调查激进右翼的家庭政策议程:来自六个欧洲国家的证据

Giovanni Amerigo Giuliani
{"title":"调查激进右翼的家庭政策议程:来自六个欧洲国家的证据","authors":"Giovanni Amerigo Giuliani","doi":"10.1017/ipo.2022.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The positions of the radical right parties (RRPs) concerning the family have generally been examined through a socio-cultural lens, but very little is known about their distributive preferences. Based on the theoretical insights from the literature on varieties of familialism and social investment, the article investigates the RRPs' family policy agenda in terms of preference and support for familialism and de-familialism. Furthermore, cross-country similarities and differences will be investigated through an explanatory framework that combines the literature on partisan politics with that on historical institutionalism. A content analysis of party manifestos has shown that the RRPs adopt a male-breadwinner policy agenda, mostly intended to please their authoritarian electorate. However, comparative empirical research has highlighted some cross-country differences. These are explained by considering the counter-feedback mechanism triggered by the policy legacies, which provides RRPs with divergent electoral incentives and disincentives to promote their family policy agenda.","PeriodicalId":43368,"journal":{"name":"Italian Political Science Review-Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the radical right's family policy agenda: evidence from six European countries\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Amerigo Giuliani\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ipo.2022.23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The positions of the radical right parties (RRPs) concerning the family have generally been examined through a socio-cultural lens, but very little is known about their distributive preferences. Based on the theoretical insights from the literature on varieties of familialism and social investment, the article investigates the RRPs' family policy agenda in terms of preference and support for familialism and de-familialism. Furthermore, cross-country similarities and differences will be investigated through an explanatory framework that combines the literature on partisan politics with that on historical institutionalism. A content analysis of party manifestos has shown that the RRPs adopt a male-breadwinner policy agenda, mostly intended to please their authoritarian electorate. However, comparative empirical research has highlighted some cross-country differences. These are explained by considering the counter-feedback mechanism triggered by the policy legacies, which provides RRPs with divergent electoral incentives and disincentives to promote their family policy agenda.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Italian Political Science Review-Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Italian Political Science Review-Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2022.23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Italian Political Science Review-Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2022.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

激进右翼政党(rrp)关于家庭的立场通常是通过社会文化的视角来研究的,但对他们的分配偏好知之甚少。本文基于对熟悉主义多样性与社会投资相关文献的理论见解,从对熟悉主义和去熟悉主义的偏好和支持两个方面考察了地区农民的家庭政策议程。此外,跨国家的异同将通过结合党派政治文献和历史制度主义文献的解释框架来研究。对政党宣言的内容分析表明,rrp采用了男性养家糊口的政策议程,主要是为了取悦他们的专制选民。然而,比较实证研究突出了一些跨国差异。这可以通过考虑由政策遗产引发的反反馈机制来解释,该机制为rrp提供了不同的选举激励和抑制措施,以促进其家庭政策议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Investigating the radical right's family policy agenda: evidence from six European countries
Abstract The positions of the radical right parties (RRPs) concerning the family have generally been examined through a socio-cultural lens, but very little is known about their distributive preferences. Based on the theoretical insights from the literature on varieties of familialism and social investment, the article investigates the RRPs' family policy agenda in terms of preference and support for familialism and de-familialism. Furthermore, cross-country similarities and differences will be investigated through an explanatory framework that combines the literature on partisan politics with that on historical institutionalism. A content analysis of party manifestos has shown that the RRPs adopt a male-breadwinner policy agenda, mostly intended to please their authoritarian electorate. However, comparative empirical research has highlighted some cross-country differences. These are explained by considering the counter-feedback mechanism triggered by the policy legacies, which provides RRPs with divergent electoral incentives and disincentives to promote their family policy agenda.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Economic voting goes local: evidence from the Italian regions Did the citizenship income scheme do it? The supposed electoral consequence of a flagship policy IPO volume 53 issue 3 Cover and Front matter IPO volume 53 issue 3 Cover and Back matter Precarious work and challenger parties: how precarity influenced vote choice in the 2018 Italian election
×
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