Last year, the UK chose to opt back in to the 35 of those including the European Arrest Warrant and Europol. The second aspect related to the position of national elites on the horizontal dimension of citizenship concerns the meanings that national elites assign to European citizenship as a ‘community bond’. The views of national politicians are evenly split among those assigning to the EU the role of promoting a more competitive economy and those who expect better social protection (Table 2.

The levels of trust in the three main institutions of the EU (the Commission, the Council of Ministers, and the Parliament) are significantly positive (Table 2. e. from an evaluation of the benefits of European membership, attitudes of national elites towards Europe appear widely positive. S. copyright protection (see Title 17 of the United States Code) or any other restrictions in the Map Collection materials.The nature of the threats perceived by national elites as more significant suggests a greater preoccupation with the internal problems of the European polity and for its lack of homogeneity than for its external role and its relationship with other international actors.

The first is that citizenship (at the national and presumably also at the supranational level) is a multifaceted phenomenon. There is statistical information about the countries and their regions on either side of the map with 20 attractive vignettes depicting industry native to each area, its landscape, fauna, and flora, as well as architecture and inhabitants of the regions. That’s why a portion of every sale goes directly to supporting organizations helping to protect our land, water and air from human impact. Within this general picture of similarity between the two levels, however, we can see that the naturalistic, religious, and cultural aspects are even less important at the European level, which is probably explained by the more artificial, composite, and less homogeneous nature of the EU. We believe that preserving our environment and natural resources will create a brighter future for all.

Nonscaling patterns can look better for maps with larger subdivisions, like the simple World map or the US states map. Here, however, the proportion of those clearly sharing the idea that unification should be strengthened (on a scale of 0–10, those scoring 7 points or more) is still a majority but less strong (59 per cent) than the number of those who have a positive evaluation of the benefits of the EU and of those who feel attached to it. The distribution of responses to the proposal that ‘unification has already gone too far or should be strengthened’ is similar for economic and political elites, having a three-modal shape: the first peak comprises 15 per cent of respondents who are satisfied with the level of integration already achieved and think that process has neither gone too far nor should be strengthened. However, when we analyse responses from the politicians, they reveal an (apparent) paradox: the two institutions that have a more pronounced supranational character—the Commission and the Parliament—are the least and the most trusted, respectively, while the Council of Minister is in between. It is therefore relevant to ask whether the positive instrumental evaluation of the EU is matched by feelings of attachment to this community; and if so, how this compares to the levels of attachment to other political communities, such as those at the national or regional level.