActiv.com with Reuters. 2016. “Survey shows plunging public support for TTIP in US and Germany.” (Accessed on 19 January 2017) https://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/news/survey-shows-plunging-public-support-for-ttip-in-us-and-germany/.
European Commission. 2013. “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: The Economic Analysis Explained.”
Gibowski, Wolfgang G. and Kaase, Max. 1991. “Auf dem Weg zum politischen Alltag,” Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 11: 320.
Girma, Sourafel, Görg, Holger, and Wagner, Joachim. 2009. “Subsidies and Exports in Germany: First Evidence from Enterprise Panel Data.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 4076.
Granovetter, Mark. 1978. “Threshold Models of Collective Behavior,” American Journal of Sociology, 83(6): 1,42043.
Hetzner, Christiaan. 2015. “Zetsche, Other Top Auto Chiefs lobby for EU-US Trade Deal.” Automotive News Europe. (Accessed on 19 January 2017) http://europe.autonews.com/article/20150127/ANE/150129818/zetsche-other-top-auto-chiefs-to-lobby-for-eu-u.s.-trade-deal.
Holsti, O. 1992. “Public Opinion and Foreign Policy: Challenges to the Almond-Lippmann Consensus.” International Studies Quarterly 36 (4): 439–66.
Jacobs, L. and Page, B.. 2005. “Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy?The American Political Science Review 99 (1): 107–23.
Juncker, Jean-Calude. 2014. “A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change.” European Commission. (Accessed on 15 July 2017) http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/docs/pg_en.pdf.
Kinkartz, Sabine. 2015. “German Social Democrats Fear Free Trade.” Deutsche Welle. (Accessed on 19 January 2017) http://www.dw.com/en/german-social-democrats-fear-free-trade/a-18275595.
Kirchheimer, Otto. 1966. “The transformation of the Western European party systems.” Political parties and political development, No.177200.
Knight, Ben. 2016. “German Judges Slap TTIP down.” Deutsche Welle. (Accessed on 4 February 2017) http://www.dw.com/en/german-judges-slap-ttip-down/a-19027665.
Kuran, Timur Kuran. 1989. “Sparks and Prairie Fires: A Theory of Unanticipated Revolution.” Public Choice 61(1): 4174.
Lohmann, Susanne. 1994. “The Dynamics of Informational Cascades: The Monday Demonstrations in Leipzig, East Germany, 1989–91.” World Politics 47: 42101.
McGuire, M.C. 1974. “Group size, Group Homogeneity and the Aggregate Provision of a Pure Public Good under Cournot Behavior.” Public Choice 18(Summer): 107–26.
Marwell, G. and Oliver, P.. 1993. The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-Social Theory. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Milner, Helen. 1995. “Regional Economic Cooperation, Global Markets, and Domestic Politics: A Comparison of NAFTA and the Maastricht Treaty.” Journal of European Public Policy 2: 337–60.
Mintzel, Alf. 1989. “Großparteien im Parteienstaat der Bundesrepublik.” Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B 11(89): 311.
Office of the United States Trade Representative. 2015. “Investor-State Dispute Settlement.” (Accessed on 8 April 2015) https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015/march/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds#.
Oliver, P. and Marwell, G.. 1988. “The Paradox of Group Size in Collective Action: A Theory of the Critical Mass. II.” American Sociological Review 53(February): 18.
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ostrom, Elinor. 2003. “How Types of Goods and Property Rights Jointly Affect Collective Action.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 15(3): 239–70.
Putnam, R. 1988. “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games.” International Organization 42 (3): 427–60.
Riesbeck, Peter. 2016. “Freihandelsabkommen zwischen USA und EU Ein Monster namens TTIP.” Berliner Zeitung. (Accessed on 15 April 2017) http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/856460.
Risse-Kappen, Thomas. 1991. “Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, and Foreign Policy in Liberal Democracies.” World Politics 43(4): 479512.
Rogowski, Ronald. 1989. Commerce and coalitions: How trade affects domestic political alignments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rose, Richard. 1986. “Common goals but different roles: The state's contribution to the welfare mix.” The welfare state East and West, edited by Rose, Richard and Shratori, Rei, chapter 5.
Sandler, T. 1992. Collective Action: Theory and Applications. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Schmuker, Claudia. 2015. “TTIP: Winning Back Trust.” Deutsche Gesellschaft fuer Auswaertige Politik: Standpunkt https://dgap.org/en/article/getFullPDF/26473.
Spiegel International . 2011. “Vattenfall vs. Germany: Nuclear Phase-Out Faces Billion-Euro lawsuit.” (Accessed on 5 February 2016) http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/vattenfall-vs-germany-nuclear-phase-out-faces-billion-euro-lawsuit-a-795466.html.
Stokes, Bruce. 2015. “Is Europe on board for a new trade deal with the U.S.?” PEW Research Center. (Accessed on 8 April 2015) http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/29/is-europe-on-board-for-a-new-trade-deal-with-the-u-s/.
Taylor, M. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2014. Investor-State Dispute Settlement: An Information Note on the United States and European Union. (Accessed on 5 February 2016) http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaepcb2014d4_en.pdf.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2015. Recent Trends in IIAS and ISDS. (Accessed on 5 February 2016) http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/webdiaepcb2015d1_en.pdf.
Von der Burchard, Hans and Mucci, Alberto. 2016. “EU trade policy back on the rails after crunch German vote.” Politico. (Accessed on 19 January 2017) http://www.politico.eu/pro/eu-trade-policy-back-on-the-rails-after-crunch-german-vote/.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Business and Politics
  • ISSN: -
  • EISSN: 1469-3569
  • URL: /core/journals/business-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed