The European Studies programme at Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf is pleased to announce that it will be hosting its annual Master Meeting and Conference where students from the Master of European Studies programme showcase their research, insights, and innovative ideas. This year, the presentations will cover a diverse range of topics, reflecting the rich tapestry of European politics and history.

The event is free and open to the public. We encourage all attendees to participate in the discussions and bring their unique perspectives to the table. For more information or to RSVP, please contact the European Studies department at european-studies(at)uni-duesseldorf.de

Secondary analysis of Eurobarometer data: Is the legitimacy of the EU suffering as a result of its “management” of the energy crisis caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022?

This paper examines the impact of the 2022 energy crisis, triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, on the legitimacy of the European Union (EU) through a secondary analysis of Eurobarometer data. It explores how EU legitimacy, understood in terms of public trust, is shaped and maintained under conditions of economic and geopolitical stress. The analysis focuses primarily on public trust in EU institutions as a key indicator of legitimacy, alongside citizens’ perceptions of the EU’s crisis management. 
The study draws on the concepts of input, throughput, and output legitimacy to provide a comprehensive framework for understanding how public trust evolves in crisis contexts. Particular attention is given to output legitimacy, reflecting the EU’s capacity to deliver effective policy responses, and throughput legitimacy, relating to transparency, fairness, and the quality of decision-making processes.
Methodologically, the research relies on a quantitative secondary analysis of Eurobarometer survey data, complemented by a comparative approach across selected member states, namely Germany, Poland, Italy, and Spain. This design allows for the examination of cross-national variation in trust levels, taking into account differences in energy dependence, economic exposure, and political framing. 
The findings suggest that, despite heightened public concern over energy prices, trust in the EU did not experience a uniform decline. Instead, the results highlight the importance of effective crisis management, clear communication, and perceived fairness in sustaining legitimacy. This study contributes to ongoing debates on EU crisis governance by demonstrating that legitimacy can remain resilient even under conditions of significant economic pressure. 

Comparative case studies: What explains variation in democratic backsliding in the member states of the EU?

This research examines variation in democratic backsliding across European Union member states by comparing Hungary and Romania. While both countries share similar structural conditions— including post-communist legacies, exposure to EU rule-of-law pressures, and the rise of populist leadership—they have experienced different degrees and trajectories of democratic erosion. Hungary has undergone rapid and sustained backsliding, whereas Romania has shown slower, more contested, and partially reversible decline. 
The study focuses on judicial reforms as the primary arena through which democratic backsliding unfolds, as these reforms are central to executive attempts to weaken institutional constraints. The research adopts a Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) and applies qualitative process tracing to key reform episodes in both countries between 2011 and 2024. 
The analysis is guided by a theoretical framework that combines leadership strategies and structural conditions. It argues that while populist executives attempt to concentrate power through processes of executive aggrandizement, the extent of democratic backsliding depends on two key factors: the strength of the party system and the capacity of civil society to mobilize resistance. The findings suggest that strong party dominance and weak societal resistance facilitate deeper democratic erosion, as seen in Hungary, whereas fragmented political competition and active civil society can constrain and partially reverse such processes, as in Romania. The study also finds that EU pressure plays a secondary and conditional role, shaping but not determining outcomes.

Secondary Analysis: Political Group Formation in the European Parliament after 2024 elections

The European Parliament (EP) holds a unique role within the EU's institutional structure. It serves as the main platform for transnational democratic representation. These groups bring together Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from 27 member states, united by shared ideological principles rather than geography or nationality. With 720 seats distributed across 27 member states, the composition and coalition-building within these groups are crucial for shaping the Union’s legislative agenda and strategic direction. To understand this framework, it is necessary to analyze the ideological motivations behind group affiliations. These connections link national policy strategies to supranational representation. Whether a national party is included in a specific group directly impacts that member state's ability to influence the wider European project.
This study addresses the central research question: In what ways have the establishment of political groups inside the European Parliament following the 2024 elections mirrored the growing gap between pro-EU and anti-EU ideology across European integration, populism, and parties EU position stance? It examines how these ideological distinctions appear across three main areas: party competition, the people versus elites’ dynamic, and parties EU position on European integration. The analysis explores how the shifting political landscape influences the internal dynamics of the Parliament, with special attention to the rise of far-right populism within its political groups and the subsequent implications for legislative decisions affecting the various topics in the EP, such as the environment, gender, and the green deal.

Process tracing: The Making of the Multiannual Financial Framework MFF 2021- 27 and the EU Recovery Plan

This paper examines the negotiation and adoption of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021–2027 and the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) recovery fund in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. It focuses on how interactions between key member states and European Union institutions shaped the final agreement, particularly regarding grants, loans, and common borrowing. 
Using a qualitative case study and a process-tracing approach, the paper reconstructs the sequence of negotiations during the final phase leading to the July 2020 European Council agreement. The analysis draws primarily on official EU documents and political statements, complemented by insights from pan-European media reports, to identify actors’ positions, bargaining interactions, and key turning points in the negotiation process. 
The paper aims to show how divergent preferences—especially between fiscal solidarity and fiscal responsibility—were reconciled through intergovernmental bargaining, coalition dynamics, and incremental concessions. It argues that while crisis conditions increased urgency and expanded the range of policy options, the final agreement ultimately emerged from structured bargaining among member states, resulting in a negotiated compromise combining grants, loans, and common borrowing.

Discourse analysis (framing): Same but different – Issue agendas of right-wing populist parties in the EP 2024 election campaigns

This study examines how right-wing populist parties shaped their issue agendas during the 2024 European Parliament election campaigns, focusing on how they presented key political topics to voters. It looks at campaign materials, party manifestos, and public statements to understand how issues such as immigration, national sovereignty, economic protectionism, and criticism of EU institutions are framed across different countries. 
The analysis highlights both shared patterns and national differences in how these parties communicate their priorities and adapt their messages. While similar themes appear across cases, the way they are emphasized varies depending on the political context. Overall, the study shows how right-wing populist parties contribute to shaping political debates in the EU and influence how major issues are understood during election campaigns.

Discourse analysis: Who defends democratic backsliding in European Parliament debates

This study explores how members of the European Parliament talk about the decline of democratic standards in Hungary and Poland, and especially how some defend these governments despite widespread concerns. 
By analysing speeches from several parliamentary debates, the researchers found that defenders usually justify controversial actions by claiming they protect national independence and reflect the will of their voters, while critics argue that these actions violate shared European values and legal commitments. The findings show that the European Parliament is deeply divided: some groups strongly oppose democratic backsliding, others actively defend it, and a few remain caught in between. Overall, the study reveals that the struggle over democracy in the EU is not only legal or political, it is also a battle over the language and narratives used to explain what democracy means and who has the right to protect it.