EP4U is a project aiming at raising citizens’ awareness of EU policy-making and engage university and high school students, and the broader public, in discussions about the work of the EU and the EP in four policy areas that are considered salient for these audiences: climate and environment; employment and social policies; migration and asylum; and non-discrimination and protection of fundamental rights. These four policy areas are analysed in four different Member States: Finland, France, Bulgaria and Slovakia, whilst the project also reaches trans-national audiences in other Member States. To achieve these aims, TEPSA implements the following activities:

• Events
• Communication activities
• Student paper competitions
• High-school talks

You can find the project factsheet here.

Sie trennen tausende Kilometer und politisch Welten: Dennoch sind Zentralasien und die EU wichtige Partner geworden. Wie die Beziehungen weiter wachsen können, wollen WissenschaftlerInnen und Denkfabriken im Projekt „SEnECA – Strengthening and Energizing EU-Central Asia Relations“, erarbeiten. Dr. Michael Kaeding, Professor für Europapolitik an der Universität Duisburg-Essen (UDE), und Dr. Katrin Böttger, stellvertretende Direktorin des Berliner Instituts für Europäische Politik (IEP) leiten es und bekommen dafür Unterstützung aus Brüssel: Die Europäische Kommission fördert SEnECA in den kommenden zwei Jahren mit rund 1,5 Millionen Euro.

Kasachstan, Kirgisistan, Tadschikistan, Turkmenistan und Usbekistan: Seit zehn Jahren verfolgt die EU in der Region eine ‚Strategie der neuen Partnerschaft‘. Denn die Länder an der Schnittstelle zwischen Asien und Europa sind geopolitisch bedeutsam. Dass sich dort stabile und demokratische Gesellschaften entwickeln, ist auch im Interesse Europas.

Hier geht es zur vollständigen Presseerklärung in DE und EN.

InDivEU zielt darauf ab, unser Wissen über differenzierte Integration zu maximieren, indem systematisch vier Forschungsziele verfolgt werden: Modelle, Szenarien und Visionen, die Präferenzen von Bürgern, Regierungen und Parteien, die Ursachen und Auswirkungen sowie andere Formen der Flexibilität.

InDivEU wird vom EUI und der ETH Zürich geleitet und bringt die Schlüsseldisziplinen der politischen Theorie, Politikwissenschaft, Recht und Ökonomie, die die transdisziplinäre Analyse der Differenzierten Integration gewährleisten, zusammen. Das EU H2020 Projekt läuft über drei Jahre – bis 2022. Mehr Infos unter: http://indiveu.eui.eu/

‘Differentiation: Clustering Excellence’ (DiCE) establishes a large research network designed to support policy decisions on EU differentiation. This CSA creates a unique cluster of excellence by bringing together, through their coordinators, the three successful H2020 sister projects on differentiation (EU3D, EU IDEA, InDivEU), which is amplified by the involvement of the TEPSA network and a strategy for including other experts plus UNEXE. DiCE’s overarching objective is to ensure that state-of-the-art research on differentiation is properly translated into policy-relevant advice and made readily accessible to policy-makers at European, national and regional levels of governance and society, better preparing the EU for future differentiation scenarios. The open and inclusive network will become the ‘Who’s Who’ of researchers working on differentiation and the dynamics of European integration. The three projects consist of 38 partner institutions (22 universities, 15 think tanks, 1 media partner) from across Europe involving more than 50 leading scholars and experts on differentiation. TEPSA’s presence in 35 European countries further enlarges the projects’ geographical scope.

More information here. 

Assessing the Potential of EU Agencies for the Future of EU-Turkey Relations, Part I: Turkey's Full Membership without Voting Rights in the EEA and EMCDDA. Kaeding, M. & Krull, F. (2021). IPC Policy Brief. 

Currently, Turkey plays a particularly privileged role in two EU agencies: the European Environment Agency (EEA) and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). To assess the dynamics and potential of EU agencies to strengthen Turkey-EU relations, we focus on this relationship and Turkey’s existing involvement in the EEA and EMCDDA over the last twenty years. We show that despite similarities, Turkey’s involvement in EU agencies varies between these two agencies in various dimensions. To conclude, we recommend strengthening the idea of transgovernmental outreach and consider that EU agencies, which are driven by policy sector-specific interdependencies, are a valuable asset for both Turkey and the EU as the road to EU membership remains uncertain.

Assessing the Potential of EU Agencies for the Future of EU-Turkey Relations, Part 2: A Systematic Mapping of Cooperation Between EU Agencies and Turkey (1999-2021). Kaeding, M. (2021). IPC Policy Brief. 

To showcase the dynamics and potential of EU agencies for EU-Turkey relations, this contribution focuses on Turkey’s role across EU agencies, mapping its bilateral and ad hoc working arrangements with them (1999–2021). This year, Turkey has engaged with 18 out of 34 decentralized EU agencies. Turkey’s involvement in EU agencies is manifold, covers various policy areas, and has proven itself for more than 20 years. For the future of EU-Turkey relations, EU agencies seem to offer a valuable “participatory form of external differentiation” worth pursuing for both the EU and Turkey.

Assessing the Potential of EU Agencies for the Future of EU-Turkey Relations, Part 3: Mapping EU Agencies' Coverage in the Turkish Press (2002-2021). Kaeding, M., & Demirpolat, Z. (2021). IPC Policy Brief.

EU agencies and Brexit: Assessing the implications of Brexit for EU agencies.Kaeding, M. (2021). EU3D Research Paper No. 20.

This chapter considers implications of Brexit for a set of actors which are often neglected, but without whom the future of Europe has become unthinkable: EU decentralised agencies. It assesses the EU agencies‘role during the Brexit negotiations and those on the future EU-UK relations. It shows how the UK moved from a decisive and respected EU decision maker during 47 years of full EU membership in all EU agencies to one of many rule takers with the status of ‘just another third country’ – despite geographical proximity and considerable EU-UK sector-specific interdependencies. At the end, the chapter discusses the next steps involved in giving effect to the provisions of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement on EU agencies and their future relationship with the UK, bearing in mind that ‘uncertainties and contestation about Brexit are only beginning to be resolved’.

European Solidarity in Action and the Future of Europe: Views from the Capitals. Kaeding, M., Pollak, J. and Paul Schmidt (Ed.) (2022). Springer International Publishing. (forthcoming)

This book sheds light on how member states and EU neighbours reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of European solidarity, what they expect from the EU, and other member states, and how they are ready to contribute to common action. The volume reveals how European countries experience and perceive solidarity from the EU and towards the EU in different policy dimensions, such as intra-EU mobility, healthcare and financial and economic aspects of Europe’s recovery. The book offers national perspectives and perceptions of solidarity and concrete aspects in different policy areas. It includes a Foreword by the Vice-presidents of the European Parliament Katarina Barley and Othmar Karas.

Political equality without social equality? Social distortion of voter turnout in the European elections 2019 across nine European capitals.  Haußner, S., Kaeding, M. (2020), in: Research&Politics (2019 European Parliament Elections Special Issue)

Although we know a lot about why citizens vote or abstain in elections, the social inequality of low turnout in European elections has attracted little attention. This paper focuses on voter turnout in the last 2019 European elections and examines whether low voter turnout in second-order elections is automatically associated with high social inequality, using Tingsten’s law as inspiration. By contrasting a second-order election with other high and low turnout elections, the paper deepens our understanding of the mechanisms behind low turnout in European elections. Following the argument that the macrolevel social imbalances of low turnout can best be analysed at the neighbourhood level, we develop a small-scale analysis of turnout across nine capitals of the European Union for the 2019 European Parliament (election and perform a regression model with interaction effects to examine the effects between different types of elections. Our results do not find differences in the effect of neighbourhoods’ social context on voter turnout between these elections. Although turnout in all cities is socially biased across all types of elections, jeopardising the ideal of political equality across Europe, we find no evidence that the 2019 European Parliament elections were more socially unequal than other elections – regardless of their second-order nature.

Precisely one year later, after the 2019 European Elections, this Special Issue was published on the initiative of Prof. Michael Kaeding and Stefan Haußner. A total of six articles by eleven authors were published as part of the Special Issue and are available to the public via "open access".

Here you can find the website of the Special Issue.

Here you can find all articles published in the Special Issue:

    Daniel, W. T., & Obholzer, L. (2020). Reaching out to the voter? Campaigning on Twitter during the 2019 European elections. Research & Politics.

    Gattermann, K., & de Vreese, C. (2020). Awareness of Spitzenkandidaten in the 2019 European elections: The effects of news exposure in domestic campaign contexts. Research & Politics.

    Haußner, S., & Kaeding, M. (2020). Political equality without social equality? Social distortion of voter turnout in the European elections 2019 across nine European capitals. Research & Politics.

    Heidbreder, E. G., & Schade, D. (2020). (Un)settling the precedent: Contrasting institutionalisation dynamics in the spitzenkandidaten procedure of 2014 and 2019. Research & Politics.

    Hurka, S., & Kaplaner, C. (2020). Are popular and powerful committees more representative? Evidence from the ninth European Parliament. Research & Politics.

    Treib, O. (2020). Exploring mainstream Euroscepticism: Similarities and differences between Eurosceptic claims of centre-right and radical right parties. Research & Politics.

Euroscepticism and the Future of Europe: Views from the Capitals, Kaeding, M.,  Pollak, J. and P. Schmidt(Ed.) (2020). Palgrave Mcmillian.​

This This book sheds light on how the increasing prominence of Eurosceptic and nationalist parties is having an impact on the thinking of mainstream parties, their representatives in the European Parliament, and the future of Europe. It provides perspectives on the future of the European project from authors in all the EU Member States, as well as neighbouring European countries and potential applicant nations.With many Eurosceptic parties now in national government or exerting influence over the national debate, this book maps and analyses the nature and impact of Euroscepticism and nationalism in the different party systems of Europe. As national political parties are the gatekeepers of the process of political representation, they play a pivotal role in mobilizing civil society and in setting the political agenda. They shape politics at a national level, but also determine the way in which Europe plays out—or does not play out—as a political issue. Thus, it is from the national capitals that the very future of Europe emerges. ​​​

​​

Die Europawahl 2019: Ringen um die Zukunft Europas, Kaeding, M., Müller, M. und J. Schmälter (Hrsg.) (2020), VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Eine erstmals steigende Wahlbeteiligung, eine deutliche Veränderung der Mehrheitsverhältnisse und großer Streit um das Spitzenkandidaten-Verfahren: Die Europawahl 2019 war bewegt wie wenige zuvor. Dieses Buch bietet eine Analyse ihrer zahlreichen Facetten. Schwerpunkte liegen hierbei auf den europäischen Parteien und den Veränderungen in der Parteienlandschaft, der Rolle der Spitzenkandidaten, der öffentlichen Auseinandersetzung, der Wahlbeteiligung und dem Wahlverhalten sowie einem Ausblick auf das neue Parlament. Über Analysen der Europaforschung hinaus sind Perspektiven aus unterschiedlichen Subdisziplinen der (vergleichenden) Politikwissenschaft wie der Wahl-, Parteien-, Kommunikations- oder Regierungsforschung vertreten. Den Beitrag finden Sie hier.

Europaskeptizismus und die Zukunft Europas. Ansichten aus den Hauptstädten Kaeding, M., Pollak, J. und P. Schmidt (2020), in: Integration, S. 136-143. 

Based on a new anthology on the future of Europe in the light of Euroscepticism, this article examines how the increasing prominence of Eurosceptic and nationalist parties is affecting the thinking of mainstream parties, their representatives in the European Parliament and the future of European integration. The publication of the anthology is timed to coincide with the strategic vision of the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the Parliament as well as with the next phase of the negotiations on the future relations between the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom and the Conference on the Future of Europe. It maps and analyses 39 national perspectives from all EU Member States as well as from neighbouring European countries and potential candidate countries.

You can find the article here. 

Europa im Kreuzfeuer der Argumente: Debattierwettbewerbe in der politikwissenschaftlichen Hochschullehre, Freise, M. und M. Kaeding (2019), in: Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, S. 1-11.

Seit nunmehr vier Jahren richtet der Jean-Monnet-Lehrstuhl für Europäische Integration und Europapolitik der Universität Duisburg-Essen den Wettbewerb „NRW debattiert Europa“ aus. Anliegen des Wettbewerbs ist es, Studierende der politikwissenschaftlichen Institute im Bundesland zusammenzubringen und europapolitische Fragestellungen kontrovers zu diskutieren. Zugleich soll das Format dazu beitragen, die Argumentationsfähigkeit und das Debattiervermögen zu steigern, indem die Studierenden vor einem großen Publikum und unter der Aufsicht einer neutralen Jury aus der politischen Praxis Debatten im sogenannten Wartburgformat führen. Mittlerweile nehmen sechs politikwissenschaftliche Institute an der jährlichen Veranstaltung in Duisburg teil. In ihrem Beitrag beschreiben die beiden Autoren ihre Erfahrungen mit dem Projekt und motivieren dazu, dieses Format zu übernehmen. Den vollständigen Beitrag finden Sie hier.

Party group coordinators and rapporteurs: Discretion and agency loss along the European Parliament’s chains of delegation, Obholzer, L., Hurka, S., and M. Kaeding (2019), in: European Union Politics 0 (0), pp. 1-22.

The European Parliament organizes its legislative activities along two chains of delegation to the rapporteurs – one institutional, one partisan. We analyse discretion and agency loss along these chains of delegation from the perspective of party group coordinators who select the rapporteur on behalf of the party group. Do coordinators minimize agency loss towards their national party, their European party group, the committee median or the plenary median when allocating reports? Data from the 2009–2014 legislative term demonstrate that coordinators tend to select rapporteurs who are close to their own national party’s ideal point on the integration dimension. This has important implications for intra-parliamentary and intra-party delegation, party group cohesion and broader policy-making in the European Union.

The Future of Europe. Views from the Capitals, Kaeding, M., Pollak, J. and P. Schmidt (Ed.) (2018). Palgrave Mcmillian: Hampshire.

With a Foreword by the President of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani, this book sheds light on the political dynamics within the EU member states and contributes to the discussions about Europe. Authors from all member states as well as Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey assess how their country could get more involved in the European debate, taking the reader on a journey through various political landscapes and different views. The chapters cover issues ranging from a perceived lack of ambition at the periphery to a careful balancing act between diverse standpoints at the geographical centre. Yet, discussions share common features such as the anxiety regarding national sovereignty, the migration and border discourse, security concerns as well as the obvious need to regain trust and create policies that work. The book contributes vigorously to the debate about Europe in all capitals and every corner of the continent, because this is where its future will be decided.

Sitting between European Politics and National Constraints: The Political Economy of the European Central Bank, Sebastian Heidebrecht and Michael Kaeding (2018), in: Capital and Credit Markets (1).

Beyond core functions of central banking, the European Central Bank (ECB) plays a pivotal role in the new European economic and financial governance framework. In the aftermath of the financial crisis the social and institutional embeddedness of the Central Bank, as well as the legal architecture have changed significantly, the Central Bank’s relations with European and international institutions, EU member states and its public have been redefined. Against this backdrop, this special issue aims at analyzing these recent developments by bringing together insights from different disciplines, such as political science, economics, law, and sociology. Senior and junior scholars and practitioners out of the field apply qualitative as well as quantitative research designs focusing on the political economy of the ECB sitting between European politics and national constraints. The researched questions will be: Why has the ECB become a political leader by default in the new European governance structure?, What are the legal contradictions of institutional changes and unconventional monetary policy of the ECB, and the role of the public on European central banking?, What lessons should be learned from the new inter-institutional setting for a safe drive on the road ahead of a more stable European governance structure? Please click here for the full issue.

Pharmacovigilance in the European Union Michael Kaeding, Julia Schmälter und Christoph Kilka Wiesbaden: Springer

The book presents the results of an in-depth comparative study assessing the implementation of the EU Pharmacovigilance Directive in six EU Member States. By going beyond legal transposition and instead focusing on practical implementation, this study aims to close a gap in EU compliance research. Based on qualitative interviews with relevant actors in Germany, Poland, Portugal, France, Finland and the UK, the authors identify perceived challenges and best-practices, issue recommendations, and thereby contribute to a better understanding of the factors that incentivize or impede the practical implementation of EU drug safety at the national level.

Nichtwähler in Europa, Deutschland und Nordrhein-Westfalen, Michael Kaeding, Stefan Haußner und Morten Pieper (2016) Wiesbaden: Springer

Das Nichtwähler-Problem analysiert: Dieser 2016 erscheinende Band bietet eine aktuelle Bestandsaufnahme der bestehenden Literatur zur sinkenden Wahlbeteiligung in Europa, Deutschland und Nordrhein-Westfalen. Er analysiert die damit verbundene soziale Schieflage auf den verschiedenen Ebenen ergänzt um eigene Analysen und Fallstudien. Er zeigt, dass die soziale Schieflage der Wahlbeteiligung zu einer erheblichen Verschiebung des politischen Angebots und Nachfrage führt. Die aktuell diskutierten Lösungsmöglichkeiten greifen diese Kernprobleme allerdings nicht an, nur die Einführung einer gesetzlichen Wahlteilnahmepflicht ist dazu in der Lage. Dieser Band sucht abschließend konsensuale Fakten, zeigt Lücken auf und bezieht Stellung, wie das Problem der sozialen Schieflage der niedrigen Wahlbeteiligung gelöst werden kann.

Der Band wendet sich an Studierende und Lehrende der Sozialwissenschaften, Praktiker, Journalisten und Wissenschaftler im Bereich der Wahlforschung, sowie an weiterführende Schulen und Erwachsenenbildung.

Learning on the job? EU enlargement and the assignment of (shadow) rapporteurships in the European Parliament, Steffen Hurka, Michael Kaeding and Lukas Obholzer. In: Journal of Common Market Studies.

This article investigates the determinants of assignments to European Parliament negotiating teams comprising both rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs. We re-examine the argument that underrepresentation of MEPs from new member states on these key posts after enlargement might have been due to a ‘learning phase’. We find that Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from newer Member states remain considerably less likely to act as rapporteurs during the second term after enlargement (2009-2014). Most importantly, this trend also holds for shadow rapporteurs under the co-decision procedure, that is when they matter most. This structural underrepresentation has potentially important implications for European integration: MEPs from newer Member States are arguably less able to influence legislation. We suggest three readings of the results by asking whether MEPs from these countries are less willing, lacking skills, or disadvantaged. Future research on rapporteurship allocation and legislative careers should seek to answer these questions.

Die Europawahl 2014 - Spitzenkandidaten, Protestparteien und Nichtwähler, Kaeding, Michael und Niko Switek (Hrsg.) Wiesbaden: Springer.

Welche Neuerungen brachte die Europawahl 2014? Wie prägten die Spitzenkandidaten Wahl und Wahlkampf? Was bedeuten die Gewinne der Protestparteien und die hohe Zahl an Nichtwählern? Die Beiträge in diesem Band diskutieren diese und weitere zentrale Aspekte der Europawahl 2014. Im Besonderen stehen einzelne Mitgliedsstaaten, die Auswirkungen von Finanz- und Schuldenkrise, die Rolle europäischer Parteien und die Konsequenzen der Wahl für das Regieren auf europäischer Ebene im Fokus. Zudem umfasst der Band seltene außereuropäische Perspektiven auf den Wahl(aus)gang und die Beiträge zweier Präsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments (Martin Schulz und Klaus Hänsch).

Weitere Informationen sowie den Zugang zum Ebook des Sammelbandes finden Sie hier.