Supranational Organizations and Legitimacy: How the 2008 Global Economic Crisis Has Affected Public Opinion on Membership in the EU
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2014 Supranational Organizations and Legitimacy: How the 2008 Global Economic Crisis has affected Public Opinion on Membership in the EU Briana Vargas-Gonzalez University of Central Florida Part of the American Politics Commons, and the Comparative Politics Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Vargas-Gonzalez, Briana, "Supranational Organizations and Legitimacy: How the 2008 Global Economic Crisis has affected Public Opinion on Membership in the EU" (2014). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 4745. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/4745 SUPRANATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND LEGITIMACY: HOW THE 2008 GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISIS HAS AFFECTED PUBLIC OPINION ON MEMBERSHIP IN THE EU by BRIANA VARGAS-GONZALEZ B.A. University of Central Florida, 2011 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Political Science in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2014 © 2014 Briana Vargas-Gonzalez ii ABSTRACT This thesis examines public opinion towards membership in the EU, before and after the 2008 global economic crisis, in the newest member states to join the institution in 2004 (the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia) and 2007 (Bulgaria and Romania). Prior to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989, socialist economies and communism maintained a citizenry that never experienced unemployment and that did not have a political voice. Because free-market economic policies and democratic values are new to these countries, public opinion regarding membership in a supranational organization that promotes and fosters these ideals is important to study. Data from the Eurobarometer Public Opinion Survey spring waves 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the World Bank, and Eurostat are used to measure multiple indicators of support for membership in the EU. Ordered logistic regression and means comparison analyses are employed to measure the effect of national-level economic prospects, economic winner/loser status, political party power, age, national identity, gender, and individual-level political ideology on public opinion toward membership. The results demonstrate that multiple indicators affect attitudes toward membership and that a negative shift in public opinion is apparent following the 2008 global economic crisis. At the individual-level of analysis, economic winner/loser status and national identity are significant in the predicted direction in all five models. Age is a significant indicator of support only in 2008, 2009, and 2010. At the aggregate-level, means comparison analyses and t-test statistics indicate that GDP annual growth rates have a positive effect on attitudes toward membership in the EU. As GDP annual growth iii increases, approval of membership in the EU increases. Eurozone membership and unemployment rates indicate varied support for membership in the EU, and the results of means comparison analyses of political party power at the national-level are inconclusive and exploratory in nature. With all findings considered, future studies can further examine the implications and long-term effects of global financial crises on public opinion towards membership in various international economic organizations. iv For my family and friends who supported me through the grueling, yet rewarding, process that is writing a master’s thesis. I would not be where I am today without your love and encouragement. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Without the University of Central Florida and its distinguished faculty and staff this study would not have been accessible. I would like to give thanks to my unrelenting thesis committee for their guidance and support through the entire process of my graduate career. To Professors Barbara Kinsey and Jonathan Knuckey for your wisdom and commitment to my success. To Professor Myunghee Kim, your belief in my abilities and your constant encouragement throughout this process have meant so much to me. Your instruction through my academic career at the University of Central Florida has shaped the student that I am today, and that I will be for the rest of my life. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... x INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 5 The Economy and the Economic Vote ........................................................................................ 5 Identity ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Political Parties .......................................................................................................................... 14 Value Change ............................................................................................................................ 17 CHAPTER TWO: FROM SOCIALISM TO CAPITALISM ....................................................... 23 GDP Annual Growth Rate......................................................................................................... 29 Unemployment .......................................................................................................................... 32 Unemployment by Gender..................................................................................................... 35 Unemployment by Age .......................................................................................................... 40 CHAPTER THREE: DATA AND METHODS ........................................................................... 47 Sample Countries ...................................................................................................................... 47 Dependent Variable ................................................................................................................... 47 Macro-Level Economic Indicators ............................................................................................ 48 Micro-Level Economic Indicator .............................................................................................. 48 Control Variables ...................................................................................................................... 48 National Level Party Power in Post-Soviet Member States ...................................................... 49 Bulgaria ................................................................................................................................. 52 Czech Republic ...................................................................................................................... 55 Estonia ................................................................................................................................... 57 Hungary ................................................................................................................................. 59 Latvia ..................................................................................................................................... 61 Lithuania ................................................................................................................................ 63 Poland .................................................................................................................................... 65 Romania ................................................................................................................................. 67 vii Slovakia ................................................................................................................................. 69 Slovenia ................................................................................................................................. 71 National Level Party Power in Cyprus and Malta..................................................................... 73 Cyprus .................................................................................................................................... 74 Malta ...................................................................................................................................... 76 Hypotheses ................................................................................................................................ 78 Aggregate-Level Hypotheses ................................................................................................ 78 Individual-Level Hypotheses ................................................................................................. 79 CHAPTER FOUR: QUANTITATIVE