Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-24T22:48:52.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Winners and losers of globalization in Europe: attitudes and ideologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2013

Céline Teney*
Affiliation:
Department of Migration, Integration and Transnationalization, Social Sciences Research Centre Berlin (WZB), Reichpietschufer, Berlin, Germany
Onawa Promise Lacewell
Affiliation:
Department of Democracy and Democratization, Social Sciences Research Centre Berlin (WZB), Reichpietschufer, Berlin, Germany
Pieter De Wilde
Affiliation:
Department of Global Governance, Social Sciences Research Centre Berlin (WZB), Reichpietschufer, Berlin, Germany

Abstract

Globalization pressures result in a new ideological conflict among Europeans. We use detailed items from the Eurobarometer survey on issues of immigration and European integration that measure the ideological perspective underpinning positions toward the EU. This provides a fine-grained analysis of the ideologies underlying the poles of the new globalization-centered conflict line, which we define as cosmopolitan and communitarian. Our results show that, next to socio-demographic characteristics, subjective measurements have a considerable additional power in explaining the divide among Europeans along the communitarian–cosmopolitan dimension. Subjective deprivation, evaluation of globalization as a threat, and (sub)national and supranational identities play an important role in dividing Europeans into groups of winners and losers of globalization in both Western and Central and Eastern European countries. At the country level, the national degree of globalization is associated positively with the communitarian pole and negatively with the cosmopolitan pole in all EU countries.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © European Consortium for Political Research 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Azmanova, A. (2009), ‘1989 and the European social model: transition without emancipation?’, Philosophy & Social Criticism 35(9): 10191037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azmanova, A. (2011), ‘After the left–right (dis)continuum: globalization and the remaking of Europe’s ideological geography’, International Political Sociology 5(4): 384407.Google Scholar
Bartolini, S. and Mair, P. (1990), Identity, Competition and Electoral Availability: The Stabilisation of European Electorates, 1885–1985 , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, D. (1993), Communitarianism and its Critics, Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
Bornschier, S. (2010), Cleavage Politics and the Populist Right. The New Cultural Conflict in Western Europe, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
De Wilde, P. (2011), ‘No polity for old politics? A framework for analyzing politicization of European integration’, Journal of European Integration 33(5): 559575.Google Scholar
De Wilde, P. and Zürn, M. (2012), ‘Can the politicization of European integration be reversed?’, Journal of Common Market Studies 50(1): 137153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wilde, P. and Zürn, M. (2013), ‘Debating Globalization: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism as Political Ideologies’, unpublished manuscript, WZB.Google Scholar
Diez Medrano, J. (2010), ‘A new society in the making. European integration and European social groups’, KFG Working Paper 12: 131.Google Scholar
Dreher, A., Gaston, N. and Martens, P. (2008), Measuring Globalization – Gauging its Consequence, New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2011), ‘Cosmopolitan politicization: how perceptions of interdependence foster citizens' expectations in international institutions’, European Journal of International Relations 18(3): 481508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, E.O. (2009), ‘The EU: a cosmopolitan vanguard?’, Global Jurist 9(1): 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fligstein, N. (2008), Euro-clash . The EU, European Identity, and the Future of Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hanquinet, L. and Savage, M. (2012), ‘The Europeanisation of everyday life: cross-border practices and transnational identifications among EU and third-country citizens. Operationalisation of European identity, cosmopolitanism and cross-border practices’, EUCROSS Working Paper (2), 153.Google Scholar
Hanquinet, L. and Savage, M. (2013), ‘The Europeanisation of everyday life: cross-border practices and transnational identifications among EU and third-country citizens. Europeanization and globalisation’, EUCROSS Working Paper (6), 120.Google Scholar
Herzog, A. and Tucker, J.A. (2010), ‘The dynamics of support: the winners-losers gap in attitudes toward EU membership in post-communist countries’, European Political Science Review 2(2): 235267.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2009), ‘A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: from permissive consensus to constraining dissensus’, British Journal of Political Science 39(1): 123.Google Scholar
Jiménez, A.M.R., Górniak, J.J., Kosic, A., Kiss, P. and Kandulla, M. (2004), ‘European and national identities in EU’s old and new member states: ethnic, civic, instrumental and symbolic components’, European Integration Online Papers 8(11): 137.Google Scholar
Kendall, G., Skrbis, Z. and Woodward, I. (2009), The Sociology of Cosmopolitanism , London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kriesi, H., Grande, E., Lachat, R., Dolezal, M., Bornschier, S. and Frey, T. (2008), West European Politics in the Age of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriesi, H., Grande, E., Dolezal, M., Helbling, M., Hoeglinger, D. and Hutter, S. (2012), Political Conflict in Western Europe, Cambridge; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lacewell, O.P. and Merkel, W.M. (2013), ‘Value Shifts in European Societies: Clashes between Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism’, in O. Cramme, P. Diamond and M. McTernan (eds), Progressive Politics After The Clash: Governing From the Left, London/New York: I.B. Tauris, 7795.Google Scholar
Lipset, S.M. and Rokkan, S. (1967), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Lubbers, M. and Scheepers, P. (2010), ‘Divergent trends of euroscepticism in countries and regions of the European Union’, European Journal of Political Research 49(6): 787817.Google Scholar
Mau, S. (2005), ‘Europe from the bottom: assessing personal gains and losses and its effects on EU support’, Journal of Public Policy 25(3): 289311.Google Scholar
Phillips, T. (2002), ‘Imagined communities and self-identity: an exploratory quantitative analysis’, Sociology-The Journal Of The British Sociological Association 36(3): 597617.Google Scholar
Phillips, T. and Smith, P. (2008), ‘Cosmopolitan beliefs and cosmopolitan practices’, Journal of Sociology 44(4): 391399.Google Scholar
Pichler, F. (2009a), ‘Cosmopolitan Europe’, European Societies 11: 324.Google Scholar
Pichler, F. (2009b), ‘Down-to-Earth’ cosmopolitanism subjective and objective measurements of cosmopolitanism in survey research’, Current Sociology 57(5): 704732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pichler, F. (2012), ‘Cosmopolitanism in a global perspective: an international comparison of open-minded orientations and identity in relation to globalization’, International Sociology 27(1): 2150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogge, T.W. (1992), ‘Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty’, Ethics 103(1): 4875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandel, M. (1998), Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schlueter, E., Meuleman, B. and Davidov, E. (2013), ‘Immigrant integration policies and perceived group threat: a multilevel study of 27 Western and Eastern European Countries’, Social Science Research 42: 670682.Google Scholar
Snijders, T.A.B. and Bosker, R.J. (1999), Multilevel Analysis. An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Teney, C. (2012), ‘Space matters. the group threat hypothesis revisited with geographically weighted regression. The case of the NPD 2009 electoral success’, Zeitschrift für Soziologie 41(3): 207226.Google Scholar
Van der Brug, W. and van Spanje, J. (2009), ‘Immigration, Europe and the ‘new’ cultural dimension’, European Journal of Political Research 48(3): 309334.Google Scholar
Walter, S. (2010), ‘Globalization and the welfare state: testing the microfoundations of the compensation hypothesis’, International Studies Quarterly 54: 403426.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (1998), Regieren jenseits des Nationalstaates, Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (2012), ‘The politicization of world politics and its effects: eight propositions’, European Political Sience Review, 125.Google Scholar
Zürn, M., Binder, M. and Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2012), ‘International authority and its politicization’, International Theory 4(1): 69106.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Teney et al. Supplementary Material

Tables and Figures

Download Teney et al. Supplementary Material(File)
File 87.9 KB