## 4 Discussion
This is also a side-effect of the reduced point score of detecting the English language in either the homepage or other pages of a domain. Ireland is generally an outlier in almost all of the above observations. This is arguably the result of the decision to not consider the use of the English language an indicator of countryof origin. Unfortunately, any other form of scoring for English leads to vast numbers of dubious.eu domains being attributed to Ireland solely for language reasons, which creates an even bigger outlier. Finland and Denmark also present a high percentage of low point domain attributions, with Luxembourg and Cyprus following close behind to form a group of countries with >50% low point attributions. In order to gain a first idea of the relation between.eu usage per country and its economic power, a comparison can be made using each country's GDP as a percentage of the total GDP of the European Union. The GDP of each country was based on official EU statistics as provided by Eurostat [36]. Figure 7 presents the percentages of each country's GDP out of the total EU GDP, alongside the percentages of each country's.eu domains out of the total.eu domains investigated. Looking at countries that represent more than 3% of the total EU GDP, it appears that Poland and the Netherlands have much larger representation in the.eu domain than their GDP would suggest. On the other hand, France, Italy, and Spain hold a much smaller presence, while Germany almost strikes a balance. The same irregularity continues in smaller countries, with very few displaying a balance between the two metrics. In order to investigate whether this is indicative of a larger Web footprint for these specific countries, or a preference towards the European Internet identity that is inherent  
Figure 7: Percentage of EU domains vs. percentage of GDP per country. in the.eu usage, a comparison must be made between the national ccTLDs coverage as collected by the ccIndex and GDP. Figure 8 presents the percentage of discovered domains belonging to national ccTLDs out of the sum of all national ccTLDs belonging to EU countries, alongside the GDP percentages. Investigating the countries with GDP over 3% of the total GDP of the EU, we notice that Germany, Italy, Poland, and the Netherlands display a decrease in domain coverage in national domains as opposed to.eu domains. At the same time France, Romania, and Spain display an increase. The above charts in Figures 7 and 8 give us a clear overview of both.eu and national ccTLD domain distribution, but in order to draw conclusions regarding each country's endeavor to make use of the.eu TLD it is important to disconnect the metric from the size of the country's economy. Dividing the percentage of.eu or national domains with the percentage of GDP gives us two ratios, (_eu/gdp_ and _nat/gdp_), that indicate the relation between a country's presence in each ccTLD landscape and its GDP. If the ratio is higher  
Figure 8: Percentage of national domains vs percentage of GDP per country. than 1 it implies a larger footprint in the equivalent ccTLD landscape. Table 8 presents these ratios for each country. Figure 9 presents the _eu/gdp_ ratio over a map of Europe while Figure 10 presents the _nut/gdp_ ratio over a map of Europe. Visible at first glance is the differentiation between Western and Eastern Europe, which is to a large extend a result of the \"clear economic underpinnings of the East-West divide\" [37]. This is an observation more connected to the economic disparity of the east than to its presence on the.eu TLD. Even so, comparing the two maps can shed light on some differences. Northern countries such as Sweden, Finland, and Denmark all present a significant smaller.eu presence compared to their ccTLD presence. This could be a remnant of Nordic hesitance towards the EU as it was documented during the years of their accession [38] and is noticeable even in today's trends [26].