From austerity to solidarity? German discourse about common debt during the Eurocrisis and the Covid-19 pandemic
Date
2024
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Tartu Ülikool
Abstract
In the wake of unprecedented challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, the European Union
member states collectively agreed on introducing common debt in 2020. In light of Germany’s
pivotal role for the agreement, this thesis explores Germany’s policy shift from opposing collective
borrowing during the eurocrisis a decade ago to endorsing common debt as a unified
response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Using discursive institutionalism, the study introduces
two variables: the status-quo bias of decision-makers and persuasion in discourse. Focusing
on the two initial periods during both crises, the discourse in Germany is analyzed following a
comparative research design. Critical Interpretive Synthesis and Critical Discourse Analysis are
applied to examine scholarly articles and interviews, speeches, statements, position papers and
newspaper editorials. The empirical analysis reveals that fewer different ideas for a common
European policy response were presented in the German discourse during the Covid-19 pandemic
compared to the eurocrisis. This prevented choice overload, weakening the status-quo
bias of decision-makers and facilitating policy change in form of introducing common debt.
Further, results show that proponents of collective borrowing discursively aligned the policy
outcome of common debt with the ideas of opposed actors during the Covid-19 pandemic, but
not the eurocrisis. Employing this strategy increased the persuasion of proposals for common
debt. The thesis concludes that Germany’s policy shift is a result of a weaker status-quo bias
of decision-makers and increased persuasion by proponents of common debt. The presentation
of novel insights into the mechanisms and factors that determine how ideas and discourse influence
policy-making provides an alternative explanation to account for policy continuity and
change. For policy-makers, the findings come with valuable implications by demonstrating
opportunities to strategically alter the status-quo bias of decision-makers and increase the own
persuasiveness in discourse. Study limitations in comparability, transferability and causality
provide points of departure for further research.