re of individual lead candidates , particularly those outside their respective home countries . One study showed that awareness was highest in Luxembourg , France and Germany , at 74.8 %, 63.3 %, and 60 %, respectively .
By contrast , awareness was considerably lower in northern and eastern European countries , averaging 35.2 %, with the United Kingdom exhibiting the lowest level of knowledge at 13.9 %. Not surprisingly , the study revealed that familiarity with specific lead candidates was highest in the candidates ’ home countries . Approximately 55 % of voters in Luxembourg and 25 % in Germany and Belgium could name one or more lead candidates . However , in other Member States , the average was only 8.2 %, and , in the UK , only 1.1 % of voters could recognise a lead candidate 2 . While recognition of lead candidates increased the likelihood of voters turning out to European elections , at least for the most visible candidates ( Juncker , Schulz and Verhofstadt ), those effects were minor because only a minority of EU voters were able to identify the political party to which the candidates belonged .
All in all , post-electoral research reaches sober conclusions regarding the overall impact of the lead candidate process . Scholars conclude that the role of the lead candidates was minimal in most countries and , therefore , had a minor impact on voter participation and voter choices 3 . The lead candidate process neither defined the EU ’ s policy agenda nor boosted public engagement . Overall , the
2 . Based on a post-election survey by the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists ( now the European Conservatives and Reformists Party ) in 15 Member States , where voters and non-voters were asked directly after the elections about the degree of awareness of the political parties and candidates at the European level .
3 . B . Hobolt , A vote for the President ? The role of Spitzenkandidaten in the 2014 European Parliament elections . Journal of European Public Policy , 21 ( 10 ), 2014 , p . 1528 .
137