European Journal of Business Science and Technology 2020, 6(2):113-126 | DOI: 10.11118/ejobsat.2020.012

Measuring the Public Perception of the European Integration Process: Evidence from the United Kingdom and Germany

Daniel Pastorek1
1 Mendel University in Brno, Czech Republic

This paper investigates a new method of measuring public perception of European integration policies. The methodology is based on a monthly frequency of news generating a negative attitude toward the EU integration process in newspapers from 2010:1 to 2018:12. The studies concerning similar topic are mostly based on survey data, which does not allow measuring dissatisfaction with individual political acts. The newly constructed indexes show that the identified spikes correspond to all major European integration events and can capture public disagreement attitude with the implementation of individual policies on a European or national level. The results are compared with the interest of individuals with the use of Google trend data analysis. Indexes may be useful to understand the non-economic cost in policy decision making, the same as in the question of the ambivalence of Europe.

Keywords: public perception, integration, European Union, Google trends, media news
JEL classification: E70, F02

Received: November 28, 2020; Revised: December 25, 2020; Accepted: December 27, 2020; Published: December 29, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Pastorek, D. (2020). Measuring the Public Perception of the European Integration Process: Evidence from the United Kingdom and Germany. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 6(2), 113-126. doi: 10.11118/ejobsat.2020.012
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Baker, S., Bloom, N. and Davis, S., 2016. Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 131. Go to original source...
    2. Barnes, L. and Hicks, T. 2018. Making Austerity Popular: The Media and Mass Attitudes toward Fiscal Policy: MAKING AUSTERITY POPULAR. American Journal of Political Science. 62. Go to original source...
    3. Baute, S., Meuleman, B., Abts, K. and Swyngedow M. 2018. Measuring Attitudes Towards Social Europe: A Multidimensional Approach. Soc Indic Res 137, 353-378. Go to original source...
    4. Boomgaarden, H., Schuck, A. and Elenbaas, M., de Vreese, C. (2011). Mapping EU Attitudes: Conceptual and Empirical Dimensions of Euroscepticism and EU Support. European Union Politics. 12. 241-266. Go to original source...
    5. Demir E., Gozgor G., Lau, Ch. K., and Vigne S. 2018. Does Economic Policy Uncertainty Predict the Bitcoin Returns? An Empirical Investigation. Finance Research Letters. Go to original source...
    6. Doms M. and Morin J. N., 2004. "Consumer sentiment, the economy, and the news media," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2004-51, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.) Go to original source...
    7. Drobetz, W. & El Ghoul, S. Guedhami, O., Janzen, M. 2018. Policy Uncertainty, Investment, and the Cost of Capital. Journal of Financial Stability. 39. Go to original source...
    8. Nicoli, F., 2017. Hard-line Euroscepticism and the Eurocrisis: Evidence from a Panel Study of 108 Elections Across Europe: Hard-line Euroscepticism and the Crisis. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. Go to original source...
    9. Gomez, R. 2015. "The Economics Strikes Back: Support for the EU during the Great Recession." Journal of Common Market Studies 53 (3): 577-592. Go to original source...
    10. Gulen H. and Ion M., 2016. Policy Uncertainty and Corporate Investment, The Review of Financial Studies, Volume 29, Issue 3, March 2016, Pages 523-564
    11. Gunther, A. and Storey, D., 2006. The Influence of Presumed Influence. Journal of Communication. 53. 199 - 215. Go to original source...
    12. Hobolt SB and Brouard S., 2011. Contesting the European Union? Why the Dutch and the French rejected the European constitution. Polit. Res. Q. 64(2):309-22 Go to original source...
    13. Hobolt SB and de Vries CE., 2015. Issue entrepreneurship and multiparty competition. Comp. Polit. Stud. 48(9):1159-85 Go to original source...
    14. Hobolt, S. and de Vries, C., 2016. Public Support for European Integration. Annual Review of Political Science. 19. Go to original source...
    15. Hobolt, S., de Vries, C., Tilley, J. (2017). Facing up to the facts: What causes economic perceptions? Electoral Studies. 10. Go to original source...
    16. Hooghe, L. and Gary M., 2009. A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining. British Journal of Political Science 39, no. 1: 1-23. Go to original source...
    17. Ioannou, D., J.-F. Jamet, and J. Kleibl. 2015. "Spillovers and Euroscepticism." European Central Bank Working Paper Series 1815 (June). Go to original source...
    18. Kang, Y., and Chang-Rhyong Oh. 2020. "Spreading Euroscepticism and Its Macro-Level Determinants: Empirical Analysis of Eurobarometer Survey in 2004- 2017." Journal of Contemporary European Studies: 1-18. Go to original source...
    19. Kuhn, T., Van Elsas, E., Hakhverdian, A., Van der Brug, W., 2013. An Ever Wider Gap in an Ever Closer Union. Rising Inequalities and Euroskepticism in 12 West European Democracies, 1976-2008. Gini Discussion Paper 91.
    20. Lamla, M. and Lein, S., 2008, The Role of Media for Consumers' Inflation Expectation Formation, No 08-201, KOF Working papers, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich Go to original source...
    21. Linn, S. and Kellstedt, P., 2004. The Political (And Economic) Origins of Consumer Confidence. American Journal of Political Science - AMER J POLIT SCI.
    22. Meijers, MJ, Zaslove A. Measuring Populism in Political Parties: Appraisal of a New Approach. Comparative Political Studies. July 2020. Go to original source...
    23. Nadeau, R., Neimi R., and Amato T., 1994. "Expectations and Preferences in British Elections." American Political Science Review 88(2): 371-383. Go to original source...
    24. Pastor, L. and Veronesi, P., 2013. Political Uncertainty and Risk Premia. Journal of Financial Economics. Go to original source...
    25. Ritzen, J., Wehner, C., and Zimmerman, K. F. (2014). Euroskepticism in the crisis: More mood than economy. Discussion Paper, IZA, 12-17. Go to original source...
    26. Serricchio, F., M. Tsakatika, and L. Quaglia. 2013. "Euroscepticism and the Global Financial Crisis." Journal of Common Market Studies 51 (2): 51-64. Go to original source...
    27. Scharpf F.W, 1999. Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press Go to original source...
    28. Soroka, S., Stecula, D. and Wlezien, C., 2014. It's (Change in) the (Future) Economy, Stupid: Economic Indicators, the Media, and Public Opinion. American Journal of Political Science. 59. 10.1111/ajps.12145. Go to original source...
    29. Soroka, S. 2006. Good News and Bad News: Asymmetric Responses to Economic Information. Journal of Politics 68(2): 372-85. Go to original source...
    30. Soroka, S. 2014. Negativity in Democratic Politics: Causes and Consequences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Go to original source...
    31. Spoon J-J. 2012. How salient is Europe? An analysis of European election manifestos, 1979-2004. European Union Politics. 2012;13(4):558-579. Go to original source...
    32. Stoeckel, F. 2013. Ambivalent or Indifferent? Reconsidering the Structure of EU Public Opinion. European Union Politics. 14. 23-45. 10.1177/1465116512460736. Go to original source...
    33. Wanta, W., Golan, G. and Lee. 2004. Agenda Setting and International News: Media Influence on Public Perceptions of Foreign Nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly - JOURNALISM MASS COMMUN. 81. 364-377. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content