Communicating in Crisis: A Comparison of the EU Institutions’ Argumentative Discourse during Political, Economic, and Health Crises

Over the past decade, the European Union has faced several crises. In these uncertain times, the EU provided quick reactions and decisions that were not always considered effective or democratic. Despite improvements in the EU’s communication strategies, these crises have jeopardized the legitimacy of EU integration and sparked off (nationalist) discourses on EU dis-integration in the public space. Yet, public institutional communication remains a key tool, especially in times of crises, to connect with citizens and strengthen political legitimacy through productive debates, provided it is used properly. Building on a corpus-based analysis of institutional documents, the paper explores the EU’s crisis communication during four major crises: the Greek debt economic and financial crisis and the subsequent Eurozone crisis, the Brexit political-institutional crisis, the political-legal crisis of EU values, and the recent SARS-CoV-2 health crisis. More specifically, this paper provides both a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the arguments that the EU political, economic and legal institutions adduced — when communicating about their strategies and decisions during these crises — with a view to consolidate the EU’s legitimacy and counter threats of dis-integration. The typological and comparative analysis of the various arguments during four different, yet impactful, crises allows a better understanding of the dynamics and mechanisms surrounding the EU’s institutional communication in times of crisis, which is critical to sustainably improve the discursive responses to future crises – no matter their nature.