The von der Leyen Effect: Does Visibility Lead to Accountability?

In an eupinions poll (supported by the Bertelsmann Foundation and IEP@BU) ahead of June’s European election, most voters – three in four – were able to identify Ursula von der Leyen as head of the EU executive, showing decisively how the Commission president has managed to cut through national media filters to become far more recognisable than her predecessors. 

Yet, as the German conservative seeks a second five-year term, few Europeans say they know enough about her policies to take a view on them, undermining claims of a popular mandate. 

That, say the authors of “The von der Leyen Effect: Does visibility lead to accountability?”, eupinions’ latest report on public opinion across the bloc, underscores the need for reforms that strengthen the link between voting and executive power to make EU leaders fully accountable to the electorate – and so help them stand up to powerful lobbies, such as opponents of the EU Green Deal.

Surveying more than 12,000 EU citizens in early December, the eupinions poll found that 75% responded correctly that von der Leyen was the president of the European Commission. Public attention to EU responses to two major crises since she took office in 2019 – the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine – seems to have played a role in raising her public recognition score far beyond those of her predecessor Jean-Claude Juncker and other holders of the office. 

At the same time, however, fewer than one in three voters felt able to pass judgment on von der Leyen’s actual performance, due to a lack of information on what she had achieved. Among the minority who did offer a view, her overall approval rating was somewhat favourable, at 6 out of 10, with Belgians the most favourable and her fellow Germans the most critical.

Recent efforts to link the appointment of the Commission president to elections to the European Parliament have focused on the Spitzenkandidat, or lead candidate, system, whereby pan-EU party groups represented in the legislature nominate ahead of the election the person they would have run the Commission should they secure a majority. 

However, national leaders in the European Council have refused to be bound by this practice and have continued to put forward their own nominee for approval by the legislature – as was the case when von der Leyen herself was appointed in 2019 in preference to her centre-right group’s advertised lead candidate. This year, von der Leyen has been chosen as the European People’s Party candidate for Commission president, yet the EPP’s performance in winning seats will be no sure guide to whether or not she retains her job. The Council alone can nominate the Commission president, who must then win the approval of Parliament.

Regardless of the name recognition of Von der Leyen, the link between the executive office and a clear policy mandate remains weak. This failure to establish an electoral bond with voters makes EU leaders vulnerable – witness how von der Leyen could not easily reject farmers’ demands to water down environmental legislation by showing that she had broader public support.

 Possible approaches include a Commission president directly installed by a vote among MEPs or directly elected by citizens at the same time as they vote for Parliament – either way, would be an improvement on behind-the-scenes deals among national leaders.

IEP@BU does not express opinions of its own. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

If you want to stay up-to-date with the initiative of the Institute for European Policymaking@Bocconi University, subscribe to our monthly NEWSLETTER here.