Abstract
The politicization of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has manifested itself to different extents across EU Member States. In some countries, conflicting interpretations about the deal were highly visible in public and political debates, while in others there was hardly any awareness. To further understand this phenomenon, trade scholars have to date not yet deepened nor leveraged the insights of the ‘differentiated politicization’ and social movement literature, which both point to coalition formation as an important trigger of politicization processes. This article contributes to our understanding of variation in politicization across EU Member States, by exploring coalition formation dynamics in differentiated politicization processes, in order to identify the factors facilitating successful domestic coalition formation. Through an exploratory case study design, I focus on three countries that exemplify high, middle, and low politicization cases: Germany, Belgium, and Ireland. By relying on the testimonies of campaigners active during the TTIP episode, I identify three elements that facilitated the formation of a diverse domestic coalition, which subsequently played an important role in pushing for a broad-based debate about the implications of TTIP: (i) an expert ‘mesomobilization’ link with a transnational advocacy network, (ii) the prior availability of domestic alliances, and (iii) an inclusive framing approach in order to establish a diverse coalition. The findings also underline the importance of timing in the unfolding of (successful) politicization processes.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science
Reference41 articles.
1. Baglioni, S., & Hurrelmann, A. (2016). The Eurozone crisis and citizen engagement in EU affairs. West European Politics, 39(1), 104–124.
2. Baumgartner, F., & Mahoney, C. (2008). The two faces of framing: Individual-level framing and collective issue-definition in the EU. European Union Politics, 9(3), 435–449.
3. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639.
4. Bollen, Y., De Ville, F., & Gheyle, N. (2020). From nada to Namur: Sub-federal parliaments’ involvement in European Union trade politics, and the case of Belgium. In J. Broschek & P. Goff (Eds.), The multilevel politics of trade (pp. 256-278). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
5. Buonanno, L. A. (2017). The new trade deals and the mobilisation of civil society organizations: Comparing EU and US responses. Journal of European Integration, 39(7), 795–809.
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献