IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v55y2017ip38-53.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking Brexit: How the British Decision to Leave Shapes EU Public Opinion

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine E. De Vries

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:55:y:2017:i::p:38-53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jcms.12579
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. MARK FRANKLIN & MICHAEL MARSH & LAUREN McLAREN, 1994. "Uncorking the Bottle: Popular Opposition to European Unification in the Wake of Maastricht," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 455-472, December.
    5. Alesina, Alberto & Perotti, Roberto & Spolaore, Enrico, 1995. "Togetheror separately? Issues on the costs and benefits of political and fiscal unions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 751-758, April.
    6. Claes H. De Vreese & Hajo G. Boomgaarden, 2006. "Media Effects on Public Opinion about the Enlargement of the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 419-436, June.
    7. Alesina, Alberto & Perotti, Roberto & Spolaore, Enrico, 1995. "Togetheror separately? Issues on the costs and benefits of political and fiscal unions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 751-758, April.
    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. John Erik Fossum & Joachim Vigrestad, 2021. "Is the Grass Greener on the Other Side? Norwegians’ Assessments of Brexit," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79-89.
    2. Stefanie Walter, 2021. "EU‐27 Public Opinion on Brexit," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 569-588, May.
    3. Averell Schmidt, 2024. "Treaty withdrawal and the development of international law," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 785-808, October.
    4. Joshua C Fjelstul, 2022. "Explaining public opinion on the enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact during the European sovereign debt crisis," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 192-211, June.
    5. Pierre Philippe Balestrini, 2021. "Counterterrorism Evaluation and Citizens: More Than about Policing?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    6. Martijn Huysmans & Sven Van Kerckhoven, 2023. "The Causes and Modes of European Disintegration," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 1-4.
    7. Reinhard Heinisch & Duncan McDonnell & Annika Werner, 2021. "Equivocal Euroscepticism: How Populist Radical Right Parties Can Have Their EU Cake and Eat It," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 189-205, March.
    8. Giorgio Malet & Stefanie Walter, 2024. "The reverberations of British Brexit politics abroad," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(1), pages 63-85, March.
    9. Andreas C Goldberg & Erika J van Elsas & Claes H de Vreese, 2021. "One union, different futures? Public preferences for the EU's future and their explanations in 10 EU countries," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 721-740, December.
    10. Rikard Forslid & Sten Nyberg, 2021. "Brexit: How to Reach an Amicable Divorce," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 966-994, July.
    11. Markus Gastinger, 2021. "Introducing the EU exit index measuring each member state’s propensity to leave the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 566-585, September.
    12. Christoph Mikulaschek, 2023. "The responsive public: How European Union decisions shape public opinion on salient policies," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(4), pages 645-665, December.
    13. Inken Borzyskowski & Felicity Vabulas, 2024. "Public support for withdrawal from international organizations: Experimental evidence from the US," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 809-845, October.

    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. Nicola Pensiero, 2020. "To leave or not to leave? Understanding the support for the United Kingdom membership in the European Union: Identity, attitudes towards the political system and socio-economic status," Rationality and Society, , vol. 32(3), pages 255-277, August.
    2. Rigmar Osterkamp & Markus Eller, 2003. "Functional Decentralisation of Government Activity," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(03), pages 36-42, February.
    3. Rajashri Chakrabarti, 2005. "Gains from a Redrawing of Political Boundaries: Evidence from State Reorganization in India," Others 0512002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. 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.
    5. Picard, Pierre M. & Worrall, Tim, 2020. "Currency areas and voluntary transfers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Branko Milanović, 2001. "Nations, Conglomerates and Empires: Trade-off Between Income and Sovereignty," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Dominick Salvatore & Marjan Svetličič & Jože P. Damijan (ed.), Small Countries in a Global Economy, chapter 1, pages 25-69, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Bordignon, Massimo & Brusco, Sandro, 2001. "Optimal secession rules," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1811-1834, December.
    8. Jorge Blázquez, 1998. "Estructura federal, bienestar e inestabilidad política: un modelo de gasto público con externalidades internacionales," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 22(1), pages 119-149, January.
    9. Vlachos, Jonas, 2004. "Who wants political integration?: Evidence from the Swedish EU-membership referendum," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1589-1604, July.
    10. Richard Rose & Gabriela Borz, 2016. "Static and Dynamic Views of European Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 370-387, March.
    11. Casson, Mark & Dark, Ken & Gulamhussen, Mohamed Azzim, 2009. "Extending internalisation theory: From the multinational enterprise to the knowledge-based empire," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 236-256, June.
    12. Pierre M. Picard & Tim Worrall, 2009. "Currency Unions and International Assistance," DEM Discussion Paper Series 09-01, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    13. Niklas Hanes & Magnus Wikström & Erik Wångmar, 2012. "Municipal Preferences for State-imposed Amalgamations: An Empirical Study Based on the Swedish Municipal Reform of 1952," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(12), pages 2733-2750, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Csillag, István, 2001. "Költségvetési összhangzattan. Diktatúrából a demokráciába? [Budgetary harmony. From dictatorship to democracy?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 824-843.
    16. PICARD, Pierre M. & WORRALL, Tim, 2007. "Currency areas and international assistance," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2007052, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    17. Brink, Anna, 2001. "The Break-Up of Municipalities –Voting Behavior in Local Referenda," Working Papers in Economics 58, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 05 Sep 2003.
    18. Stefanie Walter, 2021. "EU‐27 Public Opinion on Brexit," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 569-588, May.
    19. CROCI ANGELINI Elisabetta & D'AMBROSIO Conchita & FARINA Francesco, 2001. "Do Preferences in EU Member-States Support Fiscal Federalism?," IRISS Working Paper Series 2002-01, IRISS at CEPS/INSTEAD.
    20. Pompeo Della Posta & Roberto Tamborini, 2021. "The Existential Trilemma of EMU in a Model of Fiscal Target Zone," EconPol Working Paper 66, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jcmkts:v:55:y:2017:i::p:38-53. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    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.