IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cjrecs/v11y2018i1p73-94..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The victims of neoliberal globalisation and the rise of the populist vote: a comparative analysis of three recent electoral decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Jürgen Essletzbichler
  • Franziska Disslbacher
  • Mathias Moser

Abstract

Recent presidential elections in the US and Austria as well as the referendum on Brexit in the UK delivered victories or near-victories for populist right-wing candidates or agendas. In all three cases, globalisation and European integration were blamed for higher immigration and pressure on public services, deindustrialisation and job losses, and the attack on traditional values by cosmopolitan elites supported by traditional centre parties that have been unable or unwilling to control those processes. While election analysts seek to explain voting behaviour with socio-demographic characteristics of individuals, individual voting preferences also depend on the geographical context in which decisions are made. This article thus examines how long-term, regional structural economic changes, the varying impact of the Great Recession on the rise of and recovery from regional unemployment and current regional economic conditions, such as unemployment and welfare benefit losses, affect regional vote shares. In addition to those economic conditions, we examine the impact of immigration and urban size on populist vote shares. We show that regions with low, but rising immigrant shares, old industrial regions, smaller regions, those whose labour markets were exposed more and recovered less from the Great Recession, and those with high unemployment rates and benefit losses exhibited higher populist vote shares. These results are largely consistent across the three case study countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Jürgen Essletzbichler & Franziska Disslbacher & Mathias Moser, 2018. "The victims of neoliberal globalisation and the rise of the populist vote: a comparative analysis of three recent electoral decisions," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 11(1), pages 73-94.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cjrecs:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:73-94.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cjres/rsx025
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:cjrecs:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:73-94.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cjres .

    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.