当债权人离开:否决者、选举计算和既得利益是西班牙和葡萄牙政策逆转的决定因素

IF 3.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE South European Society and Politics Pub Date : 2019-04-03 DOI:10.1080/13608746.2019.1642622
Catherine Moury, Daniel Cardoso, Angie Gago
{"title":"当债权人离开:否决者、选举计算和既得利益是西班牙和葡萄牙政策逆转的决定因素","authors":"Catherine Moury, Daniel Cardoso, Angie Gago","doi":"10.1080/13608746.2019.1642622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article aims to identify the resilience of measures adopted during bailout programmes, and the conditions under which decisions-makers reverse them. Focusing on Spain and Portugal (2014–2019), we calculated that almost half (46 per cent) of the most important measures adopted during the programmes were reversed in the five years following the bailouts. We also show that left-wing parties reversed more than right wing and that the bulk of structural reforms remained unchanged. Using crisp-set qualitative-comparative analysis (QCA), we find that business interests, veto players’ preferences and governments’ electoral calculations are determinants of reversals.","PeriodicalId":47304,"journal":{"name":"South European Society and Politics","volume":"9 1","pages":"177 - 204"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When the Lenders Leave Town: Veto Players, Electoral Calculations and Vested Interests as Determinants of Policy Reversals in Spain and Portugal\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Moury, Daniel Cardoso, Angie Gago\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13608746.2019.1642622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article aims to identify the resilience of measures adopted during bailout programmes, and the conditions under which decisions-makers reverse them. Focusing on Spain and Portugal (2014–2019), we calculated that almost half (46 per cent) of the most important measures adopted during the programmes were reversed in the five years following the bailouts. We also show that left-wing parties reversed more than right wing and that the bulk of structural reforms remained unchanged. Using crisp-set qualitative-comparative analysis (QCA), we find that business interests, veto players’ preferences and governments’ electoral calculations are determinants of reversals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47304,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South European Society and Politics\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"177 - 204\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South European Society and Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2019.1642622\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South European Society and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2019.1642622","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: 12

摘要

本文旨在确定救助计划期间采取的措施的弹性,以及决策者逆转这些措施的条件。以西班牙和葡萄牙(2014-2019年)为例,我们计算出,在纾困后的5年里,纾困计划期间采取的最重要措施中,有近一半(46%)被逆转。我们还表明,左翼政党的逆转幅度大于右翼政党,而且大部分结构性改革仍未改变。利用crisp-set定性比较分析(QCA),我们发现商业利益、否决权参与者的偏好和政府的选举计算是逆转的决定因素。
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
When the Lenders Leave Town: Veto Players, Electoral Calculations and Vested Interests as Determinants of Policy Reversals in Spain and Portugal
ABSTRACT This article aims to identify the resilience of measures adopted during bailout programmes, and the conditions under which decisions-makers reverse them. Focusing on Spain and Portugal (2014–2019), we calculated that almost half (46 per cent) of the most important measures adopted during the programmes were reversed in the five years following the bailouts. We also show that left-wing parties reversed more than right wing and that the bulk of structural reforms remained unchanged. Using crisp-set qualitative-comparative analysis (QCA), we find that business interests, veto players’ preferences and governments’ electoral calculations are determinants of reversals.
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
5.80
自引率
21.20%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: A leading point of reference for scholars of Southern Europe, South European Society and Politics promotes both comparative and inter-disciplinary analyses, as well as offering innovative single county and sub-national studies. The journal acts as a forum for social, economic, cultural, contemporary historical and political approaches to research on the region, and is particularly keen to sponsor policy–focused studies in all these disciplines. The journal publishes research articles; South European Atlas with election reports and articles on other subjects of topical interest, and an extensive book reviews section, including both review articles and individual book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Democratic backsliding, conflict, and partisan mobilisation of ethnic groups: local government control and electoral participation in Turkey Intra-party balance of power: cartelisation versus communist organisational tradition in the Cypriot radical left AKEL More flexible, less productive? The impact of employment protection legislation reforms in Italy Shared or Self-rule? Regional Legislative Initiatives in Multi-level Spain, 1979-2021 The Limits of Power Concentration and Expert Knowledge in Emergency Management: Spain’s Government Response during the First Phase of the Covid-19 Pandemic
×
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