Legitimacy Of EU Research Articles

The NGEU comes to Visegrád: implementation process and throughput legitimacy

ABSTRACT Existing research on EU legitimacy has neglected one aspect – the transformation of EU strategies into concrete national plans. This article reflects on this gap by analysing the throughput legitimacy of the implementation of the ambitious and transformative Next Generation EU (NGEU) plan into national strategies, called Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRPs), in four Central and Eastern European countries. Focusing on the transparency, accountability, openness and inclusiveness of the RRP elaboration process, it finds that the elaboration process suffered from shortcomings in all aspects analysed. In particular, they affect the quality of legitimacy of the process of implementation. The article found that while the formal aspects of throughput legitimacy were present, most of the factors that create a mirror that shows how actors participated, how their comments were addressed or how the parliamentary role was respected failed in almost all cases. This finding has implications for research on throughput legitimacy, which should focus more on its quality than on its procedural parts.

Rethinking liberal order: the EU and the quest for global justice

Abstract The liberal order is facing severe challenges. This article introduces a special section, ‘Liberal order, the EU and global political justice’, which assesses the implications of these challenges for the European Union and for its ability to remain a relevant global actor. To do so, the different contributions inquire into the interconnections between the normative premises of the EU's foreign policy within different issue areas and those of the liberal order. Presenting the core themes, this introductory article suggests that liberal order is not merely a descriptive but also a normative concept. Indicating how a well-ordered international system ought to be organized, the liberal order generates expectations of a contribution to global justice. The article further advances the hypothesis that the troubles of the liberal order are linked to its inability to fulfill these expectations. As the EU's legitimacy is bound up with that of the liberal script, this hypothesis implies a need to reconsider not only core features of liberal order, but also those of the EU's approach to it. Thus highlighting the relevance of normative factors and their capacity for disruption, the article contributes to filling gaps in scholarly literatures both on the challenges to the liberal order and on the changing role of the EU in an increasingly unsettled world.

Building up the EU Revenue Side: But What Is a Tax in EU Law?

While the US Constitution expressly grants the federation the power to tax, Article 311 TFEU is silent on whether such power exists at the EU level. This contribution argues that the Union has the power to tax, provided that the chosen resources in the basket match the objectives and policies of the Union. Since the achievement of the internal market is a shared competence (Article 4 TFEU), the Union can decide the level of resources tailored to this goal. Although the Union has a broad power to tax under Article 311 TFEU to pursue its objectives and policies, the member states are still the “masters,” able to decide the level of resources under the unanimity rule. To resolve this paradox, this contribution embraces a democratic legitimacy of EU taxes that grant the European Parliament the power to decide the revenue side of the EU budget. EU democratic taxes approved by the European Parliament could reaffirm the redistributive function of taxes, thereby allowing the redistribution of wealth from rich to poor.

Ownership of national recovery plans: next generation EU and democratic legitimacy

ABSTRACT The European Union established the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) to address the socio-economic impact of Covid-19. The RRF promotes domestic ownership through increased engagement of national authorities with stakeholders. However, empirical manifestations of ownership remain unclear. This study refines the concept of ‘ownership’ and analyses the engagement of social actors in the formulation of National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) in Croatia, the Netherlands and Sweden. The findings indicate that all three countries exhibit limited procedural ownership, while the extent of substantive ownership varies based on pre-existing conditions. Interestingly, higher financial allocation can hinder the ownership of social actors, although low allocations do not necessarily facilitate their involvement. Time pressures and divergent time horizons between EU and national politics further undermine domestic ownership. While the centralised preparation of NRRPs has led to the concentration of ownership primarily in the hands of governments, poor governance of NRRPs could erode legitimacy.

Towards Evidence-Based Legitimacy Interventions in EU Law: Challenges and Directions for Empirical Research

As EU institutions are increasingly being asked to address societal challenges, the legitimacy need of the EU becomes more evident. With the aim of complementing the already rich literature on normative EU legitimacy and ultimately enabling evidence-based legitimation strategies, this contribution identifies and addresses gaps in empirical research on perceived EU legitimacy, which pertain to conceptualization, operationalization and explanatory factors. To that end, we first of all define perceived EU legitimacy as the perception among EU citizens that the EU’s exercise of authority is appropriate. Drawing on the relational approach to legitimacy, these perceptions arise from socially held norms about how the EU should rightfully exercise authority, which are in turn influenced by the socio-political context. We then propose ways in which such a conception of legitimacy can be operationalized in empirical research. Finally, we lay the foundation for a theoretical model on the sources of EU legitimacy perceptions, arguing that such a model should consider social psychological processes related to identity and morality, because these factors influence how people process information about the EU, and are increasingly part of the environment in which norms about rightful rule arise. Once empirical research is better equipped to understand these processes underlying citizens’ legitimacy perceptions of the EU, opportunities arise to develop evidence-based interventions and inform legal practices in the EU with extra-legal insights. As EU legitimation through policies, legal reform and institutional design requires knowledge of legal feasibility, social scientists and lawyers should collaborate to embed empirical insights in EU law. Bridging the norm-fact divide in this manner is both normatively desirable and empirically necessary for the EU to strengthen its legitimacy and face societal challenges.

From causes to consequences: Investigating the effects of differentiated integration on citizens’ EU support

Research on differentiated integration has paid considerable attention to its causes. However, we know very little about its consequences. Using the synthetic control method and interactive factor models, this article investigates the effects of differentiated integration on citizens’ support for the EU. We find that in cases where member states are granted an opt-out or are allowed to integrate into a policy area they were previously excluded from, support increases. In contrast, support decreases when member states are not granted a requested opt-out or are excluded from a policy area they would like to join. These findings carry important implications for the EU's legitimacy. While differentiated integration has the potential to enhance citizens’ legitimacy perceptions, it can also undermine them simultaneously.

The integration of subgroups at the supranational level: The relation between social identity, national threat, and perceived legitimacy of the EU

Previous research suggests that social identity influences public attitudes about the European Union, but little is known about the role of social identity for perceived legitimacy of the EU. This article explores the relation between different forms of identification (national, EU, dual) and EU legitimacy perceptions, and the moderation of this relationship by experienced threat to national power and sociocultural identity. A survey was conducted in six countries (N = 1136). A factor analysis of legitimacy items resulted in two subscales (institutional trust and duty to obey). Separate regression analyses were therefore run on these subscales. All forms of identification were positively related to perceived EU legitimacy, while threat was a strong and universal negative predictor. However, the results suggest that national identification only positively predicted legitimacy when participants experienced no threat to their nation by the EU, while dual identification positively predicted legitimacy even when participants experienced threat. Overall, respect for national identities and their values may offer opportunities to safeguard and improve the perceived legitimacy of the EU. Findings are discussed in terms of the literature on the ingroup projection model and the common ingroup model.

Symmetry in the Delegation of Power as a Legitimacy Criterion

AbstractThe EU's power is expanding, calling for reassessments of its normative legitimacy. This article proposes a novel criterion for assessing the EU's legitimacy: symmetry in the delegation of power. We illustrate the usefulness of this criterion through an analysis of the European border regime. Existing analyses of the border regime have tended to dismiss it as weak and intergovernmental. We show, to the contrary, that it is both strong and weak. The EU wields significant power in border control but lacks power altogether in immigration policy. This asymmetry has rendered the EU incapable of discharging the moral responsibilities that arise in migration control, posing a novel legitimacy challenge. Finally, we argue that the symmetry criterion generalizes and can shed light on the EU's legitimacy beyond the area of migration.

Constitutionalizing the EU in an Age of Emergencies

AbstractOver the last decade especially, European authorities have successively invoked exceptional measures in the name of exceptional circumstances. This improvised mode of emergency response raises problems for EU legitimacy. After a brief analysis of the core patterns, the article examines the scope for reform. It considers the case for pre‐emptively strengthening the EU's emergency powers in the form of an ‘emergency constitution’. It goes on to argue for more radical EU constitutional change, focused not on regulating the exceptional moment but simplifying and democratizing executive power, such that when hard times arrive it is better tied to a critical public. A concluding section discusses what can be achieved by retrospective contestation, as an interim solution in advance of constitutional change.

Illiberal challenges to the European Union’s legitimacy from within and without: the rule of law and refugee crises

ABSTRACT This study revisits the academic debate on rising populism and illiberalism in Europe that reduces the EU’s crises to those involving ‘liberal EU’ and ‘illiberal regimes’ without necessarily differentiating between these regimes. Applying Suchman’s multidimensional account of legitimacy to the EU, it unpacks the varying domestic contestations of two illiberal regimes against the different components of EU legitimacy within the context of two recent EU crises. Comparative analysis of how an illiberal insider (Hungary) and an illiberal outsider (Turkey) challenge the EU’s legitimacy in handling the rule of law and Syrian refugee crises, respectively, revealed two findings. First, Hungarian and Turkish actors raise divergent legitimacy contestations against the EU’s crisis management in the select cases. Second, their positionality towards the EU drives this divergence. While both countries seek to delegitimise the EU, their points of contention differ based on being in or outside the EU.

EU Public Legitimation in the Social Media Era: Co‐ordinating the Political Communication of the European Commission

AbstractThis article addresses the question of how the EU gains influence over public legitimacy in the social media era. Existing theories focus either on the type of legitimacy at play without addressing strategic efforts in the digital public sphere, or they focus on self‐legitimation without considering the type of legitimacy at stake. However, public legitimation is the result of both institutional conditions and of agency. Strategic efforts in public legitimation are shaped not only by choices between forms of co‐ordination but also by the type of legitimacy these efforts attempt to influence. Concurrently, the purpose here is to suggest a new approach to analysing the EU's responses to public legitimacy challenges and to detecting features of good practice in the digital public sphere. Taking a historical approach, the article links existing literatures addressing EU legitimacy, organizational strategy, and political communication. The European Commission is used as an illustrative case example.

Drafting national recovery plans and stakeholder involvement: an opportunity for strengthening EU legitimacy?

The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is at the heart of Next Generation EU, Europe’s plan to tackle the economic fallout of the pandemic crisis. To obtain this support, national plans outlining structural reforms to be implemented by member states are to be submitted for assessment by the European Commission before being approved by the European Council. Accordingly, to effectively implement the structural reforms to be financed by the RRF, national governments and their constituents must show ownership over the process. While it should be in everyone’s interest to disburse recovery funds as soon as possible so as to reach a strong recovery effect, it is equally important to ensure enough time for public consultations with the relevant stakeholders and a successful reflection of input from the stakeholders in the national plans. However, drafting national recovery plans proved a laborious exercise, bringing back concerns over the EU democratic deficit. Consequently, a crucial question concerns whether the pandemic crisis is a proper opportunity to bridge the legitimacy gap of the EU, which has widened in the era of the EU’s economic crisis. In an attempt to answer this question, this paper provides an overview of the overall involvement of stakeholders in drafting national recovery and resilience plans based on information gathered from several official reports.

First Order for some. How Different Forms of Politicization Motivated Voters in the 2019 European Parliamentary Election

AbstractDifferent theories of politicization in EP elections entail very different conclusions for EU legitimacy. The somber predictions of second‐order election (SOE) theory have been challenged by theories of polity politicization in recent years, but many scholars still believe policy politicization to be most desirable from a normative point of view. Despite its importance, there are few studies investigating the meaning citizens attach to their voting decision, which is crucial for disentangling different forms of politicization. We address this gap by choosing a qualitative and explorative research design, conducting 107 semi‐structured interviews in France, Germany and Poland on the day of the 2019 EP elections. Our analysis of voter motivations provides evidence of SOE behavior, but also of European‐level polity and policy politicization. The fact that voters are motivated by different forms of politicization challenges the hegemony of SOE theory. For some voters, EP elections are first order. This is good news for EP legitimacy.

Stuck in ENP purgatory? An assessment of the EU's external legitimacy mechanisms

The EU is developing closer ties with some of its neighbours, creating various forms of external differentiated integration (EDI). Since these relations are continuously asymmetrical in terms of power, scholars raise the issue of how power and dominance feature in such structures. The main aim of this research paper is to investigate how, in the context of EDI, the EU creates structures in the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), and specifically the Eastern Partnership (EaP), that allow more participation and increasing input and throughput legitimacy for partner countries and their societies. Secondly, the paper shows how political actors from partner countries perceive these structures and tools and what improvements they propose. This is done through analysis of the mechanisms and practices which the EU is employing to improve participation and external legitimacy within the ENP. The research paper consists of a theoretical section, in which we examine the EU’s interdependence and EDI structures in the neighbourhood as well as using the concept of dominance to unpack its characteristics. This is followed by an analysis of external EU legitimacy and its indicators treated as a means to improve relations with the neighbours. In the empirical section, we identify and analyse selected mechanisms through which the EU is trying to improve its external legitimacy in the neighbourhood. We mainly look at two institutional tools: (1) consultations on the ENP reform and (2) the ENP Interparliamentary Assemblies (EuroNEST).

The Coronavirus Crisis as Catalyst for EU Legitimacy? Italian Public Opinion and the EU During the Pandemic

Over the past few years, the EU has been challenged by multiple disintegration forces sustained by a growing number of Eurosceptic citizens. In this critical scenario, Italy has emerged as a relevant case because of its transformation from a leading pro-integration country to a country where EU integration is an increasingly divisive issue. We explore the relationship between Italian public opinion and the EU, with a specific interest in understanding how the coronavirus crisis may affect such a relationship, supposing that our case study may also be revealing as to how a crisis context can produce effects on the popular legitimacy of the EU. We show that in Italy there is demand from some majoritarian segments of society for stronger cooperation in the EU. To explain the apparent paradox of why Italians decreasingly feel that their country benefits from the EU but still want to increase EU cooperation in certain areas, we turn to the argument of the public's instrumental approach to the principle of burden-sharing: citizens support deeper integration to face the costs of the most pressing crises affecting the country and the EU at large.

Can EU judicial intervention increase polity scepticism? Quasi-experimental evidence from Spain

ABSTRACT The mantra of ‘take back control’ has become a staple of eurosceptics across the European Union. At the centre of the slogan's message is a call to arms against the (perceived) challenge that EU membership represents for national sovereignty. In this paper, we theorize that supranational decisions taken by the European Court of Justice can increase ‘polity scepticism’ – increased opposition to the EU and decreased satisfaction with national democracy – by cueing citizens regarding the effects of EU integration on the perception of diluted sovereignty. Empirically, we leverage quasi-experimental evidence to support our theory, establishing that ECJ rulings have a significant causal effect on euroscepticism and dissatisfaction with democracy. The implications of our findings suggest that EU institutions seeking to ensure compliance with the rule of law and EU norms should proceed with caution. Interventionist action may backfire by increasing scrutiny of the EU's legitimacy and undermining polity support.

The Selective Advantage Criterion in Tax Rulings: The Path Towards a More Coherent and Thorough Analysis of Selectivity

Article 107(1) TFEU has long prohibited, as incompatible with the internal market, the granting of aid by Member States or through State resources which, by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, is capable of distorting competition and affecting trade between Member States. According to the settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’),1 this provision limits Member States’ exclusive competence in the field of direct taxation when national tax measures constitute fiscal State aid and gives the EU legitimacy to ensure State aid control.2 Therefore, although Member States remain generally competent to decide on their economic policy and the tax system they deem more suitable,3 they must exercise this competence in compliance with EU law.4 This includes ensuring that national tax measures, such as tax rulings, respect State aid rules.5 The Commission’s involvement in the field...

A “Legal Eccentricity”: The European Parliament, its Non-binding Resolution, and the Legitimacy of the EU’s Trade Agreements

The European Union is pursuing an ambitious trade agenda despite the increased controversy over the negotiating process and substance of trade agreements. This controversy raises questions about the legitimacy of trade agreements, as Cecilia Malmstrom, former European Commissioner for Trade, has acknowledged. This paper seeks to evaluate the legitimacy of the EU’s agreements, with a focus on the role of the European Parliament as a legitimating actor, given its position as the democratic representative of the public. It argues that the Treaties do not provide for sufficient legitimacy and then considers whether Parliament has been able to use its informal governance tools, particularly the non-binding resolution, to narrow the legitimacy deficit.

Ideologies and Imaginaries of Legitimacy from the 1950S to Today: Trajectories of EU-Official Discourses Read against Rosanvallon’sDemocratic Legitimacy

This chapter traces changes in EU-official discourse around EU legitimacy since the 1950s, relating them to the trajectory described by Pierre Rosanvallon in Democratic Legitimacy (2011a). Accordingly, the legitimacy of modern democracies broke down in the 1980s owing to a loss of faith in its two main foundations in elections and bureaucracy. This gave rise to the emergence of alternative modes of legitimation, classed under the ideal types of impartiality, reflexivity, and proximity. This chapter plays Rosanvallon’s analysis, which draws on national experiences, against the EU context. It finds important differences, in particular regarding the balance between electoral and bureaucratic legitimacy in the earlier years of integration - as well as significant similarities and interaction, manifested in a striking resonance between particular strands in EU-official legitimation strategies and Rosanvallon’s ideal types. The ways in which they played out in the case of the EU point to dangers inherent to them; of highlighting proximity over actual influence and control; making democratic forms so complex and ‘reflexive’ that they become unintelligible, and unaccountable; or replicating bureaucratic thinking that obscures choices and judgments behind claims to independence and impartiality. What is more, the discursive history of contests over EU legitimacy illustrates a predisposition of Rosanvallon’s account of democratic legitimacy towards “unpolitical democracy”, rooted in its attempt to contain the threat of populism. His goal is to politicise the indirect institutions of impartiality, reflexivity and proximity rather than democratic procedures such as voting and majority rule, with the effect that deliberation is used strategically as an alternative to electoral and partisan democracy.

¿Estados Unidos de Europa? Mapeo y diseño de constituciones para Europa

En los últimos tiempos, académicos, intelectuales públicos, movimientos políticos y sociales y destacados líderes políticos europeos de diferentes orientaciones ideológicas han hecho un llamamiento a la creación de unos Estados Unidos de Europa. Desde su punto de vista, enfrentar la crisis de legitimidad de la UE requiere una renovación democrática a través de un proceso constituyente. Sin embargo, estas declaraciones no han sido acompañadas por un diseño específico sobre cómo instituir esta nueva Constitución Europea. Con el objeto de discutir las posibles vías de poner en práctica esta idea, este artículo presenta las principales formulaciones del poder constituyente europeo y su traducción a un diseño concreto de constitution-making.
 Recibido: 16.06.2020Aceptado: 21.12.2020