IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v23y2022i1p100-119.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Brexit deterrent? How member state exit shapes public support for the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Sara B Hobolt

    (Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK)

  • Sebastian Adrian Popa

    (School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, 5994University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK)

  • Wouter Van der Brug

    (Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Hermann Schmitt

    (Faculty of Humanities, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
    The Mannheim Centre for European Social Research, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany)

Abstract

What are the effects on public support for the European Union (EU) when a member state exits? We examine this question in the context of Britain's momentous decision to leave the EU. Combining analyses of the European Election Study 2019 and a unique survey-embedded experiment conducted in all member states, we analyse the effect of Brexit on support for membership among citizens in the EU-27. The experimental evidence shows that while information about the negative economic consequences of Brexit had no significant effect, positive information about Britain's sovereignty significantly increased optimism about leaving the EU. Our findings suggest that Brexit acts as a benchmark for citizens’ evaluations of EU membership across EU-27, and that it may not continue to act as a deterrent in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara B Hobolt & Sebastian Adrian Popa & Wouter Van der Brug & Hermann Schmitt, 2022. "The Brexit deterrent? How member state exit shapes public support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 100-119, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:23:y:2022:i:1:p:100-119
    DOI: 10.1177/14651165211032766
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14651165211032766
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/14651165211032766?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilens, Martin, 2001. "Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(2), pages 379-396, June.
    2. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    3. Kayser, Mark Andreas & Peress, Michael, 2012. "Benchmarking across Borders: Electoral Accountability and the Necessity of Comparison," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 661-684, August.
    4. Arel-Bundock, Vincent & Blais, André & Dassonneville, Ruth, 2021. "Do Voters Benchmark Economic Performance?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 437-449, January.
    5. Anderson, Christopher J. & Reichert, M. Shawn, 1995. "Economic Benefits and Support for Membership in the E.U.: A Cross-National Analysis," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 231-249, September.
    6. De Vries, Catherine E. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Walter, Stefanie, 2021. "Politicizing International Cooperation: The Mass Public, Political Entrepreneurs, and Political Opportunity Structures," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 306-332, April.
    7. Althaus, Scott L., 1998. "Information Effects in Collective Preferences," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 545-558, September.
    8. Eichenberg, Richard C. & Dalton, Russell J., 1993. "Europeans and the European Community: the dynamics of public support for European integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 507-534, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Kruschinski & Márton Bene, 2022. "In varietate concordia?! Political parties’ digital political marketing in the 2019 European Parliament election campaign," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 43-65, March.
    2. Catherine E De Vries, 2022. "Analysing how crises shape mass and elite preferences and behaviour in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 161-168, March.
    3. Wouter van der Brug & Katjana Gattermann & Claes H. de Vreese, 2022. "Electoral responses to the increased contestation over European integration. The European Elections of 2019 and beyond," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 3-20, March.
    4. Monika Brusenbauch Meislová, 2023. "In Quest for Discursive Legitimation of Ongoing Policy Processes: Constructing Brexit as a Success Story," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 815-833, May.

    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. Chase Foster & Jeffry Frieden, 2021. "Economic determinants of public support for European integration, 1995–2018," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 266-292, June.
    2. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    3. Dimiter Toshkov, 2011. "Public opinion and policy output in the European Union: A lost relationship," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 169-191, June.
    4. Jørgen Bølstad, 2015. "Dynamics of European integration: Public opinion in the core and periphery," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 23-44, March.
    5. Armen Hakhverdian & Erika van Elsas & Wouter van der Brug & Theresa Kuhn, 2013. "Euroscepticism and education: A longitudinal study of 12 EU member states, 1973–2010," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(4), pages 522-541, December.
    6. Hakhverdian, A. & Elsas, E. van & Brug, W. van der & Kuhn, T., 2013. "GINI DP 92: Euroscepticism and education: A longitudinal study of twelve EU member states, 1973-2010," GINI Discussion Papers 92, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    7. Arnold, Christine, Eliyahu V. Sapir and Galina Zapryanova, 2012. "Trust in the institutions of the European Union: A cross-country examination," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 16, February.
    8. Kiratli, Osman Sabri, 2015. "The role of identity in support for supranational integration in EU Foreign and Security Policies," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 19, February.
    9. Soetkin Verhaegen & Marc Hooghe & Ellen Quintelier, 2014. "European Identity and Support for European Integration: A Matter of Perceived Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 295-314, May.
    10. Kristel Jacquier, 2015. "Public support for the economic governance of the euro zone: empirical evidence from the debt crisis," Post-Print halshs-01222511, HAL.
    11. James Tilley & Christopher Wlezien, 2008. "Does Political Information Matter? An Experimental Test Relating to Party Positions on Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 192-214, March.
    12. Jo Thori Lind & Dominic Rohner, 2017. "Knowledge is Power: A Theory of Information, Income and Welfare Spending," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 611-646, October.
    13. Adam William Chalmers & Lisa Maria Dellmuth, 2015. "Fiscal redistribution and public support for European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 386-407, September.
    14. Chun-Fang Chiang & Jason M. Kuo & Megumi Naoi & Jin-Tan Liu, 2020. "What Do Voters Learn from Foreign News? Emulation, Backlash, and Public Support for Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 27497, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Catherine E. De Vries, 2017. "Benchmarking Brexit: How the British Decision to Leave Shapes EU Public Opinion," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55, pages 38-53, September.
    16. Kristel Jacquier, 2012. "Public Support for European Integration : A comparative analysis," Post-Print halshs-00768907, HAL.
    17. Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, 2013. "Why do they want the UN to decide? A two-step model of public support for UN authority," TranState Working Papers 171, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    18. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    19. Patricia Esteve‐González & Helmut Herwartz & Bernd Theilen, 2021. "National support for the European integration project: Does financial integration matter?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 357-378, July.
    20. Ivlevs, Artjoms & King, Roswitha M., 2019. "To Europe or Not to Europe? Migration and Public Support for Joining the European Union in the Western Balkans," IZA Discussion Papers 12254, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Corrections

    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:sae:eeupol:v:23:y:2022:i:1:p:100-119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: SAGE Publications (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. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.