This article introduces and demonstrate the use of a ‘legislative polarisation index’. This extends a current measure of party system polarisation, as developed by Dalton (2008), and makes it possible to include legislative behaviour in the form of roll call votes into the assessment of polarisation. The article selects Denmark and Portugal to illustrate how the index works. The cases show that increased fragmentation and increased polarisation of the party system may become more moderate when parties on the political extremes become included in the legislative process.
{"title":"The Polarization of Legislative Party Votes: Comparative Illustrations from Denmark and Portugal","authors":"F. Christiansen","doi":"10.1093/pa/gsab029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsab029","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article introduces and demonstrate the use of a ‘legislative polarisation index’. This extends a current measure of party system polarisation, as developed by Dalton (2008), and makes it possible to include legislative behaviour in the form of roll call votes into the assessment of polarisation. The article selects Denmark and Portugal to illustrate how the index works. The cases show that increased fragmentation and increased polarisation of the party system may become more moderate when parties on the political extremes become included in the legislative process.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47532398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Australian House of Representatives contains far fewer women than men. But is this because parties of left and right discriminate against women or because voters do? Using a new dataset comprising 7271 House candidates from 2001 to 2019, firstly, we find that the percentage of women candidates is increasing, but is consistently higher for parties of the left than the right. Secondly, women tend to be selected more by parties of both left and right in unsafe seats. Thirdly, all else being equal, voters reward women running for Labor with over 1400 votes more, are neutral towards those of the Liberals and Greens, but tend to penalise women standing for the Nationals. We conclude that, overall, it is parties, not voters, driving under-representation of women in Australia’s lower house.
{"title":"Australian Parties, Not Voters, Drive Under-Representation of Women","authors":"Ferran Martínez i Coma, D. McDonnell","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB042","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Australian House of Representatives contains far fewer women than men. But is this because parties of left and right discriminate against women or because voters do? Using a new dataset comprising 7271 House candidates from 2001 to 2019, firstly, we find that the percentage of women candidates is increasing, but is consistently higher for parties of the left than the right. Secondly, women tend to be selected more by parties of both left and right in unsafe seats. Thirdly, all else being equal, voters reward women running for Labor with over 1400 votes more, are neutral towards those of the Liberals and Greens, but tend to penalise women standing for the Nationals. We conclude that, overall, it is parties, not voters, driving under-representation of women in Australia’s lower house.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44962028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article utilises the idea of procedural justice (‘fair processes’) as a tool for analysing the ways in which Parliament engages with the public. It concludes that the engagement work of individual services in Parliament often reflects such ideas, and suggests that procedural justice could have value in bringing new insights to the work of Parliament in this area.
{"title":"Procedural Justice: New Approaches to Parliament’s Engagement with the Public?","authors":"C. Bochel","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB039","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article utilises the idea of procedural justice (‘fair processes’) as a tool for analysing the ways in which Parliament engages with the public. It concludes that the engagement work of individual services in Parliament often reflects such ideas, and suggests that procedural justice could have value in bringing new insights to the work of Parliament in this area.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45376872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alongside the growth of online campaigning has been an increased anxiety around its effects on democratic institutions and processes. Many have suggested that in a (new) media environment that privileges choice, citizens will increasingly segment themselves into echo chambers, tuning out dissenting voices. But the debate on the existence of echo chambers is mixed, and the extent to which political parties campaign to easily persuadable (and pre-disposed) electorates is unclear. In this article, we present a case study of the Facebook campaign activity of the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats at the UK’s parliamentary general election in 2019. Utilising an analysis of the Facebook Ad Archive’s Graph Application Programming Interface (API), we find that political parties do not consistently campaign to their easily persuadable electorates—often chasing votes as much as they mobilise supporters. The evidence that parties campaign to specific echo chambers online is therefore, at best, mixed.
{"title":"Mobilizing or Chasing Voters on Facebook? Analysing Echo-Chamber Effects at the UK Parliamentary General Election 2019","authors":"S. Power, Ben Mason","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB043","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Alongside the growth of online campaigning has been an increased anxiety around its effects on democratic institutions and processes. Many have suggested that in a (new) media environment that privileges choice, citizens will increasingly segment themselves into echo chambers, tuning out dissenting voices. But the debate on the existence of echo chambers is mixed, and the extent to which political parties campaign to easily persuadable (and pre-disposed) electorates is unclear. In this article, we present a case study of the Facebook campaign activity of the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats at the UK’s parliamentary general election in 2019. Utilising an analysis of the Facebook Ad Archive’s Graph Application Programming Interface (API), we find that political parties do not consistently campaign to their easily persuadable electorates—often chasing votes as much as they mobilise supporters. The evidence that parties campaign to specific echo chambers online is therefore, at best, mixed.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45775904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
David Dumouchel, Catherine Ouellet, Thierry Giasson
This article contributes to the emerging literature on wedge issues and on electoral strategies in multiparty electoral systems by studying the implementation and effectiveness of a concerted electoral communication strategy deployed by the Conservative party of Canada around the elimination of the gun registry, in the late 2000s. First, using a quantitative content analysis of the Parliamentary debates from 2006 to 2011, it reveals how the Conservatives exploited the issue in order to create divisions amongst opposing opposition MPs and amongst targeted segments of partisan voters of other national parties. Secondly, using georeferenced pool data from Vote Compass, it finds empirical evidence that the Conservatives’ efforts won them new support in the 2011 federal elections, especially amongst cross-pressured voters and within the ridings that were targeted during the debates. In doing so, the article provides a rare empirical example of wedge politics carried in a multiparty system.
{"title":"Guns for Votes: Wedge Politics in the Canadian Multiparty System","authors":"David Dumouchel, Catherine Ouellet, Thierry Giasson","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article contributes to the emerging literature on wedge issues and on electoral strategies in multiparty electoral systems by studying the implementation and effectiveness of a concerted electoral communication strategy deployed by the Conservative party of Canada around the elimination of the gun registry, in the late 2000s. First, using a quantitative content analysis of the Parliamentary debates from 2006 to 2011, it reveals how the Conservatives exploited the issue in order to create divisions amongst opposing opposition MPs and amongst targeted segments of partisan voters of other national parties. Secondly, using georeferenced pool data from Vote Compass, it finds empirical evidence that the Conservatives’ efforts won them new support in the 2011 federal elections, especially amongst cross-pressured voters and within the ridings that were targeted during the debates. In doing so, the article provides a rare empirical example of wedge politics carried in a multiparty system.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42970418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Representative Democracy in Danger? The Impact of Populist Parties in Government on the Powers and Practices of National Parliaments","authors":"Aleksandra Maatsch, E. Miklin","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41670685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
With votes at 16 implemented for local and devolved assembly elections in Scotland and Wales, the debate on the issue continues amongst politicians in England and Northern Ireland. Testing arguments that are often made in that debate, we analyse two survey experiments and show that framing on extending rights prompts higher support, whilst framing on policy change depresses support. These effects hold when priming on consistency of legal ages and are particularly strong amongst the very right-wing. A majority of the public remains opposed to votes at 16, but our results indicate the malleability of public opinion on the issue.
{"title":"Public Support for Votes at 16 in the UK: The Effects of Framing on Rights and Policy Change","authors":"Joe Greenwood-Hau, R. S. Gutting","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB018","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 With votes at 16 implemented for local and devolved assembly elections in Scotland and Wales, the debate on the issue continues amongst politicians in England and Northern Ireland. Testing arguments that are often made in that debate, we analyse two survey experiments and show that framing on extending rights prompts higher support, whilst framing on policy change depresses support. These effects hold when priming on consistency of legal ages and are particularly strong amongst the very right-wing. A majority of the public remains opposed to votes at 16, but our results indicate the malleability of public opinion on the issue.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49219235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Within the UK, Scotland offers a unique case study of ‘Votes-at-16’ in practice. Research provided evidence on the immediate effects of voting age reform on young people’s engagement with politics, but little is known about how young people experienced being allowed to vote from the age of 16 years. This article analyses qualitative evidence about young people’s experiences with the right to vote at 16 since the voting age reform in Scotland. Drawing on data from interviews with young people, we find that ‘Votes-at-16’ brought about a mix of experiences. In combination with the experience of the 2014 Scottish independence referendum it marked a uniquely mobilising life event that boosted confidence in youth voice and led to a perceived increase in political efficacy. It also raised frustrations with young people, however, about their lack of voting rights in other elections and about a perceived gap between expectations and reality regarding the role of schools. By examining young people’s experiences with ‘Votes-at-16’ in Scotland, this article contributes to debates about the implications of voting age reform in the Scotland and beyond.
{"title":"How Young People in Scotland Experience the Right to Vote at 16: Evidence on ‘Votes-at-16’ in Scotland from Qualitative Work with Young People","authors":"C. Huebner","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Within the UK, Scotland offers a unique case study of ‘Votes-at-16’ in practice. Research provided evidence on the immediate effects of voting age reform on young people’s engagement with politics, but little is known about how young people experienced being allowed to vote from the age of 16 years. This article analyses qualitative evidence about young people’s experiences with the right to vote at 16 since the voting age reform in Scotland. Drawing on data from interviews with young people, we find that ‘Votes-at-16’ brought about a mix of experiences. In combination with the experience of the 2014 Scottish independence referendum it marked a uniquely mobilising life event that boosted confidence in youth voice and led to a perceived increase in political efficacy. It also raised frustrations with young people, however, about their lack of voting rights in other elections and about a perceived gap between expectations and reality regarding the role of schools. By examining young people’s experiences with ‘Votes-at-16’ in Scotland, this article contributes to debates about the implications of voting age reform in the Scotland and beyond.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44734889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research into the possible consequences of lowering the voting age to 16 used to be rather speculative in nature, as there were few countries that had implemented earlier enfranchisement. This has changed over the past decade. We now have a range of countries in different locations, mostly in Europe and South America, where 16- and 17-year-olds can vote in some or all elections. In many of those places empirical research has given us insights into the experiences of young people and the impact of those changes on political discussions. However, so far these studies have largely been conducted individually in each country, which makes comparisons difficult. This article summarises the key insights from empirical research across countries with lower voting ages. It identifies common patterns, but also highlights differences. Overall, the impact appears to not be negative and often positive in terms of political engagement and civic attitudes. However, the comprehensiveness of effects varies. The article offers some possible frameworks to understand differences, in particular by reflecting on the processes that led to voting franchise changes, but also indicates where gaps in knowledge remain, and what sort of research would be required to produce systematically comparable results.
{"title":"Lowering the Voting Age to 16 in Practice: Processes and Outcomes Compared","authors":"J. Eichhorn, Johannes Bergh","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB019","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Research into the possible consequences of lowering the voting age to 16 used to be rather speculative in nature, as there were few countries that had implemented earlier enfranchisement. This has changed over the past decade. We now have a range of countries in different locations, mostly in Europe and South America, where 16- and 17-year-olds can vote in some or all elections. In many of those places empirical research has given us insights into the experiences of young people and the impact of those changes on political discussions. However, so far these studies have largely been conducted individually in each country, which makes comparisons difficult. This article summarises the key insights from empirical research across countries with lower voting ages. It identifies common patterns, but also highlights differences. Overall, the impact appears to not be negative and often positive in terms of political engagement and civic attitudes. However, the comprehensiveness of effects varies. The article offers some possible frameworks to understand differences, in particular by reflecting on the processes that led to voting franchise changes, but also indicates where gaps in knowledge remain, and what sort of research would be required to produce systematically comparable results.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45254952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study is concerned with the substantive representation of non-human species in parliamentary business. It applies Leston-Bandeira’s legislative functions perspective (LFP) to a data set of 2500 public petitions on animal welfare, submitted over three terms of the UK parliament. The wider significance of this work lies in: (i) underlining the utility of the LFP to petitions analysis; (ii) showing that, while few directly secure policy change, e-petitions perform valuable legislative functions including campaigning, scrutiny and policy-influencing roles, foremost of which is linkage and fostering citizen engagement in parliamentary business. And (iii) Showing how, over the past decade, public petitions have significantly contributed to the increasing salience of animal welfare in UK politics.
{"title":"Exploring the Substantive Representation of Non-Humans in UK Parliamentary Business: A Legislative Functions Perspective of Animal Welfare Petitions, 2010–2019","authors":"Paul Chaney, Ian Rees Jones, Ralph Fevre","doi":"10.1093/pa/gsab036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsab036","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This study is concerned with the substantive representation of non-human species in parliamentary business. It applies Leston-Bandeira’s legislative functions perspective (LFP) to a data set of 2500 public petitions on animal welfare, submitted over three terms of the UK parliament. The wider significance of this work lies in: (i) underlining the utility of the LFP to petitions analysis; (ii) showing that, while few directly secure policy change, e-petitions perform valuable legislative functions including campaigning, scrutiny and policy-influencing roles, foremost of which is linkage and fostering citizen engagement in parliamentary business. And (iii) Showing how, over the past decade, public petitions have significantly contributed to the increasing salience of animal welfare in UK politics.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41710443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：