TY - JOUR
T1 - Preferences, preference formation and position taking in a Eurozone out: Lessons from the United Kingdom
AU - Kassim, Hussein
AU - James, Scott
AU - Warren, Thomas
AU - Hargreaves Heap, Shaun
PY - 2020/11/1
Y1 - 2020/11/1
N2 - In the literature on member state position-taking in the eurozone crisis, the debate has mainly centred on whether national preferences are shaped exclusively within the domestic setting or influenced by shared EU-level norms or interaction within EU institutions. This article goes beyond this discussion. Drawing on original data collected by the authors, it uses the UK’s experience to test the claims both of society-centred approaches, including liberal intergovernmentalism, and perspectives that emphasise the importance of shared EU norms or interaction. It argues that while the first overlook the role of institutions as both actors and mediating variables in preference formation, the second have so far focused on the experience of eurozone members, thereby raising the possibility of selection bias. Treating eurozone form as a series of processes rather than a single event, it contests the claim that preference formation is always driven by societal interests, highlights instances where government acts in the absence of or contrary to expressed societal interests, and reveals limitations of the shared norms critique of liberal intergovernmentalism. It shows that the UK government was driven by a scholars concern to protect the UK economy from financial contagion rather than solidarity with its European partners.
AB - In the literature on member state position-taking in the eurozone crisis, the debate has mainly centred on whether national preferences are shaped exclusively within the domestic setting or influenced by shared EU-level norms or interaction within EU institutions. This article goes beyond this discussion. Drawing on original data collected by the authors, it uses the UK’s experience to test the claims both of society-centred approaches, including liberal intergovernmentalism, and perspectives that emphasise the importance of shared EU norms or interaction. It argues that while the first overlook the role of institutions as both actors and mediating variables in preference formation, the second have so far focused on the experience of eurozone members, thereby raising the possibility of selection bias. Treating eurozone form as a series of processes rather than a single event, it contests the claim that preference formation is always driven by societal interests, highlights instances where government acts in the absence of or contrary to expressed societal interests, and reveals limitations of the shared norms critique of liberal intergovernmentalism. It shows that the UK government was driven by a scholars concern to protect the UK economy from financial contagion rather than solidarity with its European partners.
KW - eurozone crisis
KW - institutions
KW - preference formation
KW - preferences
KW - United Kingdom
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083571002&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1478929919864774
DO - 10.1177/1478929919864774
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85083571002
VL - 18
SP - 525
EP - 541
JO - Political Studies Review
JF - Political Studies Review
SN - 1478-9299
IS - 4
ER -