IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/termod/202509.html

Paying for Euroscepticism

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Over the past two decades, support for Eurosceptic parties has climbed from fringe to nearly one third of voters. Promising renewed prosperity through less European integration, these parties imply Euroscepticism is a ‘free lunch.’ Drawing on an original panel of 1,166 European NUTS 3 regions (2004 2023) and using fixed , random effects, and difference in differences designs, we test how rising Euroscepticism connects with regional economic and demographic outcomes. We track GDP per capita, productivity, employment, and population growth. We find that a region 10 points more Eurosceptic than another could have ended up with GDP per capita roughly 5% lower than the less Eurosceptic region, as the negative economic influence of Euroscepticism compounds across cycles and intensified after the financial and austerity crises. The same applies for productivity and employment. Demographic impacts are smaller but point in the same direction. Even without governing, Eurosceptic support appears to deter investment and raise uncertainty, deepening the very stagnation that fuels discontent. There is no free lunch: political backlash against European integration carries measurable costs for the regions that embrace it.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodriguez-Pose Andrés & Dijkstra Lewis & Dorati Chiara, 2025. "Paying for Euroscepticism," JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis 2025-09, Joint Research Centre.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipt:termod:202509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC143982
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Lewis Dijkstra & Hugo Poelman, 2024. "The Geography of EU Discontent and the Regional Development Trap," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 100(3), pages 213-245, May.
    2. Alabrese, Eleonora & Becker, Sascha O. & Fetzer, Thiemo & Novy, Dennis, 2019. "Who voted for Brexit? Individual and regional data combined," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 132-150.
    3. Christian Dustmann & Kristine Vasiljeva & Anna Piil Damm, 2019. "Refugee Migration and Electoral Outcomes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(5), pages 2035-2091.
    4. Fabrizio Barca & Philip McCann & Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose, 2012. "The Case For Regional Development Intervention: Place‐Based Versus Place‐Neutral Approaches," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 134-152, February.
    5. 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.
    6. Lewis Dijkstra & Hugo Poelman & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2020. "The geography of EU discontent," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(6), pages 737-753, June.
    7. Thomas Sampson, 2017. "Brexit: The Economics of International Disintegration," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 163-184, Fall.
    8. Wen Chen & Bart Los & Philip McCann & Raquel Ortega‐Argilés & Mark Thissen & Frank van Oort, 2018. "The continental divide? Economic exposure to Brexit in regions and countries on both sides of The Channel," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(1), pages 25-54, March.
    9. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    10. Manuel Funke & Moritz Schularick & Christoph Trebesch, 2023. "Populist Leaders and the Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(12), pages 3249-3288, December.
    11. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Javier Terrero-Dávila & Neil Lee, 2023. "Left-behind versus unequal places: interpersonal inequality, economic decline and the rise of populism in the USA and Europe," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 951-977.
    12. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2018. "Erratum to: Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 33(93), pages 179-180.
    13. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Di Cataldo, Marco & Giua, Mara, 2020. "It’s not about the money. EU funds, local opportunities, and Euroscepticism," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    14. Alessandro Borin & Elisa Macchi & Michele Mancini, 2021. "EU transfers and euroscepticism: can’t buy me love?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 36(106), pages 237-286.
    15. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Di Cataldo, Marco & Giua, Mara, 2020. "It’s not about the money. EU funds, local opportunities, and Euroscepticism," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    16. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Federico Bartalucci, 2024. "The green transition and its potential territorial discontents," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 17(2), pages 339-358.
    17. Colantone, Italo & Stanig, Piero, 2018. "Global Competition and Brexit," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(2), pages 201-218, May.
    18. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Eugenio Levi & Isabelle Sin & Steven Stillman, 2021. "Understanding the Origins of Populist Political Parties and the Role of External Shocks," Motu Working Papers 21_09, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    2. Eugenio Levi & Isabelle Sin & Steven Stillman, 2024. "The lasting impact of external shocks on political opinions and populist voting," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 349-374, January.
    3. Stephen Drinkwater & Colin Jennings, 2022. "The Brexit referendum and three types of regret," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 275-291, December.
    4. Michele Cascarano & Laura Sigalotti & Francesco Stradi, 2025. "EU views and household investments: evidence from the Brexit referendum," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1504, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Alabrese, Eleonora & Becker, Sascha O. & Fetzer, Thiemo & Novy, Dennis, 2019. "Who voted for Brexit? Individual and regional data combined," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 132-150.
    8. Maria Abreu & Özge Öner, 2020. "Disentangling the Brexit vote: The role of economic, social and cultural contexts in explaining the UK’s EU referendum vote," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(7), pages 1434-1456, October.
    9. Frédéric Docquier & Stefano Iandolo & Hillel Rapoport & Riccardo Turati & Gonzague Vannoorenberghe, 2024. "Populism and the skill content of globalisation," PSE Working Papers halshs-04960427, HAL.
    10. Rolf J. Langhammer & Lisandra Flach & Feodora Teti & Lena Wiest & Margherita Atzei & Lisa Scheckenhofer & Joachim Wuermeling & Carsten Hefeker & Friedemann Kainer & Philipp Harms & Michael Kaeding, 2020. "Brexit-Finale: Das letzte Ringen um einen Deal," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 73(12), pages 03-27, December.
    11. Charlotte Grynberg & Stefanie Walter & Fabio Wasserfallen, 2020. "Expectations, vote choice and opinion stability since the 2016 Brexit referendum," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 255-275, June.
    12. Docquier, Frédéric & Vasilakis, Chrysovalantis, 2024. "Migrants' Self-Selection and the Vicious Circle of Right-Wing Populism," IZA Discussion Papers 17402, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Fetzer, Thiemo & Wang, Shizhuo, 2020. "Measuring the Regional Economic Cost of Brexit: Evidence up to 2019," CEPR Discussion Papers 15051, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Adrian Mehic, 2022. "Regional aspects of immigration‐related changes in political preferences," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(5), pages 1386-1413, November.
    15. Fidrmuc, Jan & Hulényi, Martin & Tunalı, Çiğdem Börke, 2019. "Can money buy EU love?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Andreas Dür & Christoph Moser & Gabriele Spilker, 2020. "The political economy of the European Union," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 561-572, July.
    17. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Di Cataldo, Marco & Giua, Mara, 2020. "It’s not about the money. EU funds, local opportunities, and Euroscepticism," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    18. Maurice Obstfeld, 2021. "Globalization and nationalism: Retrospect and prospect," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 675-690, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Thiemo Fetzer, 2019. "Did Austerity Cause Brexit?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3849-3886, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ipt:termod:202509. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.html .

    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.