Wang, Hequn
A icle — Published Ve sion
Suppo o an EU‐wide social policy? A coun y‐
compa a i e analysis o unemploymen pe cep ions
In e na ional Jou nal o Social Wel a e
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
John Wiley & Sons
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Wang, Hequn (2024) : Suppo o an EU‐wide social policy? A coun y‐
compa a i e analysis o unemploymen pe cep ions, In e na ional Jou nal o Social Wel a e, ISSN
1468-2397, Wiley Pe iodicals, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 34, Iss. 1,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ijsw.12687
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/313730
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Suppo o an EU-wide social policy? A coun y-
compa a i e analysis o unemploymen pe cep ions
Hequn Wang
Uni e si ä Hambu g, Hambu g,
Ge many
Co espondence
Hequn Wang, Uni e si ä Hambu g,
Hambu g, Ge many.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
Abs ac
This a icle explo ed he in luence o unemploymen pe cep ions on a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide social policy ha gua an ees a minimum s anda d o li -
ing o he poo ac oss 18 Eu opean coun ies. The a icle elied on a heo e i-
cal amewo k ha highligh s he in e ac ion among economic sel -in e es ,
ideology, and pe cep ions. Using da a om Eu os a and he Eu opean Social
Su ey, he esul s show ha Eu opeans wi h mo e nega i e pe cep ions o
na ional unemploymen o he li ing condi ions o he unemployed we e mo e
likely o suppo an EU minimum income scheme. This associa ion was pa ic-
ula ly s ong among indi iduals wi h non-egali a ian alues o igh -leaning
ideology and emained ela i ely consis en ac oss di e en na ional con ex s.
Addi ionally, suppo was s onge in coun ies wi h poo economic and wel-
a e condi ions. O e all, he indings e eal a high pe cei ed legi imacy among
Eu opeans o implemen ing a policy measu e ha aims o ackle po e y in
he EU.
KEYWORDS
EU social policy, minimum income, pe cep ions, public opinion, social Eu ope,
unemploymen
INTRODUCTION
The Eu opean Union in e enes in he social policy
domain o deal wi h inequali y and o comba po e y
and social exclusion wi hin he EU, leaning owa ds a
‘social Eu ope’(Ma insen & Vollaa d, 2014). S ill, one in
i e Eu opeans was a isk o po e y o social exclusion
by 2022, ha is, ha ing an income below he na ional
po e y h eshold, being socially dep i ed o excluded
om he labou ma ke as de ined in he EU
(Eu os a , 2023). In addi ion, he si ua ion a ied la gely
be ween coun ies, anging om 12% in Czechia up o
34% in Romania. A ela ed ques ion is whe he he e is
gene al suppo o he EU's in e en ion in social policy
o he sake o he well-being o Eu opeans and pe haps
s onge suppo in coun ies wi h a highe sha e o a
poo popula ion.
Al hough o da e social policy emains mainly wi hin
he a ea o na ional au ho i ies, poli ical deba es on os-
e ing solida i y and edis ibu ion beyond na ional bo -
de s a e ongoing. These deba es ha e gained inc eased
Abb e ia ions: ESS, Eu opean Social Su ey; GDP, g oss domes ic
p oduc ; ICC, in aclass co ela ion coe icien ; SD, s anda d de ia ion.
Recei ed: 13 Decembe 2023 Accep ed: 12 June 2024
DOI: 10.1111/ijsw.12687
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial-NoDe i s License, which pe mi s use and dis ibu ion in any
medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed, he use is non-comme cial and no modi ica ions o adap a ions a e made.
© 2024 The Au ho (s). In e na ional Jou nal o Social Wel a e published by Akademike ö bunde SSR (ASSR) and John Wiley & Sons L d.
In J Soc Wel . 2025;34:e12687. wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/ijsw 1o 14
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ijsw.12687
impo ance in ecen yea s due o majo global c ises
such as clima e change and he COVID-19 pandemic.
This has ein o ced he poli ical ele ance o s udying
public opinion on social policy a he EU-le el.
Agains his backg ound, his a icle analysed EU ci i-
zens' a i udes owa ds he in oduc ion o an EU-wide
social bene i scheme ha gua an ees a minimum s an-
da d o li ing o all poo people in he EU. A he
na ional le el, minimum income bene i s a e al eady in
place in all membe s a es o educe po e y and social
exclusion. Howe e , in mos coun ies, he bene i le els
all a below na ional po e y h esholds and a y signi -
ican ly ac oss coun ies. The e o e, p omo ing a mini-
mum income bene i scheme a he EU-le el would
add ess inequali ies wi hin and be ween membe s a es.
Po en ial al e na i e policies, such as a amewo k on
adequa e minimum wages ha he EU has se led on by
he end o 2022, aim o enhance minimum income p o-
ec ion o employed pe sons in he EU. Ins ead o
add essing in-wo k po e y speci ically like ha , an EU-
wide minimum income bene i would p o ide minimum
income p o ec ion o all indi iduals in need, including
he unemployed who li e in po e y. In addi ion, such a
policy measu e would equi e ich membe s a es o
in es mo e inancially, p omo ing edis ibu ion a he
EU-le el. A ho ough unde s anding o Eu opeans' sup-
po o he policy measu e hus con ibu es o legi imiz-
ing u he in eg a ion wi hin he EU, and in pa icula ,
o achie ing he EU p io i y o ackle po e y in gene al.
While he e has been a long-s anding adi ion o
s udying a i udes owa ds EU in eg a ion in gene al
(e.g., Ande son & Reiche , 1995; Gabel, 1998; Gabel &
Whi en, 1997), a i udes owa ds social-policy making a
he EU-le el ha e seldom been discussed explici ly in
p e ious li e a u e un il he las ew yea s (e.g., Bau e &
Meuleman, 2020; Beaudonne , 2013; Bu goon, 2009;
Ge ha ds e al., 2016; Roosma & an Oo scho , 2021).
The ecen s udies demons a ed ha suppo o EU
social-policy making is gene ally s onge in membe
s a es wi h wo se economic and wel a e pe o mances
(e.g., lowe wel a e gene osi y o e iciency). While
e ealing a con ex ual impac on Eu opeans' a i udes,
mos s udies le ou how Eu opeans may pe cei e hei
coun y's condi ions di e en ly. Less is known abou he
speci ic ole ha indi idual pe cep ions o he na ional
con ex may play in shaping a i udes. Pe cep ions a he
indi idual le el should be conside ed in addi ion o
objec i e con ex ual ac o s, as people o en exhibi signi -
ican mispe cep ions ega ding na ional indica o s, such
as he le el o unemploymen , po e y o inequali y
(e.g., Ca doso e al., 2016; Choi, 2019; Kuhn, 2019). As a
esul , schola s ound ha suppo o edis ibu ion a
he na ional le el is mo e s ongly associa ed wi h
indi iduals' pe cep ions o na ional inequali y han wi h
con ex ual ac o s (e.g., Bussolo e al., 2021; Gimpelson &
T eisman, 2018). This p omp s he ques ion o whe he
pe cep ions also play a c ucial ole in explaining a i udes
a he EU-le el.
The p esen s udy con ibu es o he exis ing li e a-
u e by add essing he ole o bo h objec i e con ex ual
ac o s and indi idual pe cep ions o hem in shaping
Eu opeans' a i udes owa ds an EU-wide social policy in
e ms o a minimum income bene i scheme. This s udy
cen ed on he pe cep ions o he unemploymen a e
and he li ing condi ions o unemployed indi iduals
wi hin he coun y (also e e ed o as ‘unemploymen
pe cep ions’o ‘pe cep ions ega ding unemploymen ’
he ea e ). In his s udy, I adap ed a heo e ical ame-
wo k ha highligh s he in e ac ion among economic
sel -in e es , ideology, and he pe cep ions. Empi ically, I
combined mac o da a on coun y-le el economic and
wel a e pe o mances wi h indi idual-le el da a om he
Eu opean Social Su ey (ESS) in 2016, which includes
18 EU membe s a es. This a icle aimed o add ess he
ollowing esea ch ques ions: Fi s , how a e a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide minimum income scheme associ-
a ed wi h unemploymen pe cep ions di e en ly in com-
pa ison o objec i e con ex ual ac o s ega ding he
economic and wel a e pe o mances o he EU membe
s a es? Second, o wha ex en can indi iduals' ideological
mo i a ions, such as egali a ianism o poli ical ideology,
in luence he ole o he pe cep ions in shaping he a i-
udes? Finally, do con ex ual ac o s also in luence how
unemploymen pe cep ions ela e o a i udes owa ds
he policy measu e?
COUNTRY PERFORMANCES AND
SUPPORT FOR THE EU'S
INTERVENTION IN SOCIAL POLICY
Since he Maas ich T ea y, he in eg a ion p ocess
wi hin he EU has la gely ex ended o he social dimen-
sion. The EU has begun o in e ene e en mo e in he
social policy domain, since he economic c isis in
2007/2008 has inc eased economic dispa i ies be ween
Eu opean coun ies. Fo ins ance, di e en Eu opean
S uc u al and In es men Funds ha e been ca ied ou ,
such as he Eu opean Social Fund, suppo ing ini ia i es
ha aim o educe unemploymen and p omo e eco-
nomic and social cohesion (Eu opean Pa liamen , 2022).
Howe e , om he pe spec i e o Eu opean ci izens,
he Eu opeanisa ion o social policy esul ed in a sudden
loss o suppo o he EU back in he 1990s. The e was
g owing public conce n abou he EU's in e en ion in
he social policy domain ha ing a nega i e impac on
2o 14 WANG
na ional social secu i y sys ems (Fe e a, 2005), also
desc ibed as he ‘Pos -Maas ich blues’(Eichenbe g &
Dal on, 2007). Schola s a gued ha his e lec s an eco-
nomic sel -in e es among Eu opeans, as hei a i udes
owa ds in eg a ion wi hin he EU depend on how i
could in luence hei coun y and hemsel es (see also
Gabel, 1998; Gabel & Whi en, 1997). Acco dingly, oppo-
si ion o he in e en ion by he EU would be pa icula ly
s ong in membe s a es wi h a ou able economic and
wel a e condi ions. In con as , suppo would be s ong
in membe s a es wi h un a ou able condi ions o s a
wi h because hei ci izens may expec he EU's in e en-
ion in social policy o imp o e he le el o social bene i s
in hei coun y, om which hey could possibly bene i
(e.g., Bu goon, 2009).
In line wi h he economic sel -in e es explana ion,
ecen compa a i e li e a u e ound ha suppo o he
EU's in e en ion in social policy is o e all nega i ely
associa ed wi h na ional economic and wel a e pe o -
mances. Ins ead o e e ing o he EU's in e en ion as a
whole di ec ly, empi ical s udies mos ly na owed i
down o one speci ic aspec whe e he EU could possibly
in e ene. Fo ins ance, ocusing on h ee Eu opean
coun ies, ha is, Ge many, Spain and Poland, Ge ha ds
e al. (2016) showed ha suppo o a specialised
Eu opean social policy was s onges in Poland and
weakes in Ge many. In Mau (2005), suppo o EU wel-
a e esponsibili y was much s onge in Medi e anean
han in Con inen al coun ies, and was weakes in Scan-
dina ian coun ies. Mo eo e , s udies e ealed ha a
highe le el o na ional social p o ec ion ela es o lowe
suppo o he wel a e esponsibili y o he EU
(Beaudonne , 2013; Bu goon, 2009) and o a speci ic EU-
wide income bene i scheme (Bau e & Meuleman, 2020).
Simila ly, he suppo is nega i ely associa ed wi h
na ional economic condi ions (Beaudonne , 2013;
Bu goon, 2009; Roosma & an Oo scho , 2021).
Ano he g owing b anch o li e a u e linked suppo o
edis ibu ion o he pe cei ed, no he objec i e si ua ion o
a coun y. The main easoning is ha indi iduals end o
la gely mispe cei e he ac ual s a e o hei socie y wi h
espec o na ional indica o s such as he ex en o unemploy-
men , po e y, and inequali y (e.g., A in e al., 2021;Ca doso
e al., 2016;Choi,2019; Kuhn, 2019;Kuno ich,2012). Gi en
hese mispe cep ions, p e ious s udies ound ha indi idual
pe cep ions o , o example, na ional inequali y, a he han
ac ual con ex ual ac o s o a coun y, s ongly associa e wi h
he demand o na ional edis ibu ion (e.g., Bussolo
e al., 2021; Gimpelson & T eisman, 2018). This aises he
ques ion o whe he indi iduals' pe cep ions also ha e s on-
ge explana o ypowe hanobjec i e con ex ual ac o s in
analysing a i udes owa ds edis ibu ion a a sup a-na ional
le el, ha is, he EU-le el.
To da e, only wo empi ical s udies (Bau e &
Meuleman, 2020; Roosma & an Oo scho , 2021) d ew
a en ion o he impac o pe cep ions abou na ional con-
ex on a i udes owa ds edis ibu ion a he EU-le el.
Using he same indi idual-le el su ey da a om he ESS
in 2016, he esul s o bo h s udies e eal ha pe cep ions
play a simila ly impo an ole as objec i e na ional eco-
nomic and wel a e condi ions in explaining a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide minimum income bene i scheme.
Fi s , he mo e nega i e he s anda d o li ing o unem-
ployed o e i ed indi iduals in he coun y is pe cei ed,
he s onge he suppo o he policy measu e. Second,
indi iduals om coun ies wi h wo se wel a e pe o -
mances end o exhibi s onge suppo . Howe e , nei-
he o he s udies discussed he gap be ween he
objec i e na ional con ex and he indi idual pe cep ions
o explici ly explained why pe cep ions should ma e in
addi ion o na ional con ex .
1
This a icle aimed o
add ess his esea ch gap, wi h a ocus on indi idual pe -
cep ions ega ding unemploymen .
In addi ion o he pe cei ed s anda d o li ing o he
unemployed add essed in he wo p e ious s udies,
he p esen s udy included a second measu e o unem-
ploymen pe cep ions, ha is, he pe cei ed na ional
unemploymen a e. Unemployed Eu opeans, who usu-
ally s and a he bo om o na ional income dis ibu ion
(e.g., de G aa -Zijl & Nolan, 2011; Gallie e al., 2003),
should be among he p ima y a ge g oups o an EU-
wide social policy ha aims o imp o e he well-being o
hose in po e y. The e o e, pe cep ions ela ed o bo h
he p opo ion o unemployed indi iduals in he coun y
and hei li ing condi ions a e pa icula ly ele an o
analysing a i udes owa ds such a policy measu e. This
a icle accoun ed o bo h hese indi idual unemploy-
men pe cep ions as well as objec i e na ional economic
and wel a e pe o mances, and in es iga ed di e en
mechanisms o how hey a ec a i udes owa ds an EU-
wide minimum income bene i scheme.
1
Ins ead, bo h s udies shi ed hei ocus o addi ionally analyse how
indi iduals' expec a ions abou he EU's impac on na ional social
bene i s shaped hei a i udes. Bau e and Meuleman (2020)
demons a ed ha hese expec a ions ully accoun ed o he con ex ual
impac on he a i udes, lea ing aside pe cep ions o he na ional
con ex . Roosma and an Oo scho (2021) in es iga ed whe he he ole
o he pe cep ions could be a ibu ed o a ‘hope-o - ea easoning’a
he indi idual le el: Indi iduals wi h nega i e (posi i e) pe cep ions o
he li ing condi ions o unemployed pe sons would expec an EU-wide
social policy o imp o e (wo sen) he le el o social bene i s in hei
coun y, and consequen ly, suppo he policy measu e mo e (less)
s ongly. Howe e , hey ound no empi ical e idence o suppo his
easoning.
SUPPORT FOR AN EU-WIDE SOCIAL POLICY? 3o 14
EXPLAINING ATTITUDES
TOWARDS AN EU-WIDE SOCIAL
POLICY
The economic sel -in e es explana ion is a common
app oach o analysing coun y a ia ions in a i udes
owa ds edis ibu ion and social policy a he EU-le el,
as p e iously discussed. A he indi idual le el, empi ical
e idence indica es ha i is no indi iduals' socioeco-
nomic s a us ha p ima ily shape hese a i udes, bu
hei ideological mo i a ions (e.g., Bau e &
Meuleman, 2020; Ge ha ds e al., 2016). Fo ins ance,
poli ically le -leaning indi iduals and indi iduals wi h
egali a ian alues a e mo e in a ou o an EU-wide
social policy.
Bo h economic sel -in e es and ideological mo i a-
ions a e adi ionally conside ed as impo an heo e ical
explana ions o he demand o na ional edis ibu ion
(see Alesina & Giuliano, 2011), be o e being applied o
he sup a-na ional le el. A mo e ecen s udy by Bussolo
e al. (2021) p oposed a concise amewo k ha pa icu-
la ly add esses he in e play be ween he economic sel -
in e es , ideological mo i a ions, and pe cep ions o
na ional con ex in explaining demand o edis ibu ion
a he na ional le el. Focusing on pe cep ions o na ional
inequali y, he basic heo e ical assump ion o he
au ho s is ha a s onge demand o na ional edis ibu-
ion is associa ed wi h highe pe cei ed na ional inequal-
i y, lowe socioeconomic s a us, and a le -leaning
ideology o simila iews on social jus ice. Mo eo e ,
bo h sel -in e es and ideology play a c ucial ole in shap-
ing indi iduals' pe cep ions. In pa icula , he au ho s
a gued ha ci izens o one coun y a e exposed o he
same na ional socioeconomic condi ions, such as
he ex en o unemploymen , po e y, and inequali y
wi hin he coun y. Indi iduals' socioeconomic cha ac e -
is ics and ideology, including poli ical o ien a ion, de e -
mine how hey may in e p e such na ional con ex
di e en ly.
Acco dingly, be e na ional economic and wel a e
pe o mances lead o mo e posi i e pe cep ions among
indi iduals ega ding he na ional con ex , such as lowe
pe cei ed na ional inequali y. Condi ional on he same
na ional con ex , indi iduals wi h a lowe socioeconomic
s a us o a le -leaning ideology end o exhibi mo e neg-
a i e pe cep ions and ega d a high le el o unemploy-
men , po e y o inequali y as mo e p oblema ic.
In his a icle, I adap ed he heo e ical app oach o
Bussolo e al. (2021) o explain a i udes owa ds edis i-
bu ion a he EU-le el. As opposed o hei ocus on
inequali y pe cep ions, his a icle explo ed he ole o
pe cep ions ega ding unemploymen in shaping a i-
udes owa ds an EU-wide social policy. O e all, I
assumed a simila mechanism wi h ega d o how socio-
economic s a us, ideological mo i a ions, and pe cep ions
ega ding unemploymen wi hin a coun y ela e o a i-
udes a he EU-le el. Indi iduals wi h a lowe socioeco-
nomic s a us a e likely o suppo social assis ance a he
EU-le el as an ‘impe ec subs i u e’(Bu goon, 2009,
p. 433) o assu e hei li ing condi ions. In o he wo ds,
d i en by he sel -in e es mo i a ion, indi iduals will
suppo social policy a he EU-le el i hey belie e hei
coun y and hemsel es could bene i om i . Following
his logic, indi iduals who pe cei e a high unemploy-
men a e o a low s anda d o li ing o he unemployed
in hei coun y should be mo e in a ou an EU-wide
social policy. The e o e, I hypo hesised ha he mo e neg-
a i e he pe cep ions ega ding unemploymen in he coun-
y, he mo e likely he suppo o an EU-wide social
policy (H1).
Conside ing bo h he economic sel -in e es and ideologi-
cal mo i a ions, a ew p e ious s udies (e.g., A mingeon &
Weiss anne , 2022; Ma gali , 2013) add essed a con lic o
in e es by analysing he in e play be ween indi iduals' socio-
economic s a us, such as income, and poli ical ideology o
shaping demand o na ional edis ibu ion. They ound
ha demand o na ional edis ibu ion is o e all s on-
ge among le -leaning indi iduals and poo indi iduals.
In addi ion, poo igh -leaning indi iduals and ich le -
leaning indi iduals also exhibi ela i ely s ong
demand, bo h o which a e s onge compa ed o ich
igh -leaning indi iduals, hough less s ong compa ed
o poo le -leaning indi iduals. Wi h ega d o he ole
o economic sel -in e es and how i could be in luenced
by ideology, hei indings e eal ha le -leaning ideol-
ogy mi iga es he in luence o socioeconomic s a us on
he a i udes. Acco dingly, indi iduals wi h a le -
leaning ideology o egali a ian alues may ace a simila
con lic o in e es when hey hold posi i e pe cep ions
ega ding unemploymen , ha is, pe cep ions o a low
unemploymen a e o a high s anda d o li ing o he
unemployed in he coun y. Al hough no add essed in
hei heo e ical amewo k di ec ly, Bussolo e al.
(2021) p o ided empi ical e idence ha he le -leaning
ideology diminished he ole o pe cep ions in shaping
a i udes owa ds na ional edis ibu ion. I expec ed ide-
ology has a simila damping e ec a he EU-le el, lead-
ing omysecondhypo hesis,namely he ela ionship
be ween unemploymen pe cep ions and suppo o an
EU-wide social policy is s onge among indi iduals wi h
a igh -leaning ideology o non-egali a ian alues (H2).
As elabo a ed, na ional economic and wel a e pe o -
mances play a ole in he o ma ion o indi iduals' pe -
cep ions, de e mining hei be ween-coun y a ia ion.
Acco dingly, he in luence o unemploymen pe cep ions
on suppo o an EU-wide social policy could be pa ly
4o 14 WANG
explained by objec i e con ex ual ac o s. Mo eo e ,
p e ious s udies empi ically con i med ha a i udes
owa ds social policy a he EU-le el a e nega i ely
associa ed wi h objec i e coun y pe o mances. How-
e e , hese s udies did no analyse he ole o he pe -
cep ions o discuss hem in compa ison wi h he
con ex ual ac o s, as discussed in he p e ious sec ion.
Ins ead, hey poin ed ou ha con ex ual ac o s'
impac on a i udes a he EU-le el esul s om public
conce n abou he EU ha ing a nega i e impac on
na ional social secu i y sys ems (e.g., Bau e &
Meuleman, 2020; Roosma & an Oo scho , 2021). In
gene al, ich coun ies and coun ies wi h gene ous
wel a ep o isiona emo elikely obenega i ely
a ec ed by he in e en ion o he EU, as compe ences
a e obeshi ed om hena ional o heEUle el
(Bau e e al., 2018; Ray, 2004). Consequen ly, d i en by
hei economic sel -in e es , opposi ion om he ci i-
zens o he EU's in e en ion in social policy could be
s ong. Agains his backg ound, I assumed ha indi-
iduals om coun ies wi h be e economic and wel a e
pe o mances a e less likely o suppo an EU-wide social
policy (H3).
Conside ing bo h he li e a u e ha discussed he ole
o wel a e s a e pe o mances and he heo e ical
app oach o Bussolo e al. (2021), objec i e con ex ual
ac o s and subjec i e pe cep ions ega ding unemploy-
men ha e an impac on a i udes owa ds an EU-wide
social policy ha is pa ly independen om each o he .
Fu he mo e, he e should be be ween-coun y a ia ion
in he ole o he pe cep ions, depending on a coun y's
ac ual economic and wel a e pe o mances. Gi en ha
he con ex ual ac o s could a ec a i udes di ec ly, sup-
po o an EU-wide social policy in a coun y may
al eady each a su icien ly high le el due o he poo
economic and wel a e pe o mances o he coun y. Con-
sequen ly, pe cep ions ega ding unemploymen may no
longe ma e in ha coun y. In con as , a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide social policy may a y s ongly in
ich coun ies o coun ies wi h gene ous wel a e p o i-
sion, depending on how indi iduals pe cei e unemploy-
men wi hin hei own coun y. Following his logic, I
expec ed ha he ela ionship be ween unemploymen pe -
cep ions and suppo o an EU-wide social policy is s on-
ge in coun ies wi h be e economic and wel a e
pe o mances (H4).
Figu e 1depic s a ull pic u e o he mechanisms
wi h ega d o he o ma ion o a i udes owa ds an
EU-wide social policy ha I applied o s udying he ole
o pe cep ions ega ding unemploymen . A ows wi h
black s aigh lines in he igu e espec i ely deno e he
discussed hypo heses (H1–H4). A ows wi h black
dashed lines illus a e a mo e gene al in e play among
socioeconomic s a us, ideology, and unemploymen pe -
cep ions ha I did no explici ly add ess in e ms o
hypo heses.
DATA AND METHODOLOGY
Da a
To examine he hypo heses empi ically, he p esen
s udy used indi idual-le el da a om he 8 h ound o
he Eu opean Social Su ey (ESS8) ha was held in
2016 in 23 coun ies, including i e non-EU coun ies
(Eu opean Social Su ey Round 8 Da a, 2016). This
s udy ocused on EU membe s a es o analyse a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide social policy. The ollowing
18 coun ies emained in he sample: Aus ia (AT),
Belgium (BE), Czechia (CZ), Es onia (EE), Finland (FI),
F ance (FR), Ge many (DE), Hunga y (HU), I eland
(IE),I aly(IT),Li huania(LT), he Ne he lands (NL),
Poland (PL), Po ugal (PT), Slo enia (SI), Spain (ES),
Sweden (SE), and he Uni ed Kingdom (GB). A e da a
cleaning, he sample consis ed o 29,286 indi iduals in
FIGURE 1 Fo ma ion o a i udes owa ds EU-wide social policy.
SUPPORT FOR AN EU-WIDE SOCIAL POLICY? 5o 14
o al, wi h sample sizes anging om 1114 in Slo enia
o 2623 in Ge many.
2
Fo he i s ime, ESS8 included a speci ic su ey
ques ion abou a i udes owa ds a po en ial EU-wide
minimum income bene i scheme. The in oduced p o-
posal comp ised he ollowing h ee ea u es: (1) ‘The
pu pose is o gua an ee a minimum s anda d o li ing o
all poo people in he Eu opean Union’; (2) ‘The le el o
social bene i people ecei e will be adjus ed o e lec he
cos o li ing in hei coun y’; (3) ‘The scheme would
equi e iche Eu opean Union coun ies o pay mo e
in o such a scheme han poo e Eu opean Union coun-
ies’. On a scale o 1 (‘s ongly agains ’) o4(‘s ongly
in a ou ’), esponden s we e asked i hey would be
agains o in a ou o such a scheme. No ably, o e 80%
o he esponden s ell in o he middle wo ca ego ies
(‘agains ’o ‘in a ou ’). In 12 ou o he 18 coun ies,
below 5% (30 esponden s o less in se e al coun ies)
selec ed ‘s ongly agains ’and ‘s ongly in a ou ’,
espec i ely. The e o e, I combined he i s wo and he
las wo o he o iginal ca ego ies o gene a e a dicho o-
mous dependen a iable, deno ing whe he esponden s
would suppo an EU-wide minimum income bene i
scheme o no . E en ually, 67% o all esponden s we e
suppo i e o he policy measu e. This a icle p esen ed
he esul s using he dicho omous a iable as he depen-
den a iable, bu he esul s emained obus when
using he o iginal a iable wi h ou ca ego ies.
I used wo i ems in ESS8 on pe cep ions o he unem-
ploymen a e and he s anda d o li ing o he
unemployed wi hin he coun y as measu es o unem-
ploymen pe cep ions. Fi s , ESS8 asked esponden s o
es ima e how many in e e y 100 wo king age people in
hei coun y a e unemployed and looking o wo k.
Responden s we e p o ided wi h answe ing ca ego ies
anging om 1 (‘0–4’) o11(‘50 o mo e’) wi h an in e -
al o 5 pe cen age poin s o hei esponses. They we e
hen asked o assess he s anda d o li ing o people who
a e unemployed in hei coun y on a scale o
0(‘ex emely bad’) o10(‘ex emely good’).
Following he ope a ionalisa ion in Bau e and Meule-
man (2020), egali a ianism was measu ed as a la en a i-
able cons uc ed om h ee i ems. Responden s we e
asked o epo on a scale o 1 (‘ag ee s ongly’) o5(‘dis-
ag ee s ongly’), how much hey ag eed o disag eed wi h
each o he ollowing h ee s a emen s: (1) ‘La ge di e -
ences in people's incomes a e accep able o p ope ly
ewa d di e ences in alen s and e o s’;(2)‘Fo a socie y
o be ai , di e ences in people's s anda d o li ing should
be small’;(3)‘The go e nmen should ake measu es o
educe di e ences in income le els’. I ecoded he
esponses o he cons uc ion o he la en a iable so ha
he highe he sco e, he s onge he egali a ianism.
Poli ical ideology was measu ed by he i em in which
esponden s we e asked o place hemsel es on he scale
o poli ical le – igh , anging om 0 (‘le ’) o10(‘ igh ’).
I e e sed he coding o he i em o he analysis. Due o
a high numbe o missing alues (13% o all esponden s),
I included poli ical ideology only o addi ional analysis.
Acco ding o he heo e ical amewo k elabo a ed in
he p e ious sec ion, indi iduals' socioeconomic cha ac e is-
ics also ha e an impac on hei a i udes owa ds an EU-
wide social policy, as depic ed in Figu e 1.The e o e,in he
eg ession analysis, I included as con ols gende , age, and
socioeconomic s a us. The la e was measu ed by ou di -
e en indica o s: household income, wel a e dependency,
employmen s a us, and educa ion. Since his s udy ocused
on a i udes owa ds an EU-wide social policy, I addi ion-
ally con olled o esponden s' emo ional a achmen o
Eu ope. Summa y s a is ics o all indi idual-le el a iables
a e p o ided in Table A1 in he Online Appendix.
A he coun y le el, I used Eu os a da a in 2016 o
measu ing objec i e na ional economic and wel a e pe o -
mances. I calcula ed wel a e e iciency as he a io
be ween he pe cen age o he popula ion a isk o po e y
be o e and a e social ans e s.
3
The e iciency sco es can
a y be ween 0 and 100. The highe he sco es, he highe
he wel a e e iciency. The indica o shows he ex en o
which na ional social ans e s p o ec ci izens om po -
e y, which be e measu es he wel a e pe o mance o
one coun y han o he measu emen s such as he social
wel a e gene osi y sco es (see Sc uggs, 2014). Fo obus -
ness checks, I used ne expendi u e on social p o ec ion
bene i s (as he pe cen age o g oss domes ic p oduc
[GDP] pe capi a) and a - isk-o -po e y a e (a e social
ans e s) as al e na i e con ex ual ac o s ha e lec he
na ional wel a e si ua ion mo e gene ally. In addi ion, I
used unemploymen a e o measu ing na ional economic
pe o mance and included GDP only o obus ness checks
because i co ela ed s a is ically highly wi h wel a e e i-
ciency (Pea son's co ela ion: 0.64).
4
Desc ip i e s a is ics o all con ex ual ac o s used in
he main analysis and he obus ness checks a e p o ided
in Table A2 in he Online Appendix. Table A2 also shows
2
Fo desc ip i e analysis, pos -s a i ica ion weigh s and popula ion size
weigh s we e used in combina ion o educe sampling e o and
po en ial non- esponse bias and o adjus he sample size o each
coun y in p opo ion o i s popula ion size.
3
I used he Eu os a da a in which pensions we e excluded om social
ans e s. The a - isk-o -po e y h eshold was se a 60% o he na ional
median equi alised household income. The Eu os a codes a e ilc_li10
(be o e social ans e s) and ilc_li03 (a e social ans e s).
4
Eu os a codes o ne social expendi u e, a - isk-o -po e y a e,
unemploymen a e, and GDP a e sp _ne _ben,ilc_li03,une_ _a_h and
nama_10_pc, espec i ely.
6o 14 WANG
s a is ics on he pe cep ions o he unemploymen a e
and he li ing s anda d o he unemployed a agg ega e
le el (i.e., mean alues o each coun y), which I addi-
ionally calcula ed o he desc ip i e analysis.
Me hodology
I applied mul ile el modelling o accoun o coun y-
le el a ia ions in a i udes owa ds an EU-wide social
policy acco ding o na ional economic and wel a e pe -
o mances. Since he dependen a iable is dicho omous,
I es ima ed linea p obabili y andom in e cep models o
es he i s h ee hypo heses.
Fo c oss-le el in e ac ions, andom slope models a e
mo e adequa e han andom in e cep models, since he
o me allows o a ia ions a he clus e le el wi h
espec o he coe icien s o lowe -le el co a ia es
(Heisig & Schae e , 2019). Howe e , my sample con ained
only 18 coun ies and a ela i ely la ge numbe o indi id-
uals pe coun y. In he case o a small sample size a he
clus e le el, es ima es o pa ame e s e e ing o con ex
e ec s a e likely o be biased, and may cause addi ional
eliabili y p oblems o including andom slopes o es
c oss-le el in e ac ions (B yan & Jenkins, 2016). To ackle
his speci ic issue, one may conside wo-s ep modelling
(Achen, 2005;Heisige al.,2017), which es ima es c oss-
le el in e ac ions in a mo e s aigh o wa d manne : in a
i s s ep, eg essions a e es ima ed sepa a ely o each
clus e , and in a second s ep, coe icien es ima es o a i-
ables o in e es ob ained om he i s -s ep eg essions
a e eg essed on he clus e -le el indica o s.
Gi en his con ex , I employed all h ee possible
models, ha is, andom in e cep models, andom slope
models, and wo-s ep modelling, o es my las hypo he-
sis ega ding c oss-le el in e ac ions. I aimed o d aw
obus conclusions by compa ing he esul s o hese di -
e en models. Coun y-le el indica o s we e addi ionally
s anda dised o be e in e p e a ion o he esul s.
RESULTS
Suppo o an EU-wide minimum income
scheme: Desc ip i e s a is ics
As men ioned, a majo i y (67%) o all esponden s we e
in a ou o an EU-wide minimum income bene i
scheme. Howe e , he e we e dis inc coun y di e -
ences. Figu e 2displays ha he sha e o he suppo e s
anged om 48% in he Ne he lands o 92% in Po ugal.
Suppo was s onge in Sou he n and Eas e n Eu opean
coun ies compa ed o coun ies in he No h and Wes .
Figu e 2sugges s ha he iche he coun y, o he be e
he wel a e pe o mance o he coun y, he lowe he
possibili y o suppo ing he policy measu e.
This assump ion was backed up when looking a he co -
ela ion be ween he suppo and coun y cha ac e is ics
ega ding he economic and wel a e pe o mances. Figu e 3a
shows ha he highe he unemploymen a e, o he lowe
hewel a ee iciencyo onecoun y, hehighe hesha eo
esponden s in ha coun y ha we e (s ongly) in a ou o
an EU-wide minimum income bene i scheme. This sugges s
a nega i e ela ionship be ween na ional economic and wel-
a e pe o mances and suppo o an EU social policy.
Consis en wi h he esul s ega ding he objec i e
coun y cha ac e is ics, Figu e 3b illus a es a posi i e
co ela ion be ween unemploymen pe cep ions and sup-
po o he policy measu e: he highe he unemploy-
men a e was pe cei ed a agg ega e le el, he highe he
sha e o esponden s o one coun y in a ou o an EU-
wide minimum income scheme. The sha e o suppo e s
was nega i ely co ela ed wi h agg ega e-le el pe cep-
ions on he s anda d o li ing o he unemployed in one
coun y. In addi ion, Figu e 3shows a clea e and s on-
ge linea co ela ion be ween he la e wo (Pea son's
co ela ion: 0.82) compa ed o he co ela ions o he
o he h ee p esen ed indica o s. I seems ha he a e -
age pe cep ion ega ding he s anda d o li ing o he
unemployed wi hin one coun y could be e explain
coun y di e ences in he a i udes.
To sum up, desc ip i e s a is ics sugges ha na ional
economic and wel a e pe o mances as well as pe cep-
ions ega ding unemploymen ma e o analysing a i-
udes owa ds an EU-wide social policy like a minimum
income bene i scheme. Fu he analyses a e needed o
in es iga e hei unde lying mechanisms.
FIGURE 2 Suppo o EU-wide minimum income bene i
scheme in 18 Eu opean coun ies. Using ESS8 da a, 18 Eu opean
coun ies, N=29,286; Weigh ed s a is ics.
SUPPORT FOR AN EU-WIDE SOCIAL POLICY? 7o 14
Impac o unemploymen pe cep ions and
coun y pe o mances
This sec ion shi ed he ocus om agg ega e-le el pe -
cep ions o pe cep ions a he indi idual le el. Following
he heo e ical model, I es ed in his sec ion he ex en o
which unemploymen pe cep ions ela e o a i udes
owa ds an EU-wide minimum income bene i scheme,
and how he ole o he pe cep ions di e s alongside indi-
idual ideology. In addi ion, I in es iga ed how he a i-
udes a e associa ed wi h na ional economic and wel a e
pe o mances.
The esul s a e depic ed in Table 1. Column (1) shows
ha , a he indi idual le el, he p obabili y o suppo ing
an EU-wide minimum income bene i scheme inc eased
signi ican ly by 0.5 pe cen age poin s as he pe cei ed
na ional unemploymen a e inc eased by one uni , ha
is, by 5 pe cen age poin s. The p obabili y o suppo ing
he policy measu e dec eased signi ican ly by 1.6 pe cen -
age poin s as he pe cei ed s anda d o li ing o he
unemployed in one's coun y inc eased by one uni .
Acco dingly, he highe he unemploymen a e o he
wo se he s anda d o li ing as unemployed was pe -
cei ed by indi iduals, he mo e likely hei suppo o an
EU-wide minimum income scheme. This con i med my
i s hypo hesis ha suppo o such a social policy is
posi i ely associa ed wi h mo e nega i e pe cep ions
ega ding unemploymen (H1).
The esul s o Column (1) addi ionally indica e a posi-
i e associa ion be ween suppo o he policy measu e
and egali a ianism. Column (2) hen shows ha o
esponden s wi h non-egali a ian alues, he p obabili y
o suppo ing an EU-wide minimum income bene i
scheme inc eased signi ican ly by 3 pe cen age poin s as
he pe cei ed na ional unemploymen a e inc eased by
one uni (5 pe cen age poin s). Howe e , he mo e
FIGURE 3 Suppo o EU-wide minimum income bene i scheme. Pea son's co ela ion be ween he sha e o suppo e s in one
coun y and na ional pe o mances in (a) is 0.54 o unemploymen a e (le ) and 0.65 o wel a e e iciency ( igh ). The co ela ion
be ween he sha e o suppo e s and agg ega e-le el unemploymen pe cep ions in (b) is 0.52 o he pe cei ed unemploymen a e (le )
and 0.82 o he pe cei ed li ing s anda d o he unemployed ( igh ). All co ela ions a e highly signi ican (p< 0.001). Weigh s applied o
ESS da a (N=29,286, 18 coun ies).
8o 14 WANG
