IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/0511.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

National Vote Intention and European Voting Behavior, 1979-2004: Second Order Election Effects, Election Timing, Government Approval and the Europeanization of European Elections

Author

Listed:
  • Manow, Philip

Abstract

Voting behavior in elections to the European Parliament seems to follow a regular pattern, as many EP-election studies have found: Parties in government at the national level tend to lose vote shares in EP-elections as compared to the last domestic electoral contest; small and ideologically more extreme parties tend to gain vote shares. These losses and gains seem to be more pronounced when the European election is held in the middle of the domestic legislative term (mid-term effect). In the many accounts that try to explain these regular deviations from domestic voting, one causal factor plays a central role: the popularity loss of parties in office at the national level. Since reliable and comparable popularity data for the EU-member states seems to be missing, the literature has attempted to measure popularity loss with two kinds of proxies: changes in economic performance (e.g. changes in the unemployment rate) and the timing of the EP-election within the domestic term. This paper proposes to use the bi-annually collected national vote intention question of the Eurobarometer surveys as a measurement for party popularity. The paper has three central findings: 1) changes in national vote intention are a strong and stable predictor for the actual vote share shifts between national and European elections, 2) neither the economic nor the election timing variables contribute substantially to the explanation of the vote share shifts; 3) changes in the impact of the national vote intention variable on European election outcomes over the six EPelections held so far suggest that the European electorates have taken European issues more and more into consideration when participating in European elections (Europeanization of EPelections). However, the data also suggests that voters have used these elections increasingly to voice their dissatisfaction with the European integration process (Anti-Europeanization of EPelections).

Suggested Citation

  • Manow, Philip, 2005. "National Vote Intention and European Voting Behavior, 1979-2004: Second Order Election Effects, Election Timing, Government Approval and the Europeanization of European Elections," MPIfG Discussion Paper 05/11, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:0511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/19925/1/dp05-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Hix & Amie Kreppel & Abdul Noury, 2003. "The Party System in the European Parliament: Collusive or Competitive?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 309-331, April.
    2. Strøm, Kaare & Swindle, Stephen M., 2002. "Strategic Parliamentary Dissolution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(3), pages 575-591, September.
    3. Tsebelis, George & Garrett, Geoffrey, 2001. "The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 357-390, April.
    4. Tufte, Edward R., 1975. "Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 812-826, September.
    5. Hudson, John, 1985. "The Relationship Between Government Popularity and Approval for the Government's Record in the United Kingdom," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 165-186, April.
    6. Kernell, Samuel, 1977. "Presidential Popularity and Negative Voting: An Alternative Explanation of the Midterm Congressional Decline of the President's Party," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(1), pages 44-66, March.
    7. Mughan, Anthony, 1986. "Toward A Political Explanation of Government Vote Losses in Midterm By-Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(3), pages 761-775, September.
    8. Marsh, Michael, 1998. "Testing the Second-Order Election Model after Four European Elections," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 591-607, October.
    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. Oliver Treib, 2010. "Party Politics, National Interests and Government—Opposition Dynamics," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 119-142, March.
    2. Manow, Philip & Döring, Holger, 2006. "Divided Government European Style? Electoral and Mechanical Causes of European Parliament and Council Divisions," MPIfG Discussion Paper 06/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Luiza-Maria FILIMON, 2015. "Beneficiaries Of The Second Order Election Model: Radical Right Parties In The European Parliament," Europolity – Continuity and Change in European Governance - New Series, Department of International Relations and European Integration, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 9(2), pages 1-31.

    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. Burkhart, Simone, 2004. "Parteipolitikverflechtung: Der Einfluss der Bundespolitik auf Landtagswahlentscheidungen von 1976 bis 2002," MPIfG Discussion Paper 04/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Burkhart, Simone, 2008. "Blockierte Politik: Ursachen und Folgen von "Divided Government" in Deutschland," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 60, number 60.
    3. Manow, Philip & Döring, Holger, 2006. "Divided Government European Style? Electoral and Mechanical Causes of European Parliament and Council Divisions," MPIfG Discussion Paper 06/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Knight, Brian, 2017. "An Econometric Evaluation of Competing Explanations for the Midterm Gap," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 12(2), pages 205-239, September.
    5. Halberstam, Yosh & Montagnes, B. Pablo, 2015. "Presidential coattails versus the median voter: Senator selection in US elections," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 40-51.
    6. Federico Ferrara & J. Timo Weishaupt, 2004. "Get your Act Together," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(3), pages 283-306, September.
    7. John V. Duca & Jason L. Saving, 2008. "Stock Ownership And Congressional Elections: The Political Economy Of The Mutual Fund Revolution," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 46(3), pages 454-479, July.
    8. Dieter Stiers & Anna Kern, 2021. "Cyclical accountability," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 31-49, October.
    9. Hermann Schmitt & Ilke Toygür, 2016. "European Parliament Elections of May 2014: Driven by National Politics or EU Policy Making?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 167-181.
    10. Wolfram Kaiser, 2017. "Limits of Cultural Engineering: Actors and Narratives in the European Parliament's House of European History Project," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 518-534, May.
    11. Jason Matthew DeBacker, 2015. "Flip‐Flopping: Ideological Adjustment Costs In The United States Senate," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(1), pages 108-128, January.
    12. Abdul G. Noury & Gérard Roland, 2002. "More power to the European Parliament? [‘Nice try: Should the Treaty of Nice be ratified’?]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 279-319.
    13. James Tilley & Christopher Wlezien, 2008. "Does Political Information Matter? An Experimental Test Relating to Party Positions on Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 192-214, March.
    14. Sinha, Pankaj & Srinivas, Sandeep & Paul, Anik & Chaudhari, Gunjan, 2016. "Forecasting 2016 US Presidential Elections Using Factor Analysis and Regression Model," MPRA Paper 74618, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2016.
    15. Nir Klein, 2004. "Political Cycles And Economic Policy In Israel: 1980–1999," Israel Economic Review, Bank of Israel, vol. 2(1), pages 55-67.
    16. Lluís Coromina, 2013. "Supranationalism Decision Making for Spanish Citizens and its Relation to Personal Variables," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 245-256, January.
    17. Ray C. Fair, 2009. "Presidential and Congressional Vote‐Share Equations," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 55-72, January.
    18. Saito, Hiroharu, 2022. "Loss aversion for the value of voting rights: WTA/WTP ratios for a ballot," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    19. Jerome, Bruno & Jerome, Veronique & Lewis-Beck, Michael S., 1999. "Polls fail in France: forecasts of the 1997 legislative election1," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 163-174, April.
    20. Ray Fair, 2007. "Presidential and Congressional Vote-Share Equations," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2389, Yale School of Management, revised 18 Mar 2007.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:mpifgd:0511. 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/mpigfde.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.