IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eiq/eileqs/151.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

'The politicisation of transatlantic trade in Europe: Explaining inconsistent preferences regarding free trade and the TTIP

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Sojka
  • Jorge Díaz-Lanchas
  • Frederico Steinberg

Abstract

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) generated an unprecedented public contestation across Europe. In this paper, we focus on the sources of such backlash in European public opinion. Previous studies of this issue have analysed opinions on free trade and the specific agreement separately. However, not accounting for their correlated character could lead to biased conclusions about their determinants. To address this, we apply an innovative empirical approach and construct a set of bivariate probit models to calculate joint probabilities for the different configurations of support and opposition. We validate that attitudes toward free trade and the TTIP have similar but not identical foundations. Inconsistent preferences are rooted in individual values, EU attitudes, and political cues, as well as treaty partner heuristics. Our innovative empirical approach offers an improved understanding of trade attitudes within EU’s multilevel context.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Sojka & Jorge Díaz-Lanchas & Frederico Steinberg, 2020. "'The politicisation of transatlantic trade in Europe: Explaining inconsistent preferences regarding free trade and the TTIP," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 151, European Institute, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:eiq:eileqs:151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/Assets/Documents/LEQS-Discussion-Papers/LEQSPaper151.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hainmueller, Jens & Hiscox, Michael J., 2006. "Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(2), pages 469-498, April.
    2. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    3. Dermot Hodson, 2019. "The New Intergovernmentalism and the Euro Crisis: A Painful Case?," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 145, European Institute, LSE.
    4. 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.
    5. Nils D Steiner, 2018. "Attitudes towards the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership in the European Union: The treaty partner heuristic and issue attention," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 255-277, June.
    6. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    7. Andreas Jungherr & Matthias Mader & Harald Schoen & Alexander Wuttke, 2018. "Context-driven attitude formation: the difference between supporting free trade in the abstract and supporting specific trade agreements," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 215-242, March.
    8. Mansfield, Edward D. & Mutz, Diana C., 2009. "Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 425-457, July.
    9. Hajo G. Boomgaarden & Andreas R. T. Schuck & Matthijs Elenbaas & Claes H. de Vreese, 2011. "Mapping EU attitudes: Conceptual and empirical dimensions of Euroscepticism and EU support," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 241-266, June.
    10. Scheve, Kenneth F. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2001. "What determines individual trade-policy preferences?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 267-292, August.
    11. K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," CEG Working Papers 20016, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    12. Bruce A., Blonigen, 2011. "Revisiting the evidence on trade policy preferences," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 129-135, September.
    13. Ardanaz, Martin & Murillo, M. Victoria & Pinto, Pablo M., 2013. "Sensitivity to Issue Framing on Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey Experiment," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(2), pages 411-437, April.
    14. Juan D�ez Medrano & Michael Braun, 2012. "Uninformed citizens and support for free trade," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 448-476, August.
    15. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    16. Jäkel, Ina C. & Smolka, Marcel, 2017. "Trade policy preferences and factor abundance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-19.
    17. Daniel S. Hamilton, 2014. "Transatlantic Challenges: Ukraine, TTIP and the Struggle to be Strategic," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52, pages 25-39, November.
    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. Lorenzo Codogno & Paul Noord, 2022. "Assessing Next Generation EU," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Luigi Paganetto (ed.), Economic Challenges for Europe After the Pandemic, pages 59-82, Springer.
    2. Tobias Tesche, 2020. "The European Union's response to the coronavirus emergency: an early assessment," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 157, European Institute, LSE.
    3. Dimitry Kochenov, 2020. "Genuine Purity of Blood: The 2019 Report on Investor Citizenship and Residence in the European Union and its Litigious Progeny," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 164, European Institute, LSE.
    4. Gerard Delanty, 2020. "Six political philosophies in search of a virus: Critical perspectives on the coronavirus pandemic," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 156, European Institute, LSE.
    5. Bob Hancke & Toon Van Overbeke & Dustin Voss, 2021. "Similar but different? Comparing economic policy responses to the Corona Crisis in the UK and Germany," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 165, European Institute, LSE.
    6. Nina Lopez Uroz, 2020. "Populism Amidst Prosperity: Poland's Growth Model and its Socio-Political Outcomes," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 159, European Institute, LSE.
    7. Mitchell Orenstein & Bojan Bugaric, 2020. "Populism Amidst Prosperity: Work, Family, Fatherland: The Political Economy of Populism in Central and Eastern Europe," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 163, European Institute, LSE.
    8. Richard Bronk & Wade Jacoby, 2020. "The epistemics of populism and the politics of uncertainty," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 152, European Institute, LSE.

    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. Philipp Harms & Nils D. Steiner, 2023. "Attitudes towards Globalization: A Survey," Working Papers 2305, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    2. Nils D Steiner, 2018. "Attitudes towards the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership in the European Union: The treaty partner heuristic and issue attention," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 255-277, June.
    3. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2021. "How issue framing shapes trade attitudes: Evidence from a multi-country survey experiment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Tomiura, Eiichi & Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2021. "Individual characteristics and the demand for reciprocity in trade liberalization: Evidence from a survey in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    5. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto H. & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2019. "Trade Attitudes in Latin America: Evidence from a Multi-Country Survey Experiment," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9603, Inter-American Development Bank.
    6. Ina Jäkel & Marcel Smolka, 2013. "Individual Attitudes Towards Trade: Stolper-Samuelson Revisited," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 731-761, September.
    7. Jäkel, Ina C. & Smolka, Marcel, 2017. "Trade policy preferences and factor abundance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-19.
    8. Gabriel Felbermayr & Toshihiro Okubo, 2022. "Individual preferences on trade liberalization: evidence from a Japanese household survey," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(1), pages 305-330, February.
    9. Harms, Philipp & Steiner, Nils, 2019. "The China Shock and the Nationalist Backlash against Globalization: Attitudinal Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203506, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Cevat G. Aksoy & Sergei Guriev & Daniel S. Treisman, 2018. "Globalization, Government Popularity, and the Great Skill Divide," NBER Working Papers 25062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Ito, Banri & Tanaka, Ayumu & Jinji, Naoto, 2023. "Why do people oppose foreign acquisitions? Evidence from Japanese individual-level data," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Bernd Schlipphak, 2015. "Measuring attitudes toward regional organizations outside Europe," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 351-375, September.
    13. Jeffrey Drope & Abdur Chowdhury, 2014. "Economic (In)Security and Gender Differences in Trade Policy Attitudes," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1067, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    14. Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Tomiura, Eiichi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2019. "Trade policy preferences and cross-regional differences: Evidence from individual-level data of Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-109.
    15. Rafael Di Tella & Dani Rodrik, 2020. "Labour Market Shocks and the Demand for Trade Protection: Evidence from Online Surveys," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(628), pages 1008-1030.
    16. Ida Bastiaens & Evgeny Postnikov, 2020. "Social standards in trade agreements and free trade preferences: An empirical investigation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 793-816, October.
    17. Rickard, Stephanie, 2022. "Economic geography, politics, and the world trade regime," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113857, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Yu Jin Woo & Ikuo Kume, 2021. "Taking Gains from Trade Seriously: The Effects of Consumer Perspective on Free Trade," Working Papers 2020, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    19. Nathaniel P.S. Cook & Robert L. Underwood, 2012. "Attitudes Toward Economic Globalization: Does Knowledge Matter?," Global Economy Journal (GEJ), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    trade liberalisation; free trade; public opinion; trade agreements; TTIP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F60 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - General
    • F68 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Policy

    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:eiq:eileqs:151. 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: Katjana Gattermann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eilseuk.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.