European Public Opinion and Turkey's Accession: Making Sense of Arguments For and Against
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
| Attachment | Size | Hits | Last download |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1494.pdf | 248.3 KB | 2088 | 1 day 7 hours ago |
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
978-92-9079-720-3-en-1324
[list_price] => 0.00000 [cost] => 0.00000 [sell_price] => 12.00000 [weight] => 300 [weight_units] => g [length] => 0 [width] => 0 [height] => 0 [length_units] => cm [pkg_qty] => 0 [default_qty] => 1 [unique_hash] => d2f7c252716a6eb4459c9e55c4fd72e8 [ordering] => 0 [shippable] => 1 [path] => book/european-public-opinion-and-turkeys-accession-making-sense-arguments-and-against [field_book_isbn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 978-92-9079-720-3 [safe] => 978-92-9079-720-3 ) ) [field_book_number] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 16 [safe] => 16 [view] => 16 ) ) [field_book_short_title] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [field_book_author_external] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => Antonia M. Ruiz-Jiménez and José I. Torreblanca [safe] => Antonia M. Ruiz-Jiménez and José I. Torreblanca ) ) [field_book_old_path] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 1494 [safe] => 1494 ) ) [field_book_pages] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 48 [view] => 48 ) ) [field_book_publication_date] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2007-05-03T00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => date [view] => 03 May 2007 ) ) [field_book_author] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [nid] => [safe] => Array ( ) [view] => ) ) [field_image_cache] => Array ( [0] => ) [field_type] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => BOOK [format] => [safe] =>BOOK
[view] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) [2] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [print_display] => 1 [print_display_comment] => 0 [print_display_urllist] => 1 [signup] => 0 [tags] => Array ( ) [uc_order_product_id] => [0] => [taxonomy] => Array ( [taxonomy_term_15] => Array ( [title] => Foreign and Security Policy [href] => taxonomy/term/15 [attributes] => Array ( [rel] => tag [title] => ) ) [taxonomy_term_94] => Array ( [title] => EPIN Working Papers [href] => catalog/94 [attributes] => Array ( [rel] => tag [title] => This series contains analysis of key issues raised by the debate on the future of Europe and produced by the European Policy Institutes Network, a network of dynamic think tanks and policy institutes focusing on current EU political and policy debates. ) ) ) [files] => Array ( [1295] => stdClass Object ( [fid] => 1295 [uid] => 1 [filename] => 1494.pdf [filepath] => files/book/1494.pdf [filemime] => application/pdf [filesize] => 254264 [status] => 1 [timestamp] => 2009-09-14 13:37:15 [nid] => 1324 [vid] => 1324 [description] => 1494.pdf [list] => 1 [weight] => 0 ) ) [flatrate] => Array ( ) [shipping_type] => small_package [shipping_address] => stdClass Object ( [first_name] => [last_name] => [company] => CEPS [phone] => +32 2 2293951 [street1] => place du Congres 1 [street2] => [city] => Brussels [zone] => 94 [postal_code] => 1000 [country] => 56 ) [usps] => Array ( [vid] => 1324 [nid] => 1324 [container] => ) [weightquote] => Array ( ) [build_mode] => 0 [readmore] => 1 [content] =>Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
| Attachment | Size | Hits | Last download |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1494.pdf | 248.3 KB | 2088 | 1 day 7 hours ago |
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
978-92-9079-720-3-en-1324
[list_price] => 0.00000 [cost] => 0.00000 [sell_price] => 12.00000 [weight] => 300 [weight_units] => g [length] => 0 [width] => 0 [height] => 0 [length_units] => cm [pkg_qty] => 0 [default_qty] => 1 [unique_hash] => d2f7c252716a6eb4459c9e55c4fd72e8 [ordering] => 0 [shippable] => 1 [path] => book/european-public-opinion-and-turkeys-accession-making-sense-arguments-and-against [field_book_isbn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 978-92-9079-720-3 [safe] => 978-92-9079-720-3 ) ) [field_book_number] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 16 [safe] => 16 [view] => 16 ) ) [field_book_short_title] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [field_book_author_external] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => Antonia M. Ruiz-Jiménez and José I. Torreblanca [safe] => Antonia M. Ruiz-Jiménez and José I. Torreblanca ) ) [field_book_old_path] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 1494 [safe] => 1494 ) ) [field_book_pages] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 48 [view] => 48 ) ) [field_book_publication_date] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2007-05-03T00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => date [view] => 03 May 2007 ) ) [field_book_author] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [nid] => [safe] => Array ( ) [view] => ) ) [field_image_cache] => Array ( [0] => ) [field_type] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => BOOK [format] => [safe] =>BOOK
[view] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) [2] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [print_display] => 1 [print_display_comment] => 0 [print_display_urllist] => 1 [signup] => 0 [tags] => Array ( ) [uc_order_product_id] => [0] => [taxonomy] => Array ( [15] => stdClass Object ( [tid] => 15 [vid] => 3 [name] => Foreign and Security Policy [description] => [weight] => 5 ) [94] => stdClass Object ( [tid] => 94 [vid] => 4 [name] => EPIN Working Papers [description] => This series contains analysis of key issues raised by the debate on the future of Europe and produced by the European Policy Institutes Network, a network of dynamic think tanks and policy institutes focusing on current EU political and policy debates. [weight] => 0 ) ) [files] => Array ( [1295] => stdClass Object ( [fid] => 1295 [uid] => 1 [filename] => 1494.pdf [filepath] => files/book/1494.pdf [filemime] => application/pdf [filesize] => 254264 [status] => 1 [timestamp] => 2009-09-14 13:37:15 [nid] => 1324 [vid] => 1324 [description] => 1494.pdf [list] => 1 [weight] => 0 ) ) [flatrate] => Array ( ) [shipping_type] => small_package [shipping_address] => stdClass Object ( [first_name] => [last_name] => [company] => CEPS [phone] => +32 2 2293951 [street1] => place du Congres 1 [street2] => [city] => Brussels [zone] => 94 [postal_code] => 1000 [country] => 56 ) [usps] => Array ( [vid] => 1324 [nid] => 1324 [container] => ) [weightquote] => Array ( ) [build_mode] => 0 [readmore] => 1 [content] => Array ( [print_links] => Array ( [#weight] => -101 [#suffix] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#title] => [#description] => [#printed] => 1 ) [display_price] => Array ( [#weight] => -10 [#access] => 1 [#value] =>BOOK
[#delta] => 0 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => [#children] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [#formatter] => default [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type_name] => book [#field_name] => field_type [#weight] => 1 [#theme] => text_formatter_default [#item] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [#delta] => 1 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => ) [2] => Array ( [#formatter] => default [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type_name] => book [#field_name] => field_type [#weight] => 2 [#theme] => text_formatter_default [#item] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [#delta] => 2 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => ) [#title] => [#description] => [#children] => Printed book [#printed] => 1 ) [#single] => 1 [#attributes] => Array ( ) [#required] => [#parents] => Array ( ) [#tree] => [#context] => full [#page] => 1 [#field_name] => field_type [#title] => type [#access] => 1 [#label_display] => inline [#teaser] => [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type] => content_field [#children] => Printed book [#printed] => 1 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#children] =>| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 1494.pdf | 248.3 KB |
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 1494.pdf | 248.3 KB |
Turkey’s accession to the European Union is one of the most controversial and divisive topics the EU faces. Both EU governments and citizens are deeply divided on whether Turkey should become a member or not. This paper takes an in-depth look at European citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey’s accession to the EU and explains which elements are key in determining support for or opposition to Turkish membership. We use new data, derived from the new questions measuring citizens’ attitudes towards Turkey that have recently been introduced in Eurobarometer questionnaires. We prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional and that citizens use different arguments for both positions. In particular, we show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey’s membership depends on whether citizens adopt a perspective that is utilitarian (resting on costs and benefits), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe) or post-national (linked to the view of a rights-based EU emphasising democracy and human rights). The main findings are as follows: first, support for Turkey’s membership is mostly based on post-national arguments; second, opposition to Turkey’s accession is mainly connected with identity-related arguments; and third, instrumental reasons (costs/benefits) play a less relevant role. Turkey’s future membership in the EU, we conclude, will thus not be won or lost at the public opinion level on the material plane (costs/benefits) but on the relative weight of post-national visions of the EU vis-à-vis more essentialist visions of Europe. The key to Turkish EU membership, we suggest, may well lie in the way accession is argued and justified, and not wholly in the way it is negotiated.
Researchers
Related Publications
- Looking afresh at the external representation of the EU in the international arena
- Common Security and Defence Policy and the Lisbon Treaty Fudge: No common strategic culture, no major progress
- Time for a Tripartite Gas Pipeline Consortium for Ukraine
- The Baltic-Russian History Controversy: From War to Diplomacy
- Russia and the European Court of Human Rights: Reform of the Court and of Russian judicial practice?
- Turkey’s Genocide Diplomacy: What’s in a word?
- Russia in Europe and the West
- Into EurAsia – Monitoring the EU’s Central Asia Strategy
- On Thin Ice? (Mis)interpreting Russian Policy in the High North
- Abnormalisation:The bumpy road to Turkish-Armenian rapprochement
Editor's choice
-
Financial Markets
-
Politics and Institutions
-
Justice and Home Affairs
-
Economic Policy
-
EU Neighbourhood Policy
-
Economic Policy