IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/227133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Populists Represent? Theoretical Considerations on How Populist Parties (Might) Enact their Representative Function

Author

Listed:
  • Werner, Annika
  • Giebler, Heiko

Abstract

Are populist parties bad for representative democracy or are they filling a representative gap? While it has been broadly established that the emergence and success of populist parties is not merely a sign of protest, there is still a sparsity of empirical investigations into whether these parties represent hitherto under- or unrepresented social groups or whether they offer a policy profile that was in demand but not present. Using Pitkin’s concepts of symbolic, descriptive and substantive representation, this article opens up the dimensions in which populist parties might challenge or aid democratic representation. It then places the articles in the Special Issue ‘Populist Representation of, by and for the People?’ along these dimensions and highlights their specific contributions.

Suggested Citation

  • Werner, Annika & Giebler, Heiko, 2019. "Do Populists Represent? Theoretical Considerations on How Populist Parties (Might) Enact their Representative Function," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 55(4), pages 379-392.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:227133
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/227133/1/Full-text-article-Werner-et-al-Do-populists-represent.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Royed, Terry J., 1996. "Testing the Mandate Model in Britain and the United States: Evidence from the Reagan and Thatcher Eras," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 45-80, January.
    2. Meguid, Bonnie M., 2005. "Competition Between Unequals: The Role of Mainstream Party Strategy in Niche Party Success," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(3), pages 347-359, August.
    3. Benjamin Moffitt & Simon Tormey, 2014. "Rethinking Populism: Politics, Mediatisation and Political Style," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62(2), pages 381-397, June.
    4. Lawrence J. Grossback & David A.M. Peterson & James A. Stimson, 2005. "Comparing Competing Theories on the Causes of Mandate Perceptions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 406-419, April.
    5. Michael Freeden, 1998. "Is Nationalism a Distinct Ideology?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(4), pages 748-765, September.
    6. Margaret Canovan, 1999. "Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 47(1), pages 2-16, March.
    7. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    8. Matt Golder & Jacek Stramski, 2010. "Ideological Congruence and Electoral Institutions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 90-106, January.
    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. Giebler, Heiko & Werner, Annika, 2020. "Cure, Poison or Placebo? The Consequences of Populist and Radical Party Success for Representative Democracy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 293-306.

    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. Robert Johns & Ann‐Kristin Kölln, 2020. "Moderation and Competence: How a Party's Ideological Position Shapes Its Valence Reputation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 649-663, July.
    2. Lasco, Gideon & Curato, Nicole, 2019. "Medical populism," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 1-8.
    3. Ruben Durante & Paolo Pinotti & Andrea Tesei, 2019. "The Political Legacy of Entertainment TV," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(7), pages 2497-2530, July.
    4. Mikael Elinder & Henrik Jordahl & Panu Poutvaara, 2008. "Selfish and Prospective: Theory and Evidence of Pocketbook Voting," CESifo Working Paper Series 2489, CESifo.
    5. Andrea Junqueira & Ali Kagalwala & Christine S. Lipsmeyer, 2023. "What's your problem? How issue ownership and partisan discourse influence personal concerns," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(1), pages 25-37, January.
    6. James J. Fahey, 2021. "Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1268-1288, July.
    7. Christopher J. Williams & John Ishiyama, 2022. "How voter distributions, issue ownership, and position influence party emphasis," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1084-1100, September.
    8. Jennings, Colin, 2011. "The good, the bad and the populist: A model of political agency with emotional voters," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 611-624.
    9. Bayerlein, Michael, 2021. "Chasing the Other 'Populist Zeitgeist'? Mainstream Parties and the Rise of Right-Wing Populism," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 240403, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Daniel L. Bennett & Christopher Boudreaux & Boris Nikolaev, 2023. "Populist discourse and entrepreneurship: The role of political ideology and institutions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(1), pages 151-181, February.
    11. Catherine E. de Vries, 2007. "Sleeping Giant: Fact or Fairytale?," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 363-385, September.
    12. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck, 2021. "Populism and the rational choice model: The case of the French National Front," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(2), pages 196-228, May.
    13. Catherine E. De Vries & Sara B. Hobolt, 2012. "When dimensions collide: The electoral success of issue entrepreneurs," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 246-268, June.
    14. Petrarca, Constanza Sanhueza & Giebler, Heiko & Weßels, Bernhard, 2022. "Support for insider parties: The role of political trust in a longitudinal-comparative perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(2), pages 329-341.
    15. Chris Erl, 2021. "The People and The Nation: The “Thick” and the “Thin” of Right‐Wing Populism in Canada," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 107-124, January.
    16. Matthieß, Theres, 2020. "Retrospective pledge voting: A comparative study of the electoral consequences of government parties’ pledge fulfilment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(4), pages 774-796.
    17. Jae-Jae Spoon, 2012. "How salient is Europe? An analysis of European election manifestos, 1979–2004," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 558-579, December.
    18. Tim Bale & Christoffer Green‐Pedersen & André Krouwel & Kurt Richard Luther & Nick Sitter, 2010. "If You Can't Beat Them, Join Them? Explaining Social Democratic Responses to the Challenge from the Populist Radical Right in Western Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(3), pages 410-426, June.
    19. Silke Adam & Eva-Maria Antl-Wittenberg & Beatrice Eugster & Melanie Leidecker-Sandmann & Michaela Maier & Franzisca Schmidt, 2017. "Strategies of pro-European parties in the face of a Eurosceptic challenge," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 260-282, June.
    20. Robert Rohrschneider & Stephen Whitefield, 2016. "Responding to growing European Union-skepticism? The stances of political parties toward European integration in Western and Eastern Europe following the financial crisis," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(1), pages 138-161, March.

    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:zbw:espost:227133. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.