IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eiq/eileqs/160.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Populism Amidst Prosperity: Dimensionality, party competition and voter preference in the era of populism: The case of England, 2010-2017

Author

Listed:
  • Do Won Kim

Abstract

This study examines how the UK political space, party competition and voting behaviour have changed with the recent rise of populism. First, this paper identifies the changes in UK dimensionality by conducting factor analyses on British Election Study data. Then, it maps parties and their supporters on the identified space to explore the changes in party competition and voter-party congruence. Finally, this study runs an OLS regression to analyse to what extent voter-party congruence influences voter’s party preference. This study finds that UK political space has become multidimensional as issues related to populism have become salient enough to form an independent dimension. After Brexit, however, the main contents of this new dimension have changed from EU-related immigration issues to Brexit negotiation. Meanwhile, party competition and voter preferences have revolved around and placed more emphasis on the salient dimension.

Suggested Citation

  • Do Won Kim, 2020. "Populism Amidst Prosperity: Dimensionality, party competition and voter preference in the era of populism: The case of England, 2010-2017," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 160, European Institute, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:eiq:eileqs:160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.lse.ac.uk/european-institute/Assets/Documents/LEQS-Discussion-Papers/LEQSPaper160.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Endersby, James W & Galatas, Steven E, 1998. "British Parties and Spatial Competition: Dimensions of Party Evaluation in the 1992 Election," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 363-382, December.
    2. Laméris, Maite D. & Jong-A-Pin, Richard & Garretsen, Harry, 2018. "On the measurement of voter ideology," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 417-432.
    3. Abou-Chadi, Tarik, 2016. "Niche Party Success and Mainstream Party Policy Shifts – How Green and Radical Right Parties Differ in Their Impact," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 417-436, April.
    4. Kedar, Orit, 2005. "When Moderate Voters Prefer Extreme Parties: Policy Balancingin Parliamentary Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(2), pages 185-199, May.
    5. Thomas Quinn, 2013. "From Two-Partism to Alternating Predominance: The Changing UK Party System, 1950–2010," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(2), pages 378-400, June.
    6. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    7. Ryan Bakker & Seth Jolly & Jonathan Polk, 2018. "Multidimensional incongruence and vote switching in Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 267-296, July.
    8. 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.
    9. Stoetzer, Lukas F. & Zittlau, Steffen, 2015. "Multidimensional Spatial Voting with Non-separable Preferences," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 415-428, July.
    10. Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Spatial Models of Party Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(2), pages 368-377, June.
    11. Cho, Sungdai & Endersby, James W, 2003. "Issues, the Spatial Theory of Voting, and British General Elections: A Comparison of Proximity and Directional Models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 114(3-4), pages 275-293, March.
    12. Tomz, Michael & Van Houweling, Robert P., 2008. "Candidate Positioning and Voter Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(3), pages 303-318, August.
    13. Sarah L. de Lange, 2012. "New Alliances: Why Mainstream Parties Govern with Radical Right-Wing Populist Parties," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 60(4), pages 899-918, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael K Miller, 2011. "Seizing the mantle of change: Modeling candidate quality as effectiveness instead of valence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 52-68, January.
    2. Isaac Duerr & Thomas Knight & Lindsey Woodworth, 2019. "Evidence on the Effect of Political Platform Transparency on Partisan Voting," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 331-349, June.
    3. John Jackson, 2014. "Location, location, location: the Davis-Hinich model of electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 197-218, April.
    4. Damien Bol & Philipp Harfst & André Blais & Sona N Golder & Jean-François Laslier & Laura B Stephenson & Karine Van der Straeten, 2016. "Addressing Europe’s democratic deficit: An experimental evaluation of the pan-European district proposal," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(4), pages 525-545, December.
    5. Paul Mitchell & Geoffrey Evans & Brendan O'Leary, 2009. "Extremist Outbidding in Ethnic Party Systems is Not Inevitable: Tribune Parties in Northern Ireland," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(2), pages 397-421, June.
    6. Ryan Bakker & Seth Jolly & Jonathan Polk, 2018. "Multidimensional incongruence and vote switching in Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 267-296, July.
    7. Zoltán Fazekas & Levente Littvay, 2012. "Choosing sides: The genetics of why we go with the loudest," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 24(3), pages 389-408, July.
    8. Jane Green, 2007. "When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(3), pages 629-655, October.
    9. Burkhard Schipper & Hee Yeul Woo, 2012. "Political Awareness and Microtargeting of Voters in Electoral Competition," Working Papers 124, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    10. Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay & Manaswini Bhalla & Kalysan Chatterjee & Jaideep Roy, 2014. "Ideological Dissent in Downsian Politics," Discussion Papers 14-04, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    11. Michal Tóth & Roman Chytilek, 2018. "Fast, frugal and correct? An experimental study on the influence of time scarcity and quantity of information on the voter decision making process," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 177(1), pages 67-86, October.
    12. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard & Stéphane Rossignol, 2011. "An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(2), pages 309-340, July.
    13. Mattozzi, Andrea & Snowberg, Erik, 2018. "The right type of legislator: A theory of taxation and representation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 54-65.
    14. Federico Vaccari, 2023. "Influential news and policy-making," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1363-1418, November.
    15. Jelle Koedam, 2021. "Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 655-675, December.
    16. A. Kamakura, Wagner & Afonso Mazzon, Jose & De Bruyn, Arnaud, 2006. "Modeling voter choice to predict the final outcome of two-stage elections," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 689-706.
    17. Yasushi Asako, 2015. "Campaign promises as an imperfect signal: How does an extreme candidate win against a moderate candidate?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(4), pages 613-649, October.
    18. Jason Y Wu, 2019. "A spatial valence model of political participation in China," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(2), pages 244-259, April.
    19. Stefano Camatarri & Francesco Zucchini, 2019. "Government coalitions and Eurosceptic voting in the 2014 European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 425-446, September.
    20. Gersbach, Hans & Tejada, Oriol, 2018. "A Reform Dilemma in polarized democracies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 148-158.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multidimensionality; populism; voter-party congruence;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eiq:eileqs:160. 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: Katjana Gattermann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eilseuk.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.