The negotiations on the reforms of the Economic and Monetary Union were highly
conflictual. This article analyses the dimensions of conflict that structured these
negotiations. Using several dimension-reduction methods, we conduct an in-depth analysis
of the ‘EMU Positions’ dataset, which codes the positions of all EU member states over a
broad range of fiscal, financial, economic, and institutional integration proposals. The
empirical findings show that the political contestation in the reform of the Eurozone is
one-dimensional between advocates of fiscal transfer and discipline. On this
one-dimensional scale, we identify three broader coalitions, while Germany and France lead
the two opposing groups. This conflict structure provides a setting conducive to the
constant (re-)negotiation of compromises. We conclude the analysis with a discussion of
several implications.
AksoyD
(2012) Institutional arrangements and logrolling: Evidence
from the European Union.American Journal of Political Science56(3):
538–552.
2.
ArmingeonKCranmerS
(2017) Position-taking in the euro crisis.Journal of European Public Policy25(4):
546–566.
3.
ArmstrongDABakkerRCarrollRet al.
(2014) Analyzing Spatial Models of Choice and Judgment with
R. London: CRC
Press.
4.
BeramendiPStegmuellerD
(2017) The Political Geography of the Eurocrisis.
Durham, NC: Duke
University.
5.
BernhardWTLeblangD
(2016) Sovereign debt, migration pressure, and government
survival.Comparative Political Studies49(7):
907–938.
6.
BlackD
(1948) On the rationale of group
decision-making.Journal of Political Economy56(1):
23–34.
7.
BrunnermeierMKJamesHLandauJ-P
(2016) The Euro and the Battle of Ideas.
Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
8.
CopelovitchMFriedenJWalterS
(2016) The political economy of the euro
crisis.Comparative Political Studies49(7):
811–840.
9.
DegnerHLeuffenD
(2019) Franco-German cooperation and the rescuing of the
Eurozone. European Union Politics20(1): 89–108.
10.
De
GrauweP (2013)
The political economy of the euro.Annual Review of Political Science16: 153–170.
11.
European Commission
(2017) Reflection Paper on the Deepening of the Economic and
Monetary Union. Brussels:
European Commission.
12.
FosterCFriedenJ
(2017) Crisis of trust: Socio-economic determinants of
Europeans’ confidence in government.European Union Politics16(4):
511–535.
13.
FriedenJWalterS
(2017) Understanding the political economy of the Eurozone
crisis.Annual Review of Political Science20: 371–390.
14.
HaasEB
(1958) The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic
Forces, 1950–1957. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
15.
HeipertzMVerdunA
(2010) Ruling Europe. The Politics of the Stability and Growth
Pact. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
16.
HernandézEKriesiH
(2016) The electoral consequences of the financial and
economic crisis in Europe.European Journal of Political Research55: 203–224.
17.
HixS
(1999) Dimensions and alignments in European Union Politics:
Cognitive constraints and partisan responses.European Journal of Political Research35: 69–125.
18.
HixSLordC
(1997) Political Parties in the European Union. London:
Macmillan.
19.
HixSNouryARolandG
(2006) Dimensions of politics in the European
parliament.American Journal of Political Science50(2):
494–520.
20.
HoogheLMarksG
(1999) The making of a polity: The struggle over European
integration. In: KitschelHLangePMarksGet al.
(eds) Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp.70–97.
21.
HoogheLMarksG
(2001) Multi-Level Governance and European Integration.
Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers.
22.
JohnstonAHanckéBPantS
(2014) Comparative institutional advantage in the European
sovereign debt crisis.Comparative Political Studies47(13):
1771–1800.
23.
JonesERKelemenDRMeunierS
(2016) Failing forward? The euro crisis and the incomplete
nature of European integration.Comparative Political Studies49(7):
1010–1034.
24.
JunckerJ-CTuskDDijsselbloemJet al.
(2014) Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union.
Brussels: European
Commission.
25.
KriesiH
(2018) The implications of the euro crisis for
democracy.Journal of European Public Policy25(1): 59–82.
26.
LaursenFVanhoonackerS
(eds) (1992) The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union.
Institutional Reforms, New Policies and International Identity of the European
Community. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
LundgrenMBailerSDellmuthLMet al.
(2019) Bargaining success in the reform of the
Eurozone. European Union Politics20(1): 65–88.
29.
MartinAQuinnKMParkJH
(2011) MCMCpack: Markov Chain Monte Carlo in
R.Journal of Statistical Software49(2):
1–21.
30.
MattilaM
(2009) Roll call analysis of voting in the European Union
Council of Ministers after the 2004 enlargement.European Journal of Political Research48: 840–857.
31.
Pisani-FerryJ
(2012) The euro crisis and the new impossible
trinity.Bruegel Policy Contribution1: 1–16.
32.
PooleKT
(1998) Recovering a basic space from a set of issue
scales.American Journal of Political Science42(3):
954–993.
33.
PooleKTRosenthalH
(1985) A spatial model for legislative roll call
analysis.American Journal of Political Science29(2):
357–384.
34.
PooleKTRosenthalH
(1997) Congress: A Political Economic History of Roll Call
Voting. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
35.
PooleKTLewisJLoJet al.
(2011) Scaling roll call votes with nominate in
R.Journal of Statistical Software42(14):
1–21.
36.
RikerWH
(1986) The Art of Political Manipulation.
New Haven: Yale University
Press.
37.
SchimmelfennigF
(2015) Liberal intergovernmentalism and the euro area
crisis.Journal of European Public Policy22(2):
177–195.
38.
SteenbergenMRMarksG
(2004) Introduction: Models of political conflict in the
European Union. In: Steenbergen MR and Marks G (eds) European
Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press,
pp.1–10.
39.
TarleaSBailerSDegnerHet al.
(2019) Explaining governmental preferences on economic and
monetary union reform. European Union Politics20(1): 24–44.
40.
ThomsonR
(2009) Actor alignments in the European Union before and
after enlargement.European Journal of Political Research48: 756–851.
41.
ThomsonRBoerefijnJStokmanF
(2004) Actor alignments in European Union decision
making.European Journal of Political Research43(2):
237–261.
42.
TreierSJackmanS
(2009) Democracy as a latent variable.American Journal of Political Science52(1):
201–217.
43.
TsebelisGGarrettG
(2000) Legislative politics in the European
Union.European Union Politics1: 9–36.
44.
WasserfallenF
(2014) Political and economic integration in the EU: The
case of failed tax harmonization.Journal of Common Market Studies52(2):
420–435.
45.
WasserfallenFLeuffenDKudrnaZet al.
(2019) Analysing European Union decision-making during the
Eurozone crisis with new data. European Union Politics20(1): 3–23.
WoolleyJT
(1994) Linking political and monetary union: The Maastricht
Agenda and German Domestic Politics. In: EichengreenBFriedenJ
(eds) The Political Economy of European Monetary Unification.
Boulder: Westview Press,
pp.67–86.
48.
ZimmerCSchneiderGDobbinsM
(2005) The contested council: Conflict dimensions of an
intergovernmental EU institution.Political Studies53: 403–422.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
