This Living Review presents an overview of the research on European identity in the context of EU governance by focussing on central debates in the political science literature. It departs from the problems of disagreement between European citizens and their elites as well as the lack of a European demos. Against this background, the article discusses the functions of collective identity including the legitimation function and solution of collective dilemmas. Here, two perspectives pertaining to these functions are depicted: first, the issue of European public space and second, the integrative workings of European citizenship. Next, the article explores the conceptual and methodological problems of the research on European collective identity. In particular, it focuses on the conceptual ambiguity of the collective identity term and problems of operationalization and measurement. Following this, the article discusses the literature on identity technologies of the EU and identifies the shortcomings of identity technologies with regard to EU governance.

Abstract.  This article is a reply to Marcia Grimes's 2006 contribution to the European Journal of Political Research entitled ‘Organizing consent: The role of procedural fairness in political trust and compliance’. The remarks focus on two main points. First, the author discusses the conceptual basis of the study, to argue that trust and legitimacy are quite different concepts that should not be used synonymously. In particular, the author challenges the conceptualization of (subjective) legitimacy in that institutional legitimacy is partly defined as institutional trust. Additionally, the author justifies why (institutional) trust should not be treated as a ‘component’ of (institutional) legitimacy. Second, the author deals with a methodological problem in Grimes’ article. This problem refers to the operationalization of norms of fairness in order to examine the influence of perceived fairness in decision processes on citizens’ beliefs of legitimacy. Summing up the author's conceptual and methodological objections, this article offers a somewhat different interpretation of Grimes’ main findings.

No abstract

‘WITHOUT TRUST WE WILL NOT SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS,’ WARNED Johannes Rau, the former German Federal president in his last ‘Berlin speech’ in May 2004. As one reason for an alarming loss of trust in Germany, creating a serious obstacle to necessary changes, he identified an irresponsible, egoistic and greedy behaviour among parts of German elites. Actually, Johannes Rau did not blame only political elites but also elite members in other sectors such as business, trade unions or mass media. His statement implies that parts of German elites are causing a decline in trust in Germany by losing touch with the people. Likewise, various observers in the public discourse argue that the immoral, cynical and increasingly incompetent behaviour of several elite members especially fosters a crisis of trust in Germany by creating a diffuse climate of distrust, pessimism, uncertainty and Zukunftsangst.