IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v102y2018icp304-314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Findings on Key Factors Influencing the UK’s Referendum on Leaving the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Aihua

Abstract

The UK’s EU in/out referendum raised significant debate and speculation of the intention of the electorate and its motivations in voting; much of this debate was informed by simple data analysis examining individual factors, in isolation, and using opinion polling data. This, in the case of the EU referendum where multiple factors influence the decision simultaneously, failed to predict the eventual outcome. On June 23, 2016, Britain’s vote to leave the EU came as a surprise to most observers, with a bigger voter turnout than that of any UK general election in the past decade. In this research, we apply multivariate regression analysis and a Logit Model to real voting data to identify statistically significant factors influencing the EU referendum voting preference simultaneously as well as the odd ratio in favor of Leave. Visualizations of the key findings are also provided with heat maps and graphs.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Aihua, 2018. "New Findings on Key Factors Influencing the UK’s Referendum on Leaving the EU," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 304-314.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:102:y:2018:i:c:p:304-314
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X17302474
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Radcliff, Benjamin, 1992. "The Welfare State, Turnout, and the Economy: A Comparative Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(2), pages 444-454, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter M. White & David M. Lee, 2020. "Geographic Inequalities and Access to Higher Education: Is the Proximity to Higher Education Institution Associated with the Probability of Attendance in England?," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 61(7), pages 825-848, November.
    2. Simon Rudkin & Lucy Barros & Paweł Dłotko & Wanling Qiu, 2024. "An economic topology of the Brexit vote," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(3), pages 601-618, March.
    3. Barry Eichengreen & Rebecca Maria Mari & Gregory Thwaites, 2021. "Will Brexit Age Well? Cohorts, Seasoning and the Age–Leave Gradient: On the Evolution of UK Support for the European Union," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(352), pages 1130-1143, October.
    4. Eichengreen, Barry & Mari, Rebecca & Thwaites, Gregory, 2018. "Will Brexit Age Well? Cohorts, Seasoning and the Age-Leave Gradient, Past, Present and Future," CEPR Discussion Papers 13288, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Maria Symeonaki & George Filandrianos & Giorgos Stamou, 2022. "Visualising key information and communication technologies (ICT) indicators for children and young individuals in Europe," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Johan A Elkink & Sarah Parlane & Thomas Sattler, 2020. "When one side stays home: A joint model of turnout and vote choice," Working Papers 202012, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck, 2019. "Ideology and the rationality of non-voting," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(3), pages 265-286, August.
    2. Nadia Fiorino & Nicola Pontarollo & Roberto Ricciuti, 2016. "Voter Turnout in European Parliament Elections: A Spatial Analysis," CESifo Working Paper Series 5910, CESifo.
    3. Kellermann, Kim Leonie, 2017. "Political participation and party capture in a dualized economy: A game theory approach," CIW Discussion Papers 4/2017, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    4. Neil S. Williams, 2023. "Gender and institutions moderate the relationship between conditional cash transfers and political participation," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(7), pages 1343-1359, December.
    5. Tony Caporale & Marc Poitras, 2014. "Voter turnout in US presidential elections: does Carville’s law explain the time series?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(29), pages 3630-3638, October.
    6. Vjollca Sadiraj & Jan Tuinstra & Frans Winden, 2005. "Interest group size dynamics and policymaking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 271-303, December.
    7. Rodrigo Martins & Francisco Veiga, 2013. "Economic performance and turnout at national and local elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 429-448, December.
    8. Enrico Cantoni & Vincent Pons, 2021. "Do interactions with candidates increase voter support and participation? Experimental evidence from Italy," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 379-402, July.
    9. Adalbert Abraham Ghislain Melingui Bate, 2020. "The effect of education on voter's turnout in african presidential elections," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(2), pages 1607-1622.
    10. David Jesuit, 2003. "The Regional Dynamics of European Electoral Politics," European Union Politics, , vol. 4(2), pages 139-164, June.
    11. Rodrigo Martins & Francisco José Veiga, 2012. "Turnout and the Modeling of Economic Conditions: Evidence from Portuguese Elections," GEMF Working Papers 2012-05, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    12. Daniel T. Haile, 2005. "Wealth Distribution, Lobbying and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2005-21, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Kerwin Kofi Charles & Melvin Stephens Jr., 2013. "Employment, Wages, and Voter Turnout," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 111-143, October.
    14. Schaub, Max, 2021. "Acute Financial Hardship and Voter Turnout: Theory and Evidence from the Sequence of Bank Working Days," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 115(4), pages 1258-1274.
    15. Richard J. Cebula & Gigi M. Alexander, 2017. "Female Labor Force Participation and Voter Turnout: Evidence from the American Presidential Elections," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 8(2).
    16. Cebula, Richard J., 2019. "The Voter Turnout/Relative Unemployment Rate Hypothesis," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 72(3), pages 255-280.
    17. Alan D. Crane & Andrew Koch & Leming Lin, 2024. "Real Effects of Markets on Politics: Evidence from US Presidential Elections," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 73-88, March.
    18. Nadia Fiorino & Nicola Pontarollo & Roberto Ricciuti, 2021. "Spatial links in the analysis of voter turnout in European Parliamentary elections," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 65-78, April.
    19. Lakomaa, Erik & Korpi, Martin, 2014. "Working paper No. 240 Bloc – party Politics and Economic Outcomes. What Are the Effects of Local Parties?," Ratio Working Papers 240, The Ratio Institute.
    20. Özge Kama & Tolga Aksoy & Hüseyin Taştan, 2022. "Economic Adversity and Voter Turnout: Evidence from Turkish Parliamentary Elections," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 799-821, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:102:y:2018:i:c:p:304-314. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.