IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges and opportunities for European Union in the XXIst century


  • Ionelia Bianca BOSOANCĂ

    (PhD Student at Babeș-Bolyai University, Faculty of European Studies, Cluj-Napoca, Romania)


Where do we go and what is the fate of the European Union after Brexit Referendum? What are the prospects for the development of the ‘27-nation’ formula and what are the real problems that the European Union cannot neglect for a long time? These are the most asked questions in the international press but also the speeches of Europe’s important figures. The political leaders of the world propose a series of hypotheses and scenarios about the fate of the European Union. Some of them are encouraging, others grimmer, some more radical and others rather moderate. The present paper will discuss the most vulnerable points of the today European Union and will outline the scenarios for the future of this construction. It will be discussed the most plausible scenario and some political figures who sustain this evolution of the European Union by using a qualitative methodology.

Suggested Citation

  • Ionelia Bianca BOSOANCĂ, 2019. "Challenges and opportunities for European Union in the XXIst century," CES Working Papers, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:jes:wpaper:y:2019:v:11:i:1:p:1-21

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    2. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2018. "CommentaryThe revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it)," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 11(1), pages 189-209.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Ionelia Bianca BOSOANCĂ, 2019. "Juncker’S Resilient Discourse Regarding European Security Challenges," EURINT, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 6, pages 152-167.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    2. Gabrielle Demange, 2018. "New electoral systems and old referendums," PSE Working Papers hal-01852206, HAL.
    3. Gabriel J. Felbermayr & Clemens Fuest & Hans Gersbach & Albrecht O. Ritschl & Marcel Thum & Martin T. Braml, 2019. "Hard Brexit ahead: breaking the deadlock," EconPol Policy Brief 12, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    4. Thiemo Fetzer & Stephan Kyburz, 2018. "Cohesive Institutions and Political Violence," HiCN Working Papers 271, Households in Conflict Network.
    5. Sascha O. Becker & Thiemo Fetzer, 2018. "Has Eastern European Migration Impacted UK-born Workers?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 376, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    6. Maurice Obstfeld, 2021. "Globalization and nationalism: Retrospect and prospect," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 675-690, October.
    7. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Neil Lee & Cornelius Lipp, 2021. "Golfing with Trump. Social capital, decline, inequality, and the rise of populism in the US," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 457-481.
    8. Braml, Martin & Felbermayr, Gabriel, 2018. "Understanding Free Trade Attitudes: Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181591, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Thiemo Fetzer, 2019. "Did Austerity Cause Brexit?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3849-3886, November.
    10. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp Johann, 2020. "Leaping into the dark: A theory of policy gambles," Discussion Papers 07/2020, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    11. Bachtrögler, Julia & Oberhofer, Harald, 2018. "Euroscepticism and EU Cohesion Policy: The Impact of Micro-Level Policy Effectiveness on Voting Behavior," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 273, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    12. Sebastian Doerr & Stefan Gissler & José-Luis Peydró & Hans-Joachim Voth, 2018. "From finance to fascism," Economics Working Papers 1651, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Nov 2020.
    13. Yann Algan & Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou & Evgenia Passari, 2017. "The European Trust Crisis and the Rise of Populism," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 48(2 (Fall)), pages 309-400.
    14. Enrique López-Bazo, 2021. "Does regional growth affect public attitudes towards the European Union?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 66(3), pages 755-778, June.
    15. Cipullo, Davide & Reslow, André, 2019. "Biased Forecasts to Affect Voting Decisions? The Brexit Case," Working Paper Series 2019:4, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    16. Polyzos, Stathis & Samitas, Aristeidis & Katsaiti, Marina-Selini, 2020. "Who is unhappy for Brexit? A machine-learning, agent-based study on financial instability," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Annie Tubadji & Thomas Colwill & Don Webber, 2021. "Voting with your feet or voting for Brexit: The tale of those stuck behind," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 247-277, April.
    18. Pawel Dlotko & Lucy Minford & Simon Rudkin & Wanling Qiu, 2019. "An Economic Topology of the Brexit vote," Papers 1909.03490,, revised Dec 2021.
    19. Riccardo Crescenzi & Marco Di Cataldo & Alessandra Faggian, 2018. "Internationalized at work and localistic at home: The ‘split’ Europeanization behind Brexit," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(1), pages 117-132, March.
    20. Stephen Drinkwater, 2021. "Brexit and the ‘left behind’: Job polarization and the rise in support for leaving the European Union," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(6), pages 569-588, November.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jes:wpaper:y:2019:v:11:i:1:p:1-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alupului Ciprian (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.