Extended Findings. Finland. ecfr.eu/eucoalitionexplorer. Question 1: Most Contacted

Similar documents
EU Coalition Explorer

EU Coalition Explorer

EU Coalition Explorer

EU Coalition Explorer

European Union Passport

Fertility rate and employment rate: how do they interact to each other?

Identification of the respondent: Fields marked with * are mandatory.

WORLDWIDE DISTRIBUTION OF PRIVATE FINANCIAL ASSETS

European patent filings

2. The table in the Annex outlines the declarations received by the General Secretariat of the Council and their status to date.

INVESTING IN AN OPEN AND SECURE EUROPE Two Funds for the period

ASYLUM IN THE EU Source: Eurostat 4/6/2013, unless otherwise indicated ASYLUM APPLICATIONS IN THE EU27

IMMIGRATION, ASYLUM AND NATIONALITY ACT 2006 INFORMATION FOR CANDIDATES

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

EUROPEAN UNION CURRENCY/MONEY

The diversity of Agricultural Advisory Services in Europe

Evolution of the European Union, the euro and the Eurozone Sovereign Debt Crisis

IMMIGRATION, ASYLUM AND NATIONALITY ACT 2006 INFORMATION FOR CANDIDATES

Europe divided? Attitudes to immigration ahead of the 2019 European elections. Dr. Lenka Dražanová

IMMIGRATION IN THE EU

The Intrastat System

UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 9 APRIL 2018, 15:00 HOURS PARIS TIME

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN AUGUST 2016

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN AUGUST 2015

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN FEBRUARY 2017

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN MAY 2017

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN MARCH 2016

Brexit. Alan V. Deardorff University of Michigan. For presentation at Adult Learning Institute April 11,

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

Proposal for a new repartition key

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN DECEMBER 2016

TRIPS OF BULGARIAN RESIDENTS ABROAD AND ARRIVALS OF VISITORS FROM ABROAD TO BULGARIA IN SEPTEMBER 2015

EU Main economic achievements. Franco Praussello University of Genoa

The Markets for Website Authentication Certificates & Qualified Certificates

Factsheet on rights for nationals of European states and those with an enforceable Community right

Asylum Trends. Appendix: Eurostat data

TISPOL PERSPECTIVES TO THE EUROPEAN ROAD SAFETY HOW TO SAVE LIVES AND REDUCE INJURIES ON EUROPEAN ROADS?

Visas and volunteering

Migration Challenge or Opportunity? - Introduction. 15th Munich Economic Summit

EU Settlement Scheme Briefing information. Autumn 2018

8193/11 GL/mkl 1 DG C I

Introduction. The European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 The European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 came into operation on 1 January 2004.

9 th International Workshop Budapest

CONSUMER PROTECTION IN EU ONLINE GAMBLING REGULATION

Italy Luxembourg Morocco Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania

Taiwan s Development Strategy for the Next Phase. Dr. San, Gee Vice Chairman Taiwan External Trade Development Council Taiwan

THE RECAST EWC DIRECTIVE

Shaping the Future of Transport

September 2012 Euro area unemployment rate at 11.6% EU27 at 10.6%

GALLERY 5: TURNING TABLES INTO GRAPHS

3.1. Importance of rural areas

EU Breakdown of number of cases registered and number of articles seized by product type Number of cases registered by Customs %

Asylum decisions in the EU28 EU Member States granted protection to asylum seekers in 2013 Syrians main beneficiaries

Size and Development of the Shadow Economy of 31 European and 5 other OECD Countries from 2003 to 2013: A Further Decline

INTERNAL SECURITY. Publication: November 2011

A. The image of the European Union B. The image of the European Parliament... 10

Reference Title Dates Organiser(s) 00/2007 Train the Trainers Learning Seminar Step February 2007 Portugal 01/2007 Crime, Police and Justice in

IPEX STATISTICAL REPORT 2014

VISA POLICY OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

Timeline of changes to EEA rights

LABOR MIGRATION AND RECOGNITION OF QUALIFICATIONS

Challenges for Baltics as for the Eurozone countries having Advanced Economy status

Q&A on the European Citizens' Initiative

Factual summary Online public consultation on "Modernising and Simplifying the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)"

The evolution of turnout in European elections from 1979 to 2009

Education Quality and Economic Development

UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION (UPP) PACKAGE

Public Initiative Europe without Barriers with support of the International Renaissance Foundation

The regional and urban dimension of Europe 2020

The global and regional policy context: Implications for Cyprus

Territorial indicators for policy purposes: NUTS regions and beyond

Introduction to the European Agency. Cor J.W. Meijer, Director. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education

Flash Eurobarometer 430. Summary. European Union Citizenship

Asylum in the EU28 Large increase to almost asylum applicants registered in the EU28 in 2013 Largest group from Syria

Asylum decisions in the EU EU Member States granted protection to more than asylum seekers in 2014 Syrians remain the main beneficiaries

Equality between women and men in the EU

Convergence: a narrative for Europe. 12 June 2018

CLASSIFICATION/CATEGORISATION SYSTEMS IN AGENCY MEMBER COUNTRIES

EuCham Charts. October Youth unemployment rates in Europe. Rank Country Unemployment rate (%)

EU Trade Mark Application Timeline

Options for Romanian and Bulgarian migrants in 2014

REPORT. On the operation of the European Arrest Warrant Act (as amended) in the year 2015 made to the Houses of the

The benefits of a pan-european approach: the EU and foreign perspective from the Netherlands point of view

Migration, Mobility and Integration in the European Labour Market. Lorenzo Corsini

Euro area unemployment rate at 9.9% EU27 at 9.4%

TULIP RESOURCES DOCUMENT VERIFICATION FOR ALL EMPLOYEES FEBRUARY 2013

The Unitary Patent and the Unified Patent Court. Dr. Leonard Werner-Jones

Income inequality the overall (EU) perspective and the case of Swedish agriculture. Martin Nordin

Alternative views of the role of wages: contours of a European Minimum Wage

Population and Migration Estimates

CHILDREN AND THEIR RIGHTS TO BRITISH CITIZENSHIP

European Tourism Trends & Prospects Executive Summary

Romania's position in the online database of the European Commission on gender balance in decision-making positions in public administration

I m in the Dublin procedure what does this mean?

The Belgian industrial relations system in a comparative context. David Foden Brussels, October 25th 2018

After the crisis: what new lessons for euro adoption?

Transcription:

Extended Findings Finland Preferences Question 1: Most Contacted Finland (2%) is not amongst the most contacted countries within the EU: Germany (22%), France (13%), the UK (11%), Poland (7%), Italy (6%), the Netherlands, Sweden (5%) and Spain (4%) It is contacted more often by the Affluent Seven (5%) than by the EU It is contacted more often by SE (18%) and DK (9%) and less often by the Netherlands, Austria and Belgium (0%) than by the Affluent Seven Finland contacts Sweden (29%), Germany (23%), the UK (15%), Estonia (12%), Denmark, the Netherlands and France (6%) most often It contacts Sweden (29% rather than 13%), Estionia (12% rather than 2%) and Denmark (6% rather than 2%) more often than the Affluent Seven does & France (6% rather than 12%), the Netherlands (6% rather than 10%) and Luxembourg (0% rather than 5%) less often Question 2: Shared Interests Finland (4%) is amongst the countries with which the EU shares most interests: Germany (11%), the UK (7%), the Netherlands, France, Italy and Sweden (6%), Poland, Spain and Belgium (4%) The Affluent Seven share more interests with Finland (9%) than the EU does & the Southern Seven less (0%) Germany (6%), Denmark (15%) and Sweden (17%) share more interests with Finland than their country groups do & Belgium (3%) and the Netherlands (6%) less Finland shares most preferences with: Sweden (23%), the Netherlands (14%), Estonia (12%), the UK (9%) and Denmark (8%) It shares more preferences with Sweden (23% rather than 14%), the Netherlands (14% rather than 11%) and Estonia (12% rather than 3%) than the Affluent Seven does & less with Luxembourg (0% rather than 4%) and the UK (9% rather than 11%)

Question 3: Most Responsive Finland (4%) is amongst the countries the EU finds most responsive: Germany (13%), the Netherlands, France, the UK, Sweden (7%), Belgium (6%), Luxembourg, Poland, Spain, Italy and Slovakia (4%) The Affluent Seven finds Finland (8%) more responsive than the EU does & the Southern Seven less (1%) Austria (5%), Belgium (4%) and the Netherlands (2%) find Finland less responsive than the Affluent Seven does & Denmark (16%) and Sweden (15%) more Finland finds Sweden (24%), Estonia (22%), Denmark and the Netherlands (10%) most responsive Finland finds Sweden (24% rather than 13%), Germany (20% rather than 16%), Estonia (22% rather than 6%) and Denmark (10% rather than 5%) more responsive than the Affluent Seven does & France (0% rather than 5%) and the UK (2% rather than 7%) less Question 4: Most Disappointing The EU is more disappointed in the UK (13%), Hungary (11%), Poland (10%), France,Germany (9%), Greece (8%) Austria (6%), Italy and the Netherlands (5%) than in Finland (2%) The country groups are not more or less disappointed in Finland than the EU is Spain (6%) and Portugal (9%) are more disappointed in Finland than their country groups Finland is most disappointed in Hungary (21%), Greece (16%), the UK, Poland (14%), Romania (7%) and Czech rep. (5%) It is more disappointed in Hungary (21% rather than 15%), Greece (16% rather than 11%) and Romania (7% rather than 4%) than the Affluent Seven are Influence Question 5: Ranking Big Six on Overall EU Policy There is consensus (93%) in Finland about Germany having been the most influential member of the Big Six on EU overall policy and about France ranking 2 nd (80%) There is no consensus in Finland about the influence of Italy (rank 3 by 47%, rank 4 by 27%, rank 5 by 20%), Spain (rank 5 by 40%, rank 6 by 47%), Poland (rank 4 by 27%, rank 5 by 27%, rank 6 by 47%) and the UK (rank 3 by 40%, rank 4 by 33%) In Finland, there is the same degree of consensus as in the Affluent Seven about Germany ranking 1 st (93% compared to 96%) and a higher degree of consensus about France ranking 2 nd (80% rather than 73%). Like in Finland, there is no consensus about the influence of the other Big Six members

Question 6: Ranking Big Six on Fiscal Policy There is consensus (93%) in Finland about Germany having been the most influential member of the Big Six on EU fiscal policy, about France ranking 2 nd (67%), about the UK ranking 3 rd (53%) and about Poland ranking 6 th (60%) There is no consensus in Finland about the influence of Italy (rank 2 and 3 by 13%, rank 4 by 47%, rank 5 by 20%) and Spain (rank 4 by 33%, rank 5 by 40%, rank 6 by 27%) In Finland, there is the same degree of consensus as in the Affluent Seven about Germany ranking 1 st (93% compared to 91%), a higher degree about France ranking 2 nd (67% rather than 57%) and about Poland ranking 6 th (60% rather than 52%). Like in Finland, there is no consensus in the Affluent Seven about the influence of Spain and Italy. Unlike in Finland, there is no consensus in the Affluent Seven about the influence of the UK (rank 2 by 30%, rank 3 by 27%, rank 6 by 18%) Question 7: Ranking the Big Six on Foreign and Security Policy There is consensus (53%) in Finland about Italy ranking 4 th as regards influence on EU foreign and security policy and about Spain ranking 6 th (60%) There is no consensus in Finland about the rank of Germany (rank 1 by 33%, rank 2 by 47%), France (rank 1 by 33%, rank 2 by 27%, rank 3 by 27%), Poland (rank 3 by 27%, rank 5 and 6 by 33%) and the UK (rank 1 by 33%, rank 3 by 47%) Like in Finland, there is no consensus in the Affluent Seven about the influence of Poland, UK and Germany. Unlike in Finland, there is no consensus in the Affluent Seven about Italy ranking 4 (rank 4 by 44%, rank 5 by 26%) and about Spain ranking 6 (rank 5 by 34%, rank 6 by 44%) Question 8: Ranking the Affluent Seven There is no consensus within the EU about the rank of Finland (rank 4 by 15%, rank 5 by 15%, rank 5 by 21%, rank 6 by 22%, rank 7 by 23%) as regards the influence of Affluent Seven Members on EU policy There is also no consensus about the influence of Finland in the country groups or in the individual countries There is consensus (87%) in Finland about the Netherlands ranking 1 st There is no consensus in Finland about the influence of Finland (rank 3 by 20%, rank 4,5,6 by 13%, rank 7 by 27%), Sweden (rank 2 by 47%, rank 3 by 27%, rank 4 by 27%), Denmark (rank 5 by 27%, rank 6 by 47%), Belgium (rank 3,4,5 by 13%), Luxembourg (rank 2 by 33%, rank 7 by 47%) and Austria (rank 3,4,5, by 27%) The degree of consensus in Finland about the Netherlands ranking 1 st is higher than in the Affluent Seven (87% rather than 71%). Like in Finland, there is no consensus about the influence of all other Affluent Seven members

Partners Question 10: Essential Partners on Foreign and Development Policy Finland (3%) is not amongst the EU s most essential partners in foreign and development: Germany (12%), France (10%), the UK (8%), Sweden (7%), Italy (6%), Poland (5%), Spain, Austria and Belgium (4%) The country groups do not find Finland more or less essential than the EU does Sweden finds Finland more essential than the Affluent Seven do (7% rather than 4%) Finland finds Sweden, Germany (17%), the Netherlands (13%), Denmark, France (11%) and the UK (6%) the most essential partners in foreign and development policy Finland finds Czech Rep. (11% rather than 3%), Germany (17% rather than 14%), the Netherlands (13% rather than 6%) and Sweden (17% rather than 8%) more essential than the Affluent Seven does Question 11: Essential Partners on Security and Defense Policy Finland (3%) is not amongst the EU s most essential partners in security and defense policy: Germany (13%), France (11%), the UK (10%), Poland (8%), Italy (6%), the Netherlands and Sweden (4%) The different country groups do not find Finland more or less essential than the EU does Austria (11%) and Sweden (8%) find Finland more essential than the Affluent Seven does Finland finds Sweden (17%), Germany (15%), France (13%), the UK (10%), Denmark and the Netherlands (6%) the most essential partners in security and defense policy It finds Denmark (6% rather than 2%) and Sweden (17% rather than 6%) more essential than the Affluent Seven does & Latvia less (0% rather than 3%) Question 12: Essential Partners on Economic and Social Policy Finland (4%) is amongst the EU s most essential partners in economic and social policy: Germany (13%), France (9%), the Netherlands (7%), Sweden (6%), Italy (5%), Spain, the UK, Poland, Belgium and Austria (4%) The Affluent Seven find Denmark more essential than the EU does (7%) & the Viségrad 4 less (1%) The UK, Poland (0%), Belgium (3%) and the Netherlands (4%) find Finland less essential than their country groups do & Sweden (11%) and Denmark (15%) more Finland finds Sweden (26%), Germany (24%), Denmark (18%), the Netherlands (12%) and Estonia (6%) the most essential partners in economic and social policy It finds Denmark (18% rather than 4%), Estonia (6% rather than 2%), Germany (24% rather than 18%) and Sweden (26% rather than 11%) more essential than the Affluent Seven does & Austria (0% rather than 3%), France (6% rather than 10%) and Spain (0% rather than 3%) less

Question 13: Essential Partners on Fiscal Policy Finland (5%) is amongst the EU s most essential partners in fiscal policy: Germany (17%), France (10%), the Netherlands (7%), the UK, Italy,(5%), Spain, Italy, Sweden, Austria and Belgium (4%) The Affluent Seven find Finland more essential than the EU does (8%) & the Viségrad 4 less (2%) Austria, Denmark (12%) and Sweden (20%) find Finland more essential than the Affluent Seven does Finland finds Germany (32%), Sweden (20%), the Netherlands (16%), the UK and France (8%) the most essential partners in fiscal policy It finds Germany (32% rather than 20%), Sweden (20% rather than 10%) and the Netherlands (16% rather than 9%) more essential than the Affluent Seven does & Austria (0% rather than 4%), Italy (0% rather than 3%) and Spain (0% rather than 3%) less Policies Question 14: Commitment to Deeper Integration Finland (2%) is not considered by the EU to be one of its most committed members: Germany (13%), Belgium (12%), Luxembourg, France (11%), Italy (8%), Spain (6%), Portugal (5%) and the Netherlands (4%) The country groups do not find Finland more or less integration minded than the EU does Sweden (6% rather than 3%) finds Finland more committed to deeper integration than the Affluent Seven does Finland finds France, Belgium (14%), Luxembourg (8%), Spain, Estonia (7%) and the Netherlands (6%) most committed It finds Estonia (7% rather than 3%) and France (14% rather than 11%) more committed to EU integration than the Affluent Seven does & Ireland (1% rather than 4%) and Luxembourg (8% rather than 11%) less It finds itself more committed to deeper integration than the EU does (6%) Question 15: Importance of Coalitions Finland finds coalitions very (67%) important, fairly (27%) important and neither important nor unimportant (7%) It attaches less importance to coalitions than the Affluent Seven do (of which 82% finds coalitions very important, and 17% fairly important)

Question 16: Preferred Actor Level Finland prefers to work with all member states on: Climate policy (90%), Energy policy (90%), Single market (90%), Foreign and security policy (80%), Justice and home affairs (80%), China policy (70%), Ukraine policy (70%), Russia policy (70%), Border policy and coast guard (60%), Immigration and asylum (60%), Development and assistance policy (60%), Syria policy (60%) and Defense structures (50%) Finland prefers to form a coalition on: Governance for the Eurozone (60%) There is a relatively big minority of Finnish respondents that prefers to form a coalition on: Defense structures (40%), Immigration and asylum policy (30%), Syria policy (30%) and Social policy (30%) A relatively big minority that prefers to work on the national level on: Social policy (30%) and Development and assistance policy (10%)