European identity is not monolithic and varies significantly across the continent, influenced by a complex interplay of historical, cultural, political, and economic factors; so European identity is nuanced, with significant differences in how people across Europe view themselves in relation to the broader continent. This variability underscores the challenge of fostering a cohesive European identity in a region as diverse as Europe.
Percentage of people that feel close or very close to one’s own country, continent and world
Source: Atlas of European Values
The graph represents the percentages of people who feel close or very close to their nation, their continent, and the world. In all countries, the percentage of people who feel close to their country is higher than the other two categories, with the highest values observed in countries like Norway (NO), Slovakia (SK), and Finland (FI), where the percentage approaches or exceeds 90%. This suggests a strong sense of national identity. Generally, people feel less connected to their continent and the world compared to their nation, although there is notable variability between countries in this regard. The sense of belonging to one’s continent (in this case, Europe) is lower than that for one’s country, fluctuating between 40% and 70%. This indicates that while many people feel connected to their continent, this bond is weaker compared to their national identity. Lastly, the sense of belonging to the world shows the lowest values, with percentages varying significantly between countries, but rarely exceeding 50%. This suggests that global identity is less developed. In almost all countries, the sense of belonging to the continent is greater than or equal to that towards the world, although countries like Russia (RU), Belarus (BL), and Armenia (AM) show a slightly higher sense of belonging to the world compared to the continent.
The chart clearly highlights that national identity is the predominant sentiment among people in different countries, while continental and global identities vary widely. The differences between countries likely reflect a combination of factors, including national history, the level of economic and cultural integration with Europe, and the specific historical experiences of each nation. For example, Norway shows a high percentage of people who feel close to the continent despite not being in the EU, suggesting that cultural and historical ties with Europe are strong even outside the political framework of the Union. On the other hand, countries like North Macedonia and Albania, which aspire to European integration, might show a greater identification with Europe as an aspiration rather than a consolidated reality.
The data from the European Values Study on national identity shows the perception of different factors contributing to national identity in various European countries.
Percentage of people that think it is very important or quite important to speak the national language, share national culture, be born in the country and respect institutions and laws
Source: Atlas of European Values
In almost all countries, language and culture are considered essential components of national identity, with very high scores that show an average of 92.46% for language and 89.47% for culture. For language only two countries have a score below 80%: Montenegro with 67.44% and Belarus with 73.06%. As for the percentage of people who think it is very or quite important to share the national culture, only Germany (64.25) and Sweden (72.26) have scores below 80%.
Compliance with political institutions and laws is also generally highly valued throughout Europe (average 92.69% with figures above 80% in all European countries), with high values in countries such as Finland (98.65%), Norway (98.57%) and Germany (98.28%). These data show strong attachment to institutions as a key element of national identity, especially in the Nordic countries.
The place of birth and the importance given to having ancestors from that nation vary greatly. In countries such as Bulgaria (79.39%) and Russia (78.99%), the fact of being born in one’s own country is given a high priority, while in others such as Germany (29.15%) and Sweden (14.75%) this aspect is less relevant. Countries such as Germany and the Netherlands (16.61% and 16.51%) and Sweden (7.12%) give little importance to ancestors as a constituent element of national identity, while countries such as Lithuania (87.72%), Bulgaria (86.76%) and Albania (88.86%) they value it much more.
In Western and Nordic countries, national identity tends to be shaped more by institutions and civic values, with less emphasis on place of birth or ancestry. In contrast, in Eastern European and Balkan countries, national identity appears to be more strongly connected to historical and familial roots.
Regarding European identity, the data collected in the EVS survey highlights regional differences in what is considered a key element of European identity, with Eastern Europe more connected to historical heritage and Western Europe more focused on a civic and inclusive identity.
Percentage of people who think it is very important or quite important to be Christian, share European culture, have European ancestry, or be born in Europe to be considered a European
Source: Atlas of European Values
Nordic and Western European countries: Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Norway show low percentages for traditional identity indicators, such as “Christianity,” “European ancestry,” and “being born in Europe.” Sweden stands out with the lowest values: only 8.24% consider Christianity as part of European identity, and only 20.38% view European ancestry as important.
Eastern European and Balkan countries: We find high values in almost all categories. Bulgaria (83.65%), Slovakia (83%), and Hungary (74.49%) place great importance on being born in Europe as a central element of European identity. The connection between European identity and Christianity is also strong, with Bulgaria at 69.76% and Hungary at 57.48%. Additionally, these two countries also place significant importance on ancestry (Bulgaria 81.33%, Hungary 77.63%). Russia and Belarus maintain strong ties to Christianity and ancestry, although Russia shows less emphasis on European culture (65.19%), reflecting its complex relationship with European identity.
Southern European countries, including Italy, Spain, and Portugal, show a balance between tradition and modernity. For instance, Italy shows 47.26% for Christianity and 71.38% for being born in Europe, suggesting a mix of cultural and civic values. Spain has a strong inclination towards ancestry (72.53%) but less emphasis on religion (29.97%), while Portugal reflects a similar balance, with 43.17% viewing Christianity as part of identity and 64.92% valuing ancestry.
Percentage of people that usually or always vote
Source: Atlas of European Values
National and European identities can be understood through sociological perspectives, including electoral behavior. The graph, based on data from the European Values Study (EVS) from 2017 to 2020, shows voter turnout percentages among the elderly and the young in European and national elections in various European countries. From the analysis of electoral behavior, it emerges that the elderly have a very high turnout rate, both in European and national elections; this trend is evident in almost all countries, with percentages often approaching 100%. Young people’s participation, however, is much more variable than the elderly; in some countries, such as Denmark and Sweden, youth turnout is relatively high, while in others, such as Estonia and the Czech Republic, it is significantly lower. Nevertheless, youth turnout is higher in national elections than in European ones. In summary, while the elderly tend to participate en masse in elections, young people show more variable engagement, with a general tendency to participate more in national elections than European ones.
To study in-depth and become acquainted with our studies on the European Value of Work, please refer to publications based on the EVS data and listed in the EVS Bibliography (the EVS Bibliography is annually updated) of which you can find below an excerpt of the latest:
Akaliyski, Plamen and Welzel, Christian (2020): “Clashing Values: Supranational Identities, Geopolitical Rivalry and Europe’s Growing Cultural Divide”. In: Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 51 (9): 740-762. First published online: September 15, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022120956716.
Bartasevičius, Vainius (2023): “Popular understandings of national identity in Europe: Still a gulf between West and East?”. In: Nations and Nationalism 29 (3): 939-957.
Erhardt, Julian; Wamsler, Steffen and Freitag, Markus (2021): “National identity between democracy and autocracy: a comparative analysis of 24 countries”. In: European Political Science Review 13 (1/2): 59-76. First published online: November 20, 2020, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1755773920000351.
Fabrykant, Marharyta (2019): “Russian-speaking Belarusian Nationalism: An Ethnolinguistic Identity Without a Language?”. In: Europe-Asia Studies 71 (1): 117-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2018.1555796.
Galina S., Klimova (2020): “European Identity between Religiousness and Secularity”. In: RUDN Journal of Political Science 22 (4): 617-633. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2020-22-4-617-633.
Guglielmi, Simona and Piacentini, Arianna (2023): “Religion and National Identity in Central and Eastern European Countries: Persisting and Evolving Links”. In: East European Politics and Societies: 1-31.
May, Antonia C. (2023): “And if they don’t dance, they are no friends of mine: Exploring boundaries of national identity”. In: Nations and Nationalism 29 (2): 579-597.
May, Antonia C. and Czymara, Christian S. (2023): “Careless whisper: Political elite discourses activate national identities for far-right voting preferences”. In: Nations and Nationalism: 1-20.
Praprotnik, Katrin (2020): “Regional Europeans. The relationship between social identities and EU support in Austria”. In: European Regions. Perspectives, Trends and Developments in the 21th Century, edited by Elisabeth Donat, Sarah Meyer and Gabriele Abels, 43-57. Bielefeld: transcript. https://www.transcriptverlag.de/media/pdf/ae/e2/6b/oa9783839450697.pdf.
Pollack, Detlef; Rosta, Gergely and Shmendel, Marta (2023): “Quellen nationaler Identität: Veränderungen im Verhältnis von Nationalbewusstsein, Demokratie und Religion in der Ukraine und in Russland”. In: Leviathan 51 (3): 363-395.
Rusu, Horațiu (2021): “Despre dimensiunea etnică şi dimensiunea civică a identității naționale: ce valorizează românii”. In: Atlasul valorilor sociale. România la 100 de ani, edited by Bogdan Voicu, Horațiu Rusu and Claudiu D. Tufiș, 15-23. ClujNapoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.
Rusu, Horatiu M. (2023): “Frontiers of National Identities in the Black Sea Countries: People’s Views on their Ethnic, Civic, Local, and Regional Ties”. In: Social Values and Identities in the Black Sea Region, edited by Malina Voicu, Kseniya Kizilova and Marian Zulean, 63-88. London: Lexington Books.
Sobral, José and Vala, Jorge (2022): “Portuguese National Identity: Historical Constructions and Contemporary Expressions”. In: The Oxford Handbook of Portuguese Politics, edited by Jorge M. Fernandes, Pedro C. Magalhães and António Costa Pinto, 227-243. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tamás, László and Mónika, Makay (2021): “A nemzeti büszkeség építőkövei. Nemzeti identitás és történelemkép a magyar társadalomban (The building blocks of national pride. National identity and representation of history in Hungarian society)”. In: Szociológiai Szemle 31 (1): 87-115.
Uslaner, Eric M. (2022): “National Identity and Partisan Polarization”. New York: Oxford University Press.
Voicu, Malina and Ramia, Ioana (2021): “European Identity: An Analysis of Measurement Equivalence Across Countries and Mode of Data Collection in the European Values Survey 2017/2018”. In: Social Indicators Research 154 (3): 815-834. First published online: November 11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02541-2.
Wamsler, Steffen (2023): “Dimensions of social trust and national identity: Addressing a multifaceted relationship”. In: Nations and Nationalism 29 (2): 598-617.