Dr Simona Guerra
Academic and research departments
Centre for Britain and Europe, Politics and International Relations.About
Biography
Since I was awarded my PhD (January 2009), I have established myself as a scholar and an expert in the field of Euroscepticism and European Studies. My dedication to high-quality and path-breaking research is demonstrated by my success in obtaining funded research grants (about 1,510,606.06 Euros).
This is supported by the numerous invited talks at the international level, by governmental/EU institutions, as keynote speaker/speaker at roundtables, as at the ECPR (with former Polish President and Nobel laureate Lech Wałęsa), UACES, and PSA. Further, at a rather junior stage I have become the first author of the chapter on public opinion and EU integration in the most used (OUP) textbook on the EU.
In 2013 I published my first monograph, with Palgrave, and co-edited a Special Issue of the Journal of Common Market Studies. Both were well received, among my publications, a book edited (and co-written) with a colleague (M. Caiani) on Euroscepticism, Democracy and The Media (Palgrave, European Sociology) (h 81), an articlepublished in the Journal of Communist and Postcommunist Studies (h 80), my monograph (h 50), and further articles on the Journal of Common Market Studies (h 29) and Perspectives on European Politics and Society (h 24) (see: Harzing, Publish or Perish 8.9).
I have also been the Co-Chief Editor of JCER, Journal of Contemporary European Research (2012-2017). While editor, it became a Q2 (SCImago) journal in 2014 (it was a Q3 journal in 2013, and Q4 in 2012, it had no previous ranking). I have just completed my office as founding Co-Chief Editor of the first GOA journal of the ECPR, Political Research Exchange (PRX) (2017-2023), that started publishing from 2019. Since then, PRX published five volumes with over 250,000 downloads across over 175 countries; in 2020 it was Indexed DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; in 2021 Indexed by Scopus; Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index; in 2022 we recorded more than 50% submissions with female lead authors and in 2022, PRX achieved its first Impact Factor and Q1 Citescore, 2.4.
I was elected as a UACES Committee Member & Trustee in 2010 (2010–2013), and further co-opted till 2017. In 2021 I was elected as board member of the IPSA RC03 on European Unification, focusing on the study of European integration. My international visibility has resulted in my work as reviewer (for journals, publishers, British/international grant schemes - ESRC, Leverhulme, and in Belgium, Switzerland, Czechia, Poland, Croatia), examiner, research fellow, and visiting professor across Europe and at the EU institutions.
I further hold several teaching awards, from students at the University of Nottingham, Loughborough University and the University of Leicester, as Best Personal Tutor, Best Lecturer, Best Support Staff, Best Practice in Inclusive Learning and Teaching, and Best Implementer of Students’ Feedback.
My current project is investigating the presence and work of the early women of the European Assembly (1952-1969) thanks to the interest and support from the European Parliament and internal funding (ESRC and A&H IAA grants) and working on the Oxford Handbook of Polish Politics (OUP) with Katarzyna Walecka and Fernando Casal Bertoa.
I am interested in supervising research projects examining the process of European integration, attitudes towards the European Union, or women in the early (1950s and 1960s) stages of the European integration process.
Previous visiting positions include: Unitelma La Sapienza in Rome (2014-15), University of Sussex (2015-16), London School of Economics (2017), University of Zagreb (2018), Carlos III, in Madrid (2019), International Chair at ULB (2022),Visiting Professor at the College of Europe (Bruges campus, 2020-22), and Visiting Chair at Sapienza University in Rome (2023).
Below my previous appointments:
- Visiting Professor, La Sapienza, Rome (May-June 2023);
- International Chair , ULB, Brussels (May-June 2022);
- Acting Head of School, University of Leicester (July 2018-January 2019);
- Deputy Head of School, University of Leicester (April 2017-August 2019);
- Associate Professor, University of Leicester (September 2016-June 2020);
- Senior Lecturer in Politics, University of Leicester (April–September 2016);
- Associate Professor, 14/C3, by direct appointment of an Italian citizen currently working abroad, Scuola di Studi Internazionale and the Dipartimento di Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, University of Trento (art. 15 comma 6, D.R.n.563, 29.10.2013), January 2016, declined;
- Lecturer in Politics, University of Leicester (May 2012-April 2016);
- Lecturer in Politics, Loughborough University (September 2010-May 2012);
- Teaching Fellow, University of Nottingham (September 2008-August 2010);
- Research Associate, Cardiff University (April-September 2008);
- Graduate Associate Tutor, Sussex European Institute, University of Sussex (January 2005-June 2007).
Further, I have been guest lecturer for the Politics Summer School jointly organized by Canterbury Christ Church University and the Centre International de Formation Européen; for the MYEULINK project at the University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus; and the MA in European Studies, at the Università of Siena.
University roles and responsibilities
- Convener, Foundation Year
- Athena SWAN Lead (Bronze Athena Award, March 2023)
Affiliations and memberships
News
In the media
ResearchResearch interests
Simona’s main research interests focus on the contested domestic politics of EU integration.
With her doctoral research, she addressed the question on how attitudes change before and after accession. This has been published with Palgrave, in 2013, and has later developed on how Euroscepticism changes, and the role of the media, in a new book, edited with Manuela Caiani, Euroscepticism, Democracy and the Media (Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology) and released in 2017.
More recently Simona has contributed to the Routledge book on Euroscepticism as a Transnational and Pan-European Phenomenon, the Routledge Handbook of Euroscepticism, an ECPR volume on the impact of populism on party systems, and articles with a focus on Brexit, democracy, discontent and populism, religion and politics, informality and corruption, and transnational Euroscepticism.
Currently she is working on the early women of European integration (1950-1960) and she has just been awarded an ESRC IAA Impact Exploration Grant (£1,450) and ESRC IAA Generator Grant (£5,759) (February-July 2023) for her project, CAROLINE: Creating a Network on Female Pioners.
With Katarzyna Grzybowska Walecka and Fernando Casal Bertoa she is working on the Oxford Handbook of Polish Politics (Oxford University Press), that is forthcoming.
Grants and Honours (selected):
Up to this academic year, I have obtained, as both PI and Co-I, an overall amount, of about 1,507,558.52 Euros from funded research grants.
Awarded and closed:
2023: A&H IAA Generator Grant (£5,759) (April-July 2023)
2023: ESRC IAA Impact Exploration Grant (£1,450) (February-March 2023)
2023: Visiting Professor (Rome La Sapienza) (5,000 Euros)
2020-21: Chaire Internationale”, ULB in Brussels, 2019/20 academic year (with a - up to- 2,350 Euros grant). Project on Euroscepticism (June 2021).
2017-2020: (Invited) COST member, ProSEPS (Professionalisation and Social Impact of European Political Science) COST Action CA15207, led by the University of Bologna (Italy)
2019: ‘Euroscepticism, Emotions and the Everyday (EMOTIVE)’, College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, University of Leicester, £ 4,260.00 (11 March-31 July 2019).
2018: ‘Euroscepticism and emotion in contemporary contentious politics – A study on Europe as the Other in post-2016 referendum Britain’, School of History, Politics and International Relations Research Fund, University of Leicester, £1,110.00 (June-July 2018).
2018: ‘AlterDem: Alternative Democratic actors in the Western Balkans’, College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, University of Leicester, £ 3,490.00 (8-21 July 2018).
2017: Research Development Partnership Fund to organize a workshop and strengthen research networks (within and beyond the UACES CRN ‘Europe and the Everyday: Grassroots, EU and the Politics of Crisis’) in Southeastern Europe. Workshop organized at the Museum of War Childhood, Sarajevo, with the support of the School of Technology, on Europe and the Everyday, the Politics of Crisis, ‘Democratic ‘façade’ - Re-assessment of the process of Europeanization and democratization in the region’ (7 July 2017) (1,750.00 GBP).
2016: ‘Brexit or Bremain: Britain and the June 2016 European referendum’, with Roberta Guerrina and Theofanis Exadaktylos (University of Surrey) (June-July 2016, 10,000.00 GBP).
2016: UACES Collaborative Research Network, ‘Europe and the Everyday: Grassroots, EU and the Politics of Crisis’, with Jelena Obradović-Wochnik (Aston University) and Soeren Keil (Canterbury Christ Church), 5,000.00 GBP (Start: April 2016, 36 months).
2014: Montalcini Programme Award 2012 (by a Decree of the Italian Ministry for Education, Universities and Research, Prot. 2326, 5 February 2014), International Promotion for Young Researchers to temporarily recruit outstanding post-docs working abroad, research project on public Euroscepticism, ‘Eurosceptic, Euroneutral, Euroenthusiast: Towards a framework of analysis’, 191,273.66 Euro (36 months) (Accepted: February 2014; Declined: August 2014).
2014-2017: ESRC ORA grant, ‘Pathways to Power: The Political Representation of Citizens of Immigrant Origin in Seven European Democracies’, as CoI (UK Team), 720,106.00 GBP (36 months), start date: May 2014.
2013: UACES Small Event Grant, ‘Sacred and Secular: Researching the Role of Religion in Contemporary Europe’, with Dr Ben Clements, 962.00 GBP (Funding the organization of a workshop, 21 June 2013).
2010: PI, Grant Award, SPG Seedcorn Research Fund Award, Loughborough University, on ‘Governance, Corruption and Anti-Corruption Policies: The EU and members states, candidate and third countries’ (November 2011-May 2012) with Dr Ed Brown, School of Geography, Loughborough University, 1,500.00 GBP.
2010-2012: PI, Grant Award J12823, European Commission, DG Justice Grant, Loughborough University CI, PI in UK, ‘VAA for Poles and Lithuanians in the UK’, overall project budget: 331,462.33 Euros (24 months). Project led by the University of Warsaw, with Loughborough University, then University of Leicester, and Mypolitiq (Lithuania).
Research interests
Simona’s main research interests focus on the contested domestic politics of EU integration.
With her doctoral research, she addressed the question on how attitudes change before and after accession. This has been published with Palgrave, in 2013, and has later developed on how Euroscepticism changes, and the role of the media, in a new book, edited with Manuela Caiani, Euroscepticism, Democracy and the Media (Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology) and released in 2017.
More recently Simona has contributed to the Routledge book on Euroscepticism as a Transnational and Pan-European Phenomenon, the Routledge Handbook of Euroscepticism, an ECPR volume on the impact of populism on party systems, and articles with a focus on Brexit, democracy, discontent and populism, religion and politics, informality and corruption, and transnational Euroscepticism.
Currently she is working on the early women of European integration (1950-1960) and she has just been awarded an ESRC IAA Impact Exploration Grant (£1,450) and ESRC IAA Generator Grant (£5,759) (February-July 2023) for her project, CAROLINE: Creating a Network on Female Pioners.
With Katarzyna Grzybowska Walecka and Fernando Casal Bertoa she is working on the Oxford Handbook of Polish Politics (Oxford University Press), that is forthcoming.
Grants and Honours (selected):
Up to this academic year, I have obtained, as both PI and Co-I, an overall amount, of about 1,507,558.52 Euros from funded research grants.
Awarded and closed:
2023: A&H IAA Generator Grant (£5,759) (April-July 2023)
2023: ESRC IAA Impact Exploration Grant (£1,450) (February-March 2023)
2023: Visiting Professor (Rome La Sapienza) (5,000 Euros)
2020-21: Chaire Internationale”, ULB in Brussels, 2019/20 academic year (with a - up to- 2,350 Euros grant). Project on Euroscepticism (June 2021).
2017-2020: (Invited) COST member, ProSEPS (Professionalisation and Social Impact of European Political Science) COST Action CA15207, led by the University of Bologna (Italy)
2019: ‘Euroscepticism, Emotions and the Everyday (EMOTIVE)’, College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, University of Leicester, £ 4,260.00 (11 March-31 July 2019).
2018: ‘Euroscepticism and emotion in contemporary contentious politics – A study on Europe as the Other in post-2016 referendum Britain’, School of History, Politics and International Relations Research Fund, University of Leicester, £1,110.00 (June-July 2018).
2018: ‘AlterDem: Alternative Democratic actors in the Western Balkans’, College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, University of Leicester, £ 3,490.00 (8-21 July 2018).
2017: Research Development Partnership Fund to organize a workshop and strengthen research networks (within and beyond the UACES CRN ‘Europe and the Everyday: Grassroots, EU and the Politics of Crisis’) in Southeastern Europe. Workshop organized at the Museum of War Childhood, Sarajevo, with the support of the School of Technology, on Europe and the Everyday, the Politics of Crisis, ‘Democratic ‘façade’ - Re-assessment of the process of Europeanization and democratization in the region’ (7 July 2017) (1,750.00 GBP).
2016: ‘Brexit or Bremain: Britain and the June 2016 European referendum’, with Roberta Guerrina and Theofanis Exadaktylos (University of Surrey) (June-July 2016, 10,000.00 GBP).
2016: UACES Collaborative Research Network, ‘Europe and the Everyday: Grassroots, EU and the Politics of Crisis’, with Jelena Obradović-Wochnik (Aston University) and Soeren Keil (Canterbury Christ Church), 5,000.00 GBP (Start: April 2016, 36 months).
2014: Montalcini Programme Award 2012 (by a Decree of the Italian Ministry for Education, Universities and Research, Prot. 2326, 5 February 2014), International Promotion for Young Researchers to temporarily recruit outstanding post-docs working abroad, research project on public Euroscepticism, ‘Eurosceptic, Euroneutral, Euroenthusiast: Towards a framework of analysis’, 191,273.66 Euro (36 months) (Accepted: February 2014; Declined: August 2014).
2014-2017: ESRC ORA grant, ‘Pathways to Power: The Political Representation of Citizens of Immigrant Origin in Seven European Democracies’, as CoI (UK Team), 720,106.00 GBP (36 months), start date: May 2014.
2013: UACES Small Event Grant, ‘Sacred and Secular: Researching the Role of Religion in Contemporary Europe’, with Dr Ben Clements, 962.00 GBP (Funding the organization of a workshop, 21 June 2013).
2010: PI, Grant Award, SPG Seedcorn Research Fund Award, Loughborough University, on ‘Governance, Corruption and Anti-Corruption Policies: The EU and members states, candidate and third countries’ (November 2011-May 2012) with Dr Ed Brown, School of Geography, Loughborough University, 1,500.00 GBP.
2010-2012: PI, Grant Award J12823, European Commission, DG Justice Grant, Loughborough University CI, PI in UK, ‘VAA for Poles and Lithuanians in the UK’, overall project budget: 331,462.33 Euros (24 months). Project led by the University of Warsaw, with Loughborough University, then University of Leicester, and Mypolitiq (Lithuania).
Teaching
In the Academic Year 2024/25:
- POL2033 European Integration and Dis integration (SEM1)
- POL1018 Evolution of an Integrated Europe (SEM2)
- POL3092 Good Bye Lenin: Democratization in Eastern Europe and Beyond (SEM2)
- POL0001 Contemporary Issues in Politics (SEM2)
Since joining the Department in 2020/21, I have taught across the following modules:
POL0001 Contemporary Issues in Politics
POL1018 Evolution of an Integrated Europe
POL2027 Approaches to Research
POL2033 European Integration and Disintegration
POL2046 Electoral Systems and Voting Behaviour
POL3061 Dissertation
POL3067 Engendering World Politics
POLM015 Key Issues in International Politics
Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) Advance HE, June 2021
Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA), June 2016
External Examiner:
Postgraduate programme (Aston University), 2023/24-2026/27
Postgraduate programme (Bristol University), 2021/22-present
Previously:
Politics UG programme (Canterbury Christ Church University), 2017/18-2021/22, renewed for an additional year
Postgraduate programme (Aston University), 2016/17
Area Studies (European Studies) UG programme (Portsmouth University), 2014/15-2017/18, renewed for an additional year
EISS (European Integration Summer School) 2024 Faculty for the module on 'Euroscepticism', University of Agder, FORTHEM, Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, Kristiansad, Norway.
Teaching Awards & Administrative Grants:
- Nominated as Best Personal Tutor, Best Lecturer, Best Support Staff, Best practice in inclusive learning and teaching, “Simona Guerra has been the best lecturer for any module I have taken over the course of my degree. She was continuously positive and excited about what she was discussing and this rubbed off on all the students taking the course. She would always respond very quickly to any inquiries or questions sent to her by email at any point during the week with extremely valuable and helpful responses. It is hard to put to words, not only how good she was as a lecturer, but how positive and pleasant she is as a person. I wish her all the best.” (2018/19);
- Overall winner of the ‘Best Implementer of Student Feedback’ Award, University of Leicester Students’ Union, August 2018;
- Nominated for the Discovery Excellence Award, Category: Inspiring Leader, University of Leicester, July 2018;
- Nominated for the Award as Best Lecturer, Best practice in inclusive Learning & Teaching, and Best implementer of student feedback, University of Leicester Students’ Union, May 2018;
- Teaching Research Grant: ‘Enhancing Student Learning Experience: Assessment & Feedback, and Skills Confidence’, College of Social Science, Arts and Humanities Teaching Development Fund 2016-17 (2,780.00 GBP, January-July 2017);
- ‘Alumni Mentoring Scheme’ Project, awarded and funded by the Career Development Service and the College of Social Science, £ 14,520.00 (September-October 2013 and January-May 2014);
- Superstar Teaching Award, University of Leicester Students’ Union, July 2013;
- Short-listed as best lecturer of the year, ‘Loughborough Experience Awards 2012’, Loughborough University, May 2012;
- Loughborough University PHIR Students Society Award, Memorable Mention, 2011-2012;
- The University of Nottingham Politics Society 2009/2010 Award for Best Module in its year to Introduction to European Politics, and to the convener and teacher, June 2010.
Publications
This chapter provides an overview of trends in public opinion towards the European Union (EU). The chapter also discusses the key factors thought to explain differences in mass opinion regarding the EU. These include political economy and rationality; that is, opinions stemming from calculations about the costs and benefits of the EU; perceptions of the national government (domestic proxies); the influence of political elites; political psychology, including cognitive mobilization (attentiveness to politics) and concerns about the loss of national identity; and, finally, the role of the mass media in driving opinions regarding the EU.
In this chapter, we approach the ideological trajectory of 19 th century Russian populism, focusing on the challenges and contradictions that the Narodniki faced in their aspirations and practices. By rejecting the time's politico-economic and social developments occurring in the West, the Narodniki hoped to advance a grassroots revolutionary movement without resorting to politics, and to develop socialism in Russia without passing through capitalism. The tactics developed by different Narodniki groups in their efforts to connect with the peasantry, did not bring the expected results to overthrow the tsarist autocracy and develop socialism. Therefore, some Narodniki groups came to engage with conspiratory activities, while others came closer to Marxism. Our analysis foregrounds the features of the Narodniki, their theoretical and political relations and differences with Marxism in particular, and at the same time, it also discusses the affinities and differences of the Russian populists with contemporary populist phenomena.
How we study and see the European Union (EU) affect how we engage with it. Recent works on biographies of relevant women for the European integration process and on gender and EU politics contribute to the mainstreaming of gender in EU studies. Yet, we still lack the presence of women in the narrative on the early stages of European history and politics, where women’s absence is well visible in their persistent marginalization. This analysis contributes to this debate by suggesting the definitive establishment of studies on the women of these early years as makers and shapers of European integration. La façon dont nous étudions et voyons l'Union européenne (UE) affecte notre interaction avec celle-ci. Des travaux récents sur les biographies de femmes qui ont joué un rôle central pour le processus d'intégration européenne ainsi que sur le genre et la politique de l'UE contribuent à l'intégration du genre dans les études européennes. Pourtant, les femmes restent encore largement absentes et marginalisées dans les récits des premières étapes de l'histoire et de la politique européennes. Cet article contribue à ce débat en suggérant l’établissement définitif d’un champ d'études sur les femmes et leur rôle de créatrices et façonneuses de l’intégration européenne.
In communist Eastern Europe the churches were often a focus for opposition to communism, and in the immediate post-communist period the churches often played a key role in fostering national cohesion, in promoting a conservative political agenda, sometimes in formal alliances with political parties, and in rewriting national narratives to eliminate or revise communist versions of such narratives. These activities, which are implicitly conservative and nationalistic, are not naturally in step with European integration. This book explores the relationship between religion and politics in post-communist Europe, focusing especially on the degree to which religion, and religious involvement in politics, encourage Euroscepticism. The book, which covers a range of East European countries, shows how religion is very important as a political force, how religion’s contribution to Euroscepticism varies between countries, and how in some circumstances, especially when a religious-based party is in power and has to deal with Brussels, religion can favour European integration. The book includes coverage of Catholic, Orthodox and Muslim countries, and includes discussion of how religious organisations, which often engage in lobbying in Brussels, relate to the European Union itself. 1. Introduction 2. When Religion Becomes Eurosceptic: A Theoretical Framework 3. An Anti-Semitic Narrative: The Polish Case 4. Identity, but Pro-EU: The Case of Croatia 5. 'Evil Threatens to Take Over the World': The Case of Serbia 6. Instability and Different Churches: The Case of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 7. Religion and the Democratic Struggle: The Case of Montenegro 8. The Post-Communist Region and Religions Conclusions Simona Guerra is a Lecturer in Politics at the University of Leicester, UK
Populism has gained new momentum in Southern Europe during the financial crisis. Germany’s role as top creditor fueled anger toward traditional political elites in Greece, whereas Podemos exploited the same crisis in Spain to “generate discursively a popular identity that [could] be politicized.” Drawing upon Derrida’s aporetic notion of hospitality, the article argues that left-wing populism in Greece and Spain projects an antagonistic Other. This Other, both threatening and welcomed at the home of the people, oscillates ambiguously between images of the EU and corrupted national political elites. To support this argument, our narrative proceeds with comparative discourse analysis, looking at speeches of political leaders in the run-up of elections in the two countries.
The 2004-07 EU enlargement towards the post-communist region showed that the long waiting for EU membership could impact on levels of public support for the EU. This article examines citizens' trust towards national and international institutions after joining the EU in Poland, in comparative perspective. In the post-Communist region, levels of trust towards national institutions are generally lower compared to the European and international ones. Politicians and political parties are the most distrusted actors, undermining the social and political fabric in the region. An overview of political participation and levels of trust with focus on national data sets and the European Social Survey shows that levels of trust are quite low and a share of the population is concerned with sovereignty vis-a-vis EU integration. This analysis addresses how the relationship between citizens and institutions have changed and how this may affect not just the EU's policies towards candidate countries and third countries, but how it can also affect citizen participation during the process of democratization and after joining the EU. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Regents of the University of California.
Historical legacies play an important role in the rise of radical right parties in Central and Eastern Europe. This article conducts an in-depth study of the trajectory of a particular radical right party, the League of Polish Families, in a particular Central and East European country, Poland. The central objective of the article is to highlight that, although there are important similarities between the League of Polish Families and other radical right parties in both Central and Eastern Europe and Western Europe, the League of Polish Families differs in some respects, such as the composition of electorate and ideology from these parties. The article shows that the observed differences have their roots in the Polish historical legacy, that on some accounts deviates from the historical legacies present in other Central and East European countries. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Regents of the University of California.
Through the analysis of the crisis, and its impact on European identity and on politics and party systems, this review provides three contributions. First, the persistence of crisis throughout the history of European integration is explained as a significant factor strengthening the EU and triggering the emergence of the social construction of embedded narratives. These tensions deal with identity, culture and attitudes towards the EU, but also with the EU at the political level and the role of the EU as global actor. This leads to the second debate, with a focus on the different impact the crisis has had, by examining the case of the United Kingdom, Poland and Germany. The crisis indicates the salience of the national contexts, institutions, actors and narratives, shaping the responses, while the domestic experiences, towards the responses themselves, stress divergences and differences across member states. Third, the focus on Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain, and their party system, addresses the possible prolonged long-lasting crisis, characterizing the Southern member states. As Jean Monnet wrote, it is not the institutions that create the EU, but the people who shape the institutions. Further research can address how the EU is differently represented, experienced and articulated.
This article examines the 2016 British EU referendum and the domestic debates through the citizens’ voices in the media, specifically on the emotions and narratives, on The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and The Daily Express, the week before the referendum. British citizens felt, in their words, “bullied because of [their] political correctness” and pointed their anger and dissatisfaction against the EU (and Merkel’s) “obsession for open borders”. The analysis underlines that these emotions and narratives, combining immigration and sovereignty, have remained embedded in the post-Brexit days, and go back not just to Billig’s banal nationalism (1995), but show that voting Leave represented respect towards true British values, the “core country” as conceptualised by Taggart (2000). Powellism (Hampshire 2018) and Wright’s “encroanchment” of Englishness (2017), and the analysis on the immigration narrative explain how anti-immigration and sovereignty discourse is persisting and is influencing, more broadly, the social and political relation of Britain with Europe.
This chapter draws upon the findings of the previous chapters of this book. In Chapters 2 and 3 the analysis stressed increasing levels of Euroscepticism in the run-up to accession. Also, the comparative analysis highlighted the parallel electoral success of populist parties. Here, the chapter presents a theme that the in-depth examination of the Polish case brought to light: after the opening of the negotiation process and the long period of waiting, it is easier for populist parties to channel citizens’ dissatisfaction, particularly pointing to Euroscepticism, using it as external face of their empty ideological box – in their ‘chameleonic’ nature (Taggart, 2000). It is likely that favourable institutional settings, high volatility rates, and the new politics – absorbed by the CEE countries (Wisniowski, 2000) – together with a large agrarian sector (as in Poland and Romania) and the success or failure of the economic transition (Mungiu-Pippidi, 2001) can favour the emergence of the accession populism, that type of populism rising specifically on the verge of accession and using Euroscepticism as its external face.
How public support for the EU is structured in the short term in Poland may offer insight into the way in which it will develop in all the CEE states. In addition, findings can suggest patterns of support well beyond this comparative perspective and be applied to the EU member states and current candidate countries. This study contends that the Polish study can be examined in the comparative framework of CEE, applied to the EU28, and beyond.
Euroscepticism has become more and more embedded both at the EU and national levels (Usherwood et al. 2013) and persistent across domestic debates (Usherwood and Startin 2013). This study presents an in-depth analysis of contemporary narratives of Euroscepticism. It first introduces its question related to understanding public Euroscepticism, following the British EU referendum campaign and outcome, to then present the established literature, and the analysis of the British case study. A survey run in Britain in May 2019 shows that, as already noted by Oliver Daddow (2006, 2011), Euroscepticism is very much identifiable in the traditional narratives of Europe as the Other. Context accountability (Daddow 2006) is still cause for concern in Britain and by assuming a more positive view of a European Britain (Daddow 2006) does not make the debate more informed. Images, narratives and specific issues to reform the Eurosceptic toolbox into a more neutral, but informative, instrument could be applied at the grassroots level, as the post-referendum demonstrations and manifestations have shown. British citizens are reclaiming their own European citizenship, and deconstructing existing Euromyths can be a first small step forward.
Analyses on the 2004 EP elections found that information plays a fundamental role in citizens’ choices (Wessels, 2007), particularly visibility ‘matters’ (De Vreese et al., 2006). As this book is primarily concerned on how and why attitudes change, information, as knowledge on the EU, can represent an important factor. The comparative overview on the role of information in the 2004 and 2009 EP elections stresses the correlation between information and turnout. Focus groups carried out in Central and Eastern Europe in 2007 and 2009 confirm information matters. This chapter explores whether citizens are interested in the EU and if they felt they received the information they expected in the run-up to the accession referendum and European elections.
How we study and see the European Union (EU) affects how we engage with it. Recent works on biographies of relevant women for the European integration process and on gender and EU politics contribute to the mainstreaming of gender in EU studies. Yet, we still lack the presence of women in the narrative on the early stages of European history and politics, where women's absence is well visible in their persistent marginalization. This analysis contributes to this debate by suggesting the definitive establishment of studies on the women of these early years as makers and shapers of European integration.
The European Union referendum was supposed to be a significant moment for political engagement and ownership in the UK. This article looks at how the two official European Union referendum campaigns (Vote Leave and Remain) framed discussions about the UK’s membership of the European Union, as well as the impact of the campaign on women’s political activation. Using data from a survey questionnaire conducted two weeks after the European Union referendum (in July 2016), we analyse women’s sense of political efficacy and engagement with European politics. We project those findings on a frame analysis, where we assess the footprint of each campaign in terms of issue coverage and the salience of gender as a campaign issue. Our findings shed light on the way in which issue framing and confidence affect the quality of political engagement among ‘weak publics’.
The public image of the European Union (EU) has met increasingly negative evaluations since the economic and financial crisis hit its peak. Although opposition towards the EU has been pitched as a temporary phenomenon, it has now become a distinctive characteristic of European integration, described as ‘embedded’. Recent analyses on citizens’ attitudes towards the EU underline a rational utilitarian dimension, stressing that EU attachment is affected by future life expectations. Are rationalist perspectives the only possible explanation behind the rise of Euroscepticism, though? This article offers an alternative approach, by using discourse analysis, and examines how emotions, as embedded in Eurosceptic discursive frames and practices, may affect attitudes towards the EU. We argue that an analysis of citizens’ opposition through emotions when the salience of the EU increases can show how a Eurosceptic emotion-laden public discourse may become prominent at the domestic level.
During the 1990s and the 2000s, Spain, Italy and Greece experienced a considerable growth of immigration. In just two decades, the immigrant population has multiplied more than fivefold in all three countries and by the end of the 2000s, residents of immigrant origin already accounted for 7 per cent of the overall population in Italy, 8 per cent in Greece and 13 per cent in Spain, respectively. This accelerated demographic change has put pressure on the democratic representative system of these countries, with large numbers of new residents and new citizens wishing to have a voice in the direction of collective affairs. Yet, their possibilities of securing political representation might have been constrained not only by the institutional and partisan setting in these “new” countries of immigration in Europe, but also by the fact that the public opinion has become increasingly concerned about immigration and immigrants’ integration in all three cases. As we will show, the levels of descriptive representation of citizens of immigrant origin (CIOs) are still very reduced and quite distant to those found in other European countries, thus pointing to a common ‘South European’ pattern. The paper examines how the above-mentioned institutional and societal factors have affected parties’ strategies in relation to the incorporation of CIOs into elected office and how issues relating to timing, the size of the CIO electorate (as opposed to the CIO resident population), and party competition dynamics might help us understand the descriptive representation gaps. The paper further explores their substantive political representation, by systematically comparing the behaviour of CIO and non-CIO elected representatives in the parliamentary arena in Spain, Italy and Greece.
In the first chapter, this book introduced its research question (Q) What drives support before and after accession in Poland? Previous research (Cichowski, 2000) pointed to analyses at one point in time, while patterns in citizens’ attitudes could be expected to change over time. This book answers to how determinants of public support for the EU change before and after EU accession. This study also presents what determines support for and opposition to EU integration in a post-Communist EU member state after accession.
After the Danish rejection of the Treaty on European Union (EU) (1992), the legitimizing relationship between public opinion and European integration acquired more salience, as the ‘readiness of European political elites to use’ referendums provoked uncertain developments around the EU project (Taggart and Szczerbiak, 2005). As the ‘permissive consensus’ was not assured, mass attitudes became ‘both a measure and a determinant of the process of EUropean integration’ (Gabel, 1998a, p. 9). EU politics was no longer an elite-driven process, and the role of public opinion became a determinant in shaping its agenda. The question of what determines public support for the EU has been widely examined, focusing on the domestic context (Anderson 1998; Gabel, 1998a), political parties (Ray, 2003a, b), and perceived cultural threats (Carey, 2002; McLaren, 2006). Further contributions to the study of public support for the EU stressed the importance of cultural factors, where one of the ‘most vital … elements is religion’ (Nelsen et al., 2001, p. 192; Nelsen et al., 2011).
In 2004 the EP elections brought citizens of 27 EU countries out to vote, highlighting a wide ‘Eurogap’ between the old member states, plus Malta and Cyprus, and the eight post-Communist member states. About 55.63 per cent voted in the ‘old Europe’ and Malta and Cyprus, compared with only 31.19 per cent who casted their vote in the new EU member states. When Bulgaria voted in May 2007, turnout was at 29.22 percent and in November 2007 in Romania it halted at 29.47 per cent. In 2009 the general average decreasing trend, registered since the first EP elections took place, did not alter. Also, the ‘Eurogap’ between old member states plus Malta and Cyprus (54.01 per cent) and the post-Communist new EU member states (22.93 per cent) was almost unvaried.
Recent works on biographies of relevant women for the European integration process and on gender and EU politics contribute to the mainstreaming of gender in EU studies. Yet, we still lack the presence of women in the books and narrative on the early stages of the European integration process. The lack of women's representation is still visible whenever we open a textbook on EU studies. We can read about the Founding Fathers and main politicians of the early years in the initial pages, but we can find no reference to women. This study addresses the structural lack of women's representation in this 'his-story', and that part of history already defined as incomplete, by introducing the history and political contribution of the early women of European integration. Even though it is true that there were less women in politics at the time, a few of them still sat in the Common Assembly, also holding important national, European and international roles. The analysis of the minutes of meetings and the in-depth archival research, this study outlines how these women actively contributed to the process of European integration in the early years. As the Founding Fathers, they show an extraordinary life that have simply gone undocumented.
Peter Mair argued that the lack of an institutional framework that facilitates the contestation over European politics makes European integration politics a “zero-sum game”. Yet, in the time following this statement the dynamism of Euroscepticism has allowed it to evolve its strategy beyond national contestation of the EU into a ‘transnational European political space’ (FitzGibbon et al. 2016). The centralisation of economic and financial supervision in response to the ‘Eurocrisis’ has provided Eurosceptics with the opportunity for structuring a new form of pan-European contestation that has adapted to these new policy realities. Understanding this evolution of Eurosceptic strategy helps, in part, to explain why a nativist politician, Matteo Salvini, is now calling for a pan-Eurosceptic alliance. This development gives rise to important questions; principally can this form of transnational contestation be described as Euroscepticism? And, if so, what type? We argue that the recent 2019 EP elections demonstrate opposing (successful) transnational Eurosceptic collaborations: on the right, opposing EU integration on the political and economic side, protecting national sovereignty, in particular with regard to the immigration agenda; and on the left, adopting a Euro-alternative agenda, pointing to accountability, transparency, legitimacy, democracy, the role of the ECB, and a border-free Europe. This is a significant development as the EP has long been the arena in which the ‘zeitgeist’ of Euroscepticism has manifested itself and the surface of new forms of contestation (Caiani and Guerra 2017) towards the EU.
While research tends to explore questions of power and leadership at the national level, populism in Europe has moved beyond national borders, with an increasing number of transnational movements and organizations. This article investigates the Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25) and its leadership’s main speeches. Informed by both discourse theory and Michel Foucault’s work on parrhesia (veridiction), the analysis draws on readings of transnational Euroalternativism and populism, pointing out the conflicting logic of bringing them together at the transnational level. Our findings thus stress the increasing politicization of European integration as an opportunity to mobilize transnational activities, which are based on the populist ‘people vs. the elites’ dichotomy and against Brussels’ unaccountable elites (see FitzGibbon & Guerra, 2019), while indicating the limits of leadership in a populist transnational movement (de Cleen, Moffitt, Panayotu, & Stavrakakis, 2019; Marzolini & Souvlis, 2016).
This article examines the 2016 British EU referendum and the domestic debates through the citizens’ voices in the media, specifically on the emotions and narratives, on The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph and The Daily Express, the week before the referendum. British citizens felt, in their words, “bullied because of [their] political correctness” and pointed their anger and dissatisfaction against the EU (and Merkel’s) “obsession for open borders”. The analysis underlines that these emotions and narratives, combining immigration and sovereignty, have remained embedded in the post-Brexit days, and go back not just to Billig’s banal nationalism (1995), but show that voting Leave represented respect towards true British values, the “core country” as conceptualised by Taggart (2000). Powellism (Hampshire 2018) and Wright’s “encroanchment” of Englishness (2017), and the analysis on the immigration narrative explain how anti-immigration and sovereignty discourse is persisting and is influencing, more broadly, the social and political relation of Britain with Europe.
Additional publications
Monographs:
2013: Central and Eastern European Attitudes in the Face of the Union. A Comparative Perspective, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN-10: 0230279864 | ISBN-13: 978-0230279865.
Edited books:
2017: Euroscepticism, Democracy and the Media. Communicating Europe, Contesting Europe, Basingstoke: Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology (with M. Caiani), ISBN 978-1-137-59642-0.
Edited volumes:
2013: ‘Confronting Euroscepticism’, Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 51, No. 1, January (with S. Usherwood and N. Startin).
Refereed journals:
2020: ‘Veridiction and leadership in transnational populism: The case of DiEM25’, Politics and Governance, Vol. 8, No. 1 (with E. Fanoulis).
2019: ‘Immigration, that’s what everyone’s thinking about …’ The 2016 British EU referendum seen in the eyes of the beholder, Journal of Language and Politics, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 651-670.
2018: ‘Gender, Ownership and Engagement during the EU Referendum: Gendered Frames and the reproduction of Binaries’, European Journal of Politics and Gender, Vol. 1, No. 3 (with R. Guerrina and T. Exadaktylos).
2017: ‘Anger and protest: referendum and opposition to the EU in Greece and the UK’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs (co-authored with E. Fanoulis), Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 305-324, Published online: 11 February 2018.
2017: ‘Without losing my religion: The dilemmas of EU integration in Poland’, Culture and Society: Journal of Social Research., Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 52-68.
2016: ‘Distrust Unbound: What next after joining the EU’, The Journal of Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 233-241.
2013: ‘Does familiarity breed contempt? Determinants of public support for European integration and opposition to it before and after accession’, Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 38-50, Special Issue ‘Confronting Euroscepticism’.
2010: ‘Not Just Europeanization, Not Necessarily Populism: Potential factors underlying the mobilization of populism in Ireland and Poland’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 273-291 (co-authored with J. FitzGibbon).
2009: ‘The League of Polish Families between East and West, past and present’, The Journal of Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 527-549 (co-authored with S. de Lange).
2009: ‘Election or Referendum?: The 2007 Polish Parliamentary Election’, Representation, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 75-85 (co-authored with M. Bil).
Book chapters:
2020: ’Poland and the EU: The historical roots of resilient forms of Euroscepticism among public Euroenthusiasm’, in M. Gilbert and D. Pasquinucci (eds) The Historical Roots of Euroscepticism, Amsterdam: Brill, European Studies Series.
2018: ‘Civil society and the EU’ in M. Cini and N. Perez-Solorzano (eds.) European Union Politics, Oxford University Press, 6th ed. (co-authored with H.J. Trenz).
2018: ‘Barone’ and ‘Bustarella’, The Encyclopedia of Global Informal Corruption, A. Ledeneva (ed.), London: UCL University Press.
2018: ‘Earthquake or Hurricane? The Rise and Fall of Populist Parties in Poland’, in S.B. Wolinetz and A. Zaslove (eds.) Absorbing the Blow? Populist Parties and their Impact on Party Systems (with F. Casal-Bértoa).
2017: ‘Young people and the EU: It’s about European perspective economic and life expectations’, in N. Startin, S. Usherwood and B. Leruth (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Euroscepticism, Abingdon: Routledge.
2017: El populismo en Polonia', in J. del Palacio, A. Rivero and J. Zarzalejos (eds.) Geografía del populismo: Un viaje por el universo del populismo desde sus orígenes hasta Trump, Ciencía Politica, Madrid: Tecnos (with F. Casal Bértoa).
2017: ‘Eurosceptic voices: beyond party systems, across civil society’, in M. Caiani and S. Guerra (eds.) Euroscepticism, Democracy and The Media. Communicating Europe, Contesting Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan (and Introduction and Conclusion).
2016: ‘Between dialogue and Euroscepticism: an analysis of the religious discourse at the EU level’ in J. FitzGibbon, B. Leruth and N. Startin (eds.) ‘The emergence of a new sphere of opposition: Euroscepticism as a transnational and pan- European phenomenon?’, Abingdon: Routledge.
2015: ‘Public Opinion and the EU’ in M. Cini and N. Perez-Solorzano (eds.) European Union Politics, Oxford University Press, 5th ed. (with L. McLaren, as first author).
2014: ‘Determinants of Support for EU Integration: West & Politics and East & Economy or EU Identity’ in B. Stefanova (ed.) The European Union beyond the Crisis: Evolving Governance, Contested Policies, and Disenchanted Publics, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, Rowman & Littlefield (with F. Serricchio).
Selected contributions:
2020: ‘The politics of the EU as crisis, mobilization and catharsis’, Comparative European Politics, DOI: 10.1057/s41295-020-00217-2
2020: Brexit: The EU27’s momentary Lapse of Unity, Political Insight, June.
2020: Democratic Backsliding, Poland’s election and COVID-19: What needs to be considered?, LSE Europp blog, 24th April.
2020: Between safety and surveillance, Controcorrente, SGOC COVID19 Blog, 5th April.
2019: ‘More in common: the emotional experience of Brexit in the eyes of generations’, LSE Brexit blog, 3 October (available here).
2019: ‘Siamo tutti euroscettici? Non esattamente. Ecco perché’, La Repubblica and Society of Electoral Studies (Società Italiana di Studi Politici), 24 April (available here).
2019: ‘The Affective Understanding of Post-Brexit European Integration’, DCU Brexit Institute, 20 February (available here).
2018: ‘What Euroscepticism looks like in Central and Eastern Europe’, LSE Brexit blog, 4 January (available here).
2017: ‘Akademička, ktorá skúma euroskepsu: Potrebujeme, aby ľudia Európu zažili’, Euroactiv Slovakia, 27 December (available here).
2017: ‘What is public Euroscepticism?’, Think, University of Leicester, 20 December (available here).
2017: ‘Euroscepticism has taken hold across the EU - but it has many different roots’, LSE Brexit blog, 19 July (available here).
2017: ‘Post-Referendum Britain: Hopeful or Uncertain?’, (with T. Exadaktylos and R. Guerrina), The Policy Space, University of Canberra and Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, 10 April (available here).
2016: ‘What Europe must do...’, The Conversation, 27 June.
2016: ‘Academics bring expertise to Brexit debate’, 23 May.
2016: ‘The Polish Catholic Church has become intertwined with Euroscepticism and the promotion of conservative “national values”’, The Democratic Audit UK, 28 April and LSE EUROPP blog, 2 May.
2016: ‘Europe wades into debate over Poland's constitutional crisis’, The Conversation, 27 January (with F. Casal Bértoa).
2015: ‘The year in elections. Poland: right turn’, The Conversation, 1 January (with F. Casal Bértoa).
2015: ‘How Poland's political landscape was redrawn overnight’, The Conversation, 27 October (with F. Casal Bértoa).
2015: ‘Surprise election loss for Polish president spells trouble for governing party’, The Conversation, 26 May.
2014: ‘Politicians fiddling while Rome burns?’, The Conversation’, 10 December.
2014: ‘Angry Young Europeans?: Croatian Attitudes towards the EU in comparative perspective’, The European Parties Elections and Referendums Network (EPERN) blog.