The role of Interests and ideology in the German Response to the Eurozone crisis

This research will explore the role played by Germany in the formation of responses to the sovereign debt crisis. In particular, it will examine the role played by interests (both macro-economic and sectoral) and ideas (in the form of ideological influence) in the formation of the German response. At present, much of the literature has treated Germany as a unitary actor, oversimplifying the German response and offering little information about German preference formation. An example of this oversimplification can be seen in the publication by David Art (Art, 2015, pp. 185). Art (2015) treats Germany as a unitary actor, entirely guided by the principle of ordoliberalism. This type of approach cannot account for the complexities of preference formation in a highly globalised economic environment.
Research questions and methods; 1Who were the foremost actors in formulating a response to the Sovereign Debt Crisis? 2. Which sectoral/macroeconomic interests were most influential in the formulating the German response? 3. What narrative did the German government follow in its response to the Sovereign Debt Crisis? 4. What role did ideas/ideology have in the formation of the German response? 4.a In particular, can the principles of ordoliberalism account for the German resistance to mutualised-risk and the insistence on radical austerity programs in problem states.
In order to answer RQ 1-2-4, the research will adopt process tracing (PT) as its key method. PT was chosen because this research will be establishing patterns in policy positions and PT is the most effective analytical tool for doing so. Specifically, PT will assist in establishing whether and if so how recurring empirical regularities in exist in the policy proposal and positions of the German government. Government positions will be identified by; press-releases, policy-papers and by using the consilium data base to access voting records and amendment statements in the Council of Ministers. Using a spatial analysis of German policy positions and outcomes (Collier, 2011, pp. 823-830). PT will enable the research to identify recurrent patterns between German interests and German ideology in the formation of the crisis response. The key source that will be used for PT will be public consilium records on amendment statements made in the Council of ministers.
Critical discourse analysis will also be utilised, it will be useful in approaching RQ 3-4. The operationalisation of CDA could, for example, see the examination of the IMFC Statement by Schäuble. This statement was given on the behalf of Germany, and included statements such as "due to high debt, both public and private, and the low interest rates the traditional policy room to react to adverse shocks with standard policy measures is small". Using CDA, it could, for example, be concluded from this statement that an ordoliberal influence (ordoliberalism staunchly rejects holding high sovereign debt) was present in the statement given by Schäuble. This would establish the beginning under Crespy's (2016) framework. The research would then go on to explore the opposition and defence of this statement to ascertain the middle and finally it would seek to establish if such comments were present in any of the final measures taken to offset the Eurozone crisis.
September 2017-2018. This period will be spent refining my research skills and ensuring that I have compiled an extensive list of case studies. I will also be utilising this time to develop my German language skills, as this is necessary to undertake the qualitative aspect of the research. September 2018-2019. I will use this time to engage with the research, I will be conducting the process tracing and CDA analysis of the documents during this time frame. September 2019-2020. The final year of the PHD will be spent compiling my finds and drafting the thesis. I will also spend this time preparing to defend the thesis.