Learning the Brexit Lesson? Shifting Support for Direct Democracy in Germany in the Aftermath of the Brexit Referendum

IF 4.6 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE British Journal of Political Science Pub Date : 2022-10-03 DOI:10.1017/S0007123422000382
Nils D. Steiner, Claudia Landwehr
{"title":"Learning the Brexit Lesson? Shifting Support for Direct Democracy in Germany in the Aftermath of the Brexit Referendum","authors":"Nils D. Steiner, Claudia Landwehr","doi":"10.1017/S0007123422000382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The June 2016 Brexit referendum sent international shock waves, possibly causing adjustments in public opinion not only in the UK, but also abroad. We suggest that these adjustments went beyond substantive attitudes on European integration and included procedural preferences towards direct democracy. Drawing on the insight that support for direct democracy can be instrumentally motivated, we argue that the outcome of the Brexit referendum led (politically informed) individuals to update their support for referendums based on their views towards European integration. Using panel data from Germany, we find that those in favour of European integration, especially those with high political involvement, turned more sceptical of the introduction of referendums in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum. Our study contributes to the understanding of preferences for direct democracy and documents a remarkable case of how – seemingly basic – procedural preferences can, in today's internationalized information environment, be shaped by high-profile events abroad.","PeriodicalId":48301,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Political Science","volume":"53 1","pages":"757 - 765"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123422000382","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The June 2016 Brexit referendum sent international shock waves, possibly causing adjustments in public opinion not only in the UK, but also abroad. We suggest that these adjustments went beyond substantive attitudes on European integration and included procedural preferences towards direct democracy. Drawing on the insight that support for direct democracy can be instrumentally motivated, we argue that the outcome of the Brexit referendum led (politically informed) individuals to update their support for referendums based on their views towards European integration. Using panel data from Germany, we find that those in favour of European integration, especially those with high political involvement, turned more sceptical of the introduction of referendums in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum. Our study contributes to the understanding of preferences for direct democracy and documents a remarkable case of how – seemingly basic – procedural preferences can, in today's internationalized information environment, be shaped by high-profile events abroad.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国脱欧的教训?英国脱欧公投后德国对直接民主支持的转变
2016年6月的英国脱欧公投在国际上掀起了冲击波,不仅在英国国内,也可能引起国外舆论的调整。我们认为,这些调整超出了对欧洲一体化的实质性态度,还包括对直接民主的程序性偏好。基于对直接民主的支持可以被工具性地激励这一见解,我们认为,英国脱欧公投的结果导致(政治知情的)个人根据他们对欧洲一体化的看法更新了对公投的支持。利用来自德国的小组数据,我们发现,那些支持欧洲一体化的人,尤其是那些高度参与政治的人,在英国脱欧公投后变得更加怀疑引入公投。我们的研究有助于理解对直接民主的偏好,并记录了一个引人注目的案例,即在当今国际化的信息环境中,看似基本的程序性偏好是如何被海外高调事件塑造的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Political Science is a broadly based journal aiming to cover developments across a wide range of countries and specialisms. Contributions are drawn from all fields of political science (including political theory, political behaviour, public policy and international relations), and articles from scholars in related disciplines (sociology, social psychology, economics and philosophy) appear frequently. With a reputation established over nearly 40 years of publication, the British Journal of Political Science is widely recognised as one of the premier journals in its field.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the Minority Candidate Penalty with a Regression Discontinuity Approach JPS volume 54 issue 1 Cover and Back matter Granting Immigrants the Right to Vote in National Elections: Empirical Evidence from Swedish Administrative Data Insecurity and Support for Female Leadership in Conflict States: Evidence from Afghanistan A New Dilemma of Social Democracy? The British Labour Party, the White Working Class and Ethnic Minority Representation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1