DOCSLIB.ORG

AXIA Research

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AXIA Research AXIA Research Political Update Cyprus May 24, 2016 Cypriot Parliamentary Elections Results: DISY wins but challenges ahead As expected, the ruling right-wing party DISY won Cyprus’ May 22 Parliamentary elections claiming 30.68% of the vote and securing 18 seats in the 56-seat Parliament, down 2 seats from the 20 seats previously held. AKEL came in the second place reaching 25.67% of the vote securing 16 seats, down 3 seats from 19 seats previously. DISY and AKEL, collectively lost approximately 10.0% of their supporters (56.4% compared to 67.2% in the previous Parliamentary elections of 2011). However, AKEL was the party with the largest reduction in its voting power compared to the 2011 elections (-7.1%), in contrast to DISY which lost 3.7% of its votes compared to 2011. DISY managed to remain the largest party in the Cypriot political system, despite a period of hard austerity from a three-year bailout programme. The centrist DIKO secured third place, capturing 14.49% of the votes and 9 seats. The parliamentary elections were characterized by the high level of abstention (33.26% vs. 21.3% in 2011 parliamentary elections) which led smaller parties to ‘gain ground’ in the new Parliament. In particular, the smaller parties (EDEK, Citizens Alliance, Solidarity Movement, the Green Party and ELAM) gathered c20% of the votes in total, translating to a total of 13 seats compared to a total of 8 seats, occupied by the then smaller parties after the 2011 parliamentary elections. A total of 8 parties are now represented in Parliament. Although DISY managed to remain the biggest party, the results of the elections point to a more fragmented Parliament, potentially making it more difficult to reach a consensus on economic issues. Note that, even with the support of DIKO (9 MPs), DISY will still need another 2 votes to achieve a majority for passing relevant legislation through Parliament. There is less concern regarding the Parliamentary support on the Cyprus’ issue (reunification of the island) since we view that DISY could gain support from AKEL (as was the case in the past) reaching a comfortable majority of 34 MPs in Parliament. All in all the election results increase concerns that the Government will be able to pass the remaining structural reforms set by the country’s Economic Adjustment Programme (including the privatization of Cyta, the adoption of the National Health Scheme, etc.) through Parliament. These reforms are deemed necessary to maintain the country’s growth momentum. Note that beyond the fact that the majority of the political parties represented in Parliament do not share the same views as DISY on economic-related issues, the next Presidential elections are set to take place in 2018. The latter further reduces visibility on which parties will support DISY in the future, making the Cyprus’ political scene even more blurry. Please see important disclosures at the end of this report AXIA Research Page 1 AXIA Research DISY runs first in Parliamentary elections but challenges ahead... Breaking down the election results... Notwithstanding that DISY remained the first political power in Cyprus, abstention was the main characteristic of the elections, reaching a record level of 33.26% vs. 21.3% in the Parliamentary elections of 2011. The latter assisted smaller parties to exceed the minimum required 3.6% threshold to enter Parliament. Consequently, an 8 party Parliament has been formed. Parliamentary elections (May’16) Previous Parliamentary Elections (May’11) DISY 30.7% DISY 34.4% AKEL 25.7% AKEL 32.8% DIKO 14.5% DIKO 15.8% EDEK 6.2% EDEK 8.9% Citizens Alliance 6.0% European Party 3.9% Solidarity Movement¹ 5.2% Green Party Green Party 4.8% 2.2% ELAM 3.7% ELAM 1.1% Others 3.2% Others 1.2% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% Source: Cypriot Parliament, European Parliament, AXIA Research Note : ¹ Solidarity Movement absorbed the European Party in March 2016 The main opposition party, AKEL, earned 25.67% of the vote and ran second with 16 seats (compared to 19 in the 2011 elections). AKEL recorded the largest drop (-7.1%) in its votes compared to the parliamentary elections of 2011. The third largest party in the country, the centrist DIKO, managed to maintain its political stance gathering the same number of seats (9) as in the previous parliamentary elections, albeit recording a drop of 1.3%. The social-democratic party, EDEK posted a drop in support of 2.8% compared to the previous parliamentary elections (3 seats in the Parliament from the 5 seats previously held), while on their first appearance in the political landscape the centre-left, Citizens Alliance and the right-wing, Solidarity Movement (which absorbed the European Party in March 2016) claimed a significant portion of the votes (6.0% and 5.2%, respectively) hence, each party secured three parliamentary seats compared to one seat each in the previous government. Furthermore, the Green Party posted an increase of 2.6% in its votes, resulting in 2 parliamentary seats (compared to 1 in 2011 elections). The far-right National People’s front (ELAM) also made it to the Parliament receiving 3.71% of the votes (just above the 3.6% threshold to make it to the Parliament) resulting in 2 seats. Composition of the New Parliament (May’16) Previous Composition of the Parliament (May’11) 16 19 9 8 3 3 20 18 5 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 56 seats 56 seats DISY AKEL DIKO¹ EDEK DISY AKEL DIKO Citizens Alliance Solidarity Movement² EDEK European Party Green Party Green Party ELAM Citizens Alliance Independent Source: Cypriot Parliament, AXIA Research Note : ¹ During the last Parliament’s term, an MP left DIKO and continued his term as an independent MP ² Solidarity Movement absorbed the European Party in March 2016 AXIA Research Page 2 AXIA Research The day after the elections results... Following the Parliamentary elections, the short-term focus turns on who the next President of Parliament will be. According to press reports, the first session of the new Parliament is set for June 2, during which time the new President of the Parliament will be elected. Despite DISY’s win, Cyprus’ political landscape has become more complicated and more difficult to decipher. To this end, we view that several concerns will arise towards DISY’s efforts to sustain the momentum for reforms’ that are necessary to support economic growth going forward. Since the new Parliament is comprised of eight political parties, DISY’s task to pass the remaining structural reforms, or any other economic-related legislation, through Parliament is more challenging than before. DISY’s efforts should now turn to finding the required support from several MPs (most likely from different parties) in order to secure the majority in Parliament, which will enable it to pass legislation. On the other side, if AKEL’s political stance remains unchanged in regards to the Cyprus’ issue, DISY will be capable of securing the majority in Parliament, (they gather 34 MPs together) to enable it to pass any legislation regarding the Cyprus’ issue. AXIA Research Page 3 AXIA Research Disclosures General information This research report was prepared by AXIA Ventures Group Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Cyprus (referred to herein, together with its subsidiary companies and affiliates, collectively, as “AXIA”) which is authorised and regulated by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (authorisation number 086/07). AXIA is authorized to provide investment services in the United Kingdom, Cyprus, Greece and in Portugal pursuant to its permissions under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive and may also provide similar services in other countries, inside or outside of the European Union, subject to the applicable provisions. AXIA Ventures Group Limited is not a registered broker-dealer in the United States (U.S.), and, therefore, is not subject to U.S. rules regarding the preparation of research reports and the independence of research analysts. In the U.S., this research report is intended solely for persons who meet the definition of “major U.S. institutional investors” in Rule 15a-6 under the U.S. Securities and Exchange Act, as amended, or persons listed under Rule 15a-6(4) and is meant to be disseminated only through “Axia Capital Markets LLC”, a wholly owned subsidiary of AXIA Ventures Group Limited and associated US registered broker-dealer in accordance with Rule 15a-6 of the US Securities and Exchange Act. Content of the report The persons in charge of the preparation of this report, the names of whom are disclosed below, certify that the views and opinions expressed on the subject security, issuer, companies or businesses covered by this research report (each a “Subject Company” and, collectively, the “Subject Companies”) are their personal opinions and that no part of their compensation was, is or will be directly or indirectly related to the specific recommendations or views contained in this research report. Whilst all substantial sources of information for the research are indicated in this report, including, without limitation, bases of valuation applied to any security or derivative security, such information has not been disclosed to the Subject Companies for their comments and no such information is hereby certified. All information contained herein is subject to change at any time without notice. No member of AXIA has an obligation to update, modify or amend this research report or to otherwise notify a reader thereof in the event that any matter stated herein, or any opinion, projection, forecast or estimate set forth herein, changes or subsequently becomes inaccurate, or if research on the Subject Company is withdrawn.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Ellada Ioannou Populism and the European Elections in Cyprus
    Spring 14 The Risks of growing Populism and the European elections: Populism and the European elections in Cyprus Author: Ellada Ioannou Populism and the European elections in Cyprus Ellada Ioannou1 The aim of this paper, is to examine the rise of Populism in Europe and its association with the increase in anti-European sentiments, using Cyprus as a case study. A questionnaire in the format of a survey, was completed by 1009 Cypriot participants. The findings, were that compared to other European Union member states, show that Populism and Euroscepticism in Cyprus seem, at present, not to be extensively prevalent. However, there seems to be a slight shift towards Euroscepticism and pre-conditions for the emergence and rise of radical right-wing Populism in Cyprus, are evident. Introduction While definitions of populism have varied over the years, making “populism” a rather vague and ill-defined concept, scholars and political analysts agree that its general ideology is that society is divided into two groups: the “pure people” and the “corrupt elitist” and that politics should be, above all, an expression of the general will of the people.2 With its positive connotation, it is argued, that populism can have a positive, corrective impact on democracy, by pointing out the need to integrate people’s ideas and interests into the political system and the political agenda.3 However, “populism” in general has acquired a negative connotation, as a potential threat to democracy, due to its historical association with authoritarian rule and due to some of its characteristics such as “illiberal democracy” and its exclusive nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of European and National Election Results 2014-2019 Mid-Term January 2017
    Review of European and National Election Results 2014-2019 Mid-term January 2017 STUDY Public Opinion Monitoring Series Directorate-General for Communication Published by EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Jacques Nancy, Public Opinion Monitoring Unit PE 599.242 Directorate-General for Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit REVIEW EE2014 Edition Spéciale Mi-Législature Special Edition on Mid-term Legislature LES ÉLECTIONS EUROPÉENNES ET NATIONALES EN CHIFFRES EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS RESULTS TABLES Mise à jour – 20 janvier 2017 Update – 20th January 2017 8éme Législature 8th Parliamentary Term DANS CETTE EDITION Page IN THIS EDITION Page EDITORIAL11 EDITORIAL I.COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT EUROPÉEN 6 I. COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 6 A.REPARTITION DES SIEGES 7 A.DISTRIBUTION OF SEATS 7 B.COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT 8 B.COMPOSITION OF THE PARLIAMENT 8 -9-9AU 01/07/2014 ON THE 01/07/2014 -10-10AU 20/01/2017 ON THE 20/01/2017 C.SESSIONS CONSTITUTIVES ET PARLEMENT 11 C.CONSTITUTIVE SESSIONS AND OUTGOING EP 11 SORTANT DEPUIS 1979 SINCE 1979 D.REPARTITION FEMMES - HOMMES 29 D.PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND MEN 29 AU 20/01/2017 ON 20/01/2017 -30-30PAR GROUPE POLITIQUE AU 20/01/2017 IN THE POLITICAL GROUPS ON 20/01/2017 ET DEPUIS 1979 AND SINCE 1979 E.PARLEMENTAIRES RÉÉLUS 33 E.RE-ELECTED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT 33 II.NOMBRE DE PARTIS NATIONAUX AU PARLEMENT 35 II.NUMBER OF NATIONAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN 35 EUROPEEN AU 20/01/2017 PARLIAMENT ON 20/01/2017 III.TAUX DE PARTICIPATION 37 III. TURNOUT 37 -38-38TAUX DE PARTICIPATION
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook: Government Composition, 1960-2019
    Codebook: Government Composition, 1960-2019 Codebook: SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPARATIVE POLITICAL DATA SET – GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION 1960-2019 Klaus Armingeon, Sarah Engler and Lucas Leemann The Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set provides detailed information on party composition, reshuffles, duration, reason for termination and on the type of government for 36 democratic OECD and/or EU-member countries. The data begins in 1959 for the 23 countries formerly included in the CPDS I, respectively, in 1966 for Malta, in 1976 for Cyprus, in 1990 for Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, in 1991 for Poland, in 1992 for Estonia and Lithuania, in 1993 for Latvia and Slovenia and in 2000 for Croatia. In order to obtain information on both the change of ideological composition and the following gap between the new an old cabinet, the supplement contains alternative data for the year 1959. The government variables in the main Comparative Political Data Set are based upon the data presented in this supplement. When using data from this data set, please quote both the data set and, where appropriate, the original source. Please quote this data set as: Klaus Armingeon, Sarah Engler and Lucas Leemann. 2021. Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set – Government Composition 1960-2019. Zurich: Institute of Political Science, University of Zurich. These (former) assistants have made major contributions to the dataset, without which CPDS would not exist. In chronological and descending order: Angela Odermatt, Virginia Wenger, Fiona Wiedemeier, Christian Isler, Laura Knöpfel, Sarah Engler, David Weisstanner, Panajotis Potolidis, Marlène Gerber, Philipp Leimgruber, Michelle Beyeler, and Sarah Menegal.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Parties and Trade Unions in Cyprus
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by LSE Research Online Political Parties and Trade Unions in Cyprus Yiannos Katsourides GreeSE Paper No.74 Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe SEPTEMBER 2013 All views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Hellenic Observatory or the LSE © Yiannos Katsourides _ TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT __________________________________________________________ iii 1. Introduction _____________________________________________________ 1 2. Political Parties and Interest Groups __________________________________ 3 3. The Cypriot Party System and the CSOs _______________________________ 9 4. The relationships between parties and trade unions in historical perspective 13 5. The changing environment ________________________________________ 18 6. Assessing contemporary relationships between political parties and TUs ___ 25 7. Conclusions _____________________________________________________ 35 References _________________________________________________________ 37 Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the Hellenic Observatory for offering him the chance to spend some time in London to advance his research. He would also like to express his gratitude to the administration of the Hellenic Observatory for their significant support. Finally, he would like to thank Dr Andreas Kornelakis and the anonymous reviewer for comments on a previous version of this paper. ii Political Parties and Trade Unions in Cyprus Yiannos Katsourides # ABSTRACT The political parties in Cyprus are extremely powerful. They play a dominant role in the public as well as the private sphere, resulting in a civil society that is extremely weak. The article will address two issues. First, it will map the evolution of civil society organisations (CSOs), especially the trade unions, and their relationship with political parties.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Populism in Europe 2020
    2020 STATE OF POPULISM IN EUROPE – 2020 STATE Tamás BOROS STATE OF Maria FREITAS POPULISM Gábor GYŐRI IN EUROPE Gergely LAKI 2020 STATE OF POPULISM IN EUROPE 2020 Published by: Table of Contents FEPS – Foundation for European Progressive Studies Rue Montoyer 40, 4th floor – 1000 Brussels, Belgium T: +32 2 234 69 00 Foreword .........................................................................................................................................6 Email: [email protected] Austria ............................................................................................................................................10 Website: www.feps-europe.eu Belgium ..........................................................................................................................................14 Bulgaria ..........................................................................................................................................18 Croatia ............................................................................................................................................22 Policy Solutions Cyprus .............................................................................................................................................26 Révay utca 10 – 1065 Budapest, Hungary Czechia ...........................................................................................................................................30 T: +36 1 4 748 748 Email: [email protected] Denmark .......................................................................................................................................36
    [Show full text]
  • The European Trust Crisis and the Rise of Populism Supplementary
    The European Trust Crisis and the Rise of Populism Supplementary Online Appendix Yann Algan Sergei Guriev Sciences Po and CEPR EBRD, Sciences Po and CEPR Elias Papaioannou Evgenia Passari London Business School and CEPR Université Paris-Dauphine Abstract This supplementary online appendix consists of three parts. First, we provide summary statistics, additional sensitivity checks and further evidence. Second, we provide details and sources on the data covering regional output and unemployment, trust, beliefs, attitudes and voting statistics. Third, we provide the classification of non-mainstream political parties’ political orientation (far-right, radical-left, populist, Eurosceptic and separatist) for all countries. 1 1. Summary Statistics, Additional Sensitivity Checks, and Further Evidence 1.1 Summary Statistics Appendix Table 1 reports the summary statistics at the individual level for all variables that we use from the ESS distinguishing between the pre-crisis period (2000-08) and the post-crisis period (2009-14). Panel A looks at all questions on general trust, trust in national and supranational institutions, party identification, ideological position on the left-right scale and beliefs on the European unification issue whereas in panel B we focus on attitudes to immigration. 1.2 Additional Sensitivity Checks Appendix Table 2 looks at the relationship between employment rates and voting for anti- establishment parties. Panel A reports panel OLS estimates with region fixed effects. Panel B reports difference-in-differences estimates. In contrast to Table 4, the specifications now include a dummy that takes on the value of one for core countries (Austria, France, Norway, Sweden) and zero for the periphery countries (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, Hungary, Ireland, Slovakia).
    [Show full text]
  • MAPPING the EUROPEAN LEFT Socialist Parties in the EU ROSA LUXEMBURG STIFTUNG NEW YORK OFFICE by Dominic Heilig Table of Contents
    MAPPING THE EUROPEAN LEFT Socialist Parties in the EU ROSA LUXEMBURG STIFTUNG NEW YORK OFFICE By Dominic Heilig Table of Contents The Rise of the European Left. By the Editors 1 Mapping the European Left Socialist Parties in the EU 2 By Dominic Heilig 1. The Left in Europe: History and Diversity 2 2. Syriza and Europe’s Left Spring 10 3. The Black Autumn of the Left in Europe: The Left in Spain 17 4. DIE LINKE: A Factor for Stability in the Party of the European Left 26 5. Strategic Tasks for the Left in Europe 33 Published by the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung, New York Office, April 2016 Editors: Stefanie Ehmsen and Albert Scharenberg Address: 275 Madison Avenue, Suite 2114, New York, NY 10016 Email: [email protected]; Phone: +1 (917) 409-1040 With support from the German Foreign Office The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation is an internationally operating, progressive non-profit institution for civic education. In cooperation with many organizations around the globe, it works on democratic and social participation, empowerment of disadvantaged groups, alternatives for economic and social development, and peaceful conflict resolution. The New York Office serves two major tasks: to work around issues concerning the United Nations and to engage in dialogue with North American progressives in universities, unions, social movements, and politics. www.rosalux-nyc.org The Rise of the European Left The European party system is changing rapidly. As a result of the ongoing neoliberal attack, the middle class is shrinking quickly, and the decades-old party allegiance of large groups of voters has followed suit.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of Protest and Electoral Politics in the Great Recession*
    Dynamics of protest and electoral politics in the Great Recession* Björn Bremer†, Swen Hutter‡, and Hanspeter Kriesi§ Abstract This paper links the consequences of the Great Recession on protest and electoral politics. It innovates by combining the literature on economic voting with social movement research and by presenting the first integrated, large-scale empirical analysis of protest mobilisation and electoral outcomes in Europe. The economic voting literature offers important insiGhts on how and under what conditions economic crises play out in the short-run. However, it tends to ignore the closely connected dynamics of opposition in the two arenas and the role of protests in politicising economic grievances. More specifically, it is argued that economic protests act as a ‘signalling mechanism’ by attributing blame to decision-makers and by highlighting the political dimension of deteriorating economic conditions. Ultimately, massive protest mobilisation should, thus, amplify the impact of economic hardship on the electoral losses of incumbents and mainstream parties more generally. The empirical analysis to study this relationship relies on an original semi-automated protest event dataset combined with an updated dataset of electoral outcomes in 30 European countries from 2000 to 2015. The results indicate that the dynamics of economic protests and electoral punishment are closely related and point to a destabilisation of European party systems during the Great Recession. Keywords: Protest politics, protest event analysis, economic crisis, electoral politics, economic voting, mainstream parties * The authors acknowledge funding by the ERC project “Political Conflict in Europe in the Shadow of the Great Recession” (POLCON) (Project id: 338875). Swen Hutter also acknowledges funding by the Volkswagen Foundation during the final stages of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (394Kb)
    Explaining Turkish Party and Public Support for the EU Seth Jolly, Syracuse University Sibel Oktay, Syracuse University February 2011 Draft Presented at the Biennial Meeting of the European Union Studies Association, Boston, 3-5 March 2011 Abstract: The three main Turkish political parties, the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), each favor Turkish accession to the European Union, with varying degrees of reservations. Turkish public support for EU membership is also divided, with recent surveys showing only 50% of the population views the EU positively. In this paper, we first evaluate the extent of support for European integration among Turkish mainstream and minor parties using Chapel Hill Expert Survey data and case studies. Next, building from the vast literature on public and party support for the EU in western European states, we develop utilitarian and identity hypotheses to explain public support. Using Eurobarometer data, we test these explanations. In this analysis, we compare Turkish parties and public to their counterparts in eastern and western Europe. I. Introduction What explains the levels of mass and elite support toward European integration in Turkey? To what extent do the established theories of public and elite attitudes toward integration explain the Turkish case? Can we integrate our findings to the comparative scope of the literature, or is Turkish exceptionalism a reality? During the era of permissive consensus, European integration was an elite-driven process. But the recent literature on attitudes toward European integration has established that the era of permissive consensus (Lindberg and Scheingold 1970) is over (Carrubba 2001, Hooghe and Marks 2005, De Vries and Edwards 2009); in other words, Euroskepticism should be studied at the mass level along with the elite level.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconnecting European Political Parties with European Union Citizens
    Reconnecting European Political Parties with European Union Citizens International IDEA Discussion Paper 6/2018 Reconnecting European Political Parties with European Union Citizens International IDEA Discussion Paper 6/2018 Lead author: Steven van Hecke Contributors: Alex Andrione-Moylan, Nathalie Brack, Isabelle de Coninck, Stephen Day, Wojciech Gagatek, Emilie van Haute, Isabelle Hertner, Karl Magnus Johansson, Teona Lavrelashvili, Gilles Pittoors and Wouter Wolfs © 2018 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The electronic version of this publication is available under a Creative Commons Attribute-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the publication as well as to remix and adapt it, provided it is only for non-commercial purposes, that you appropriately attribute the publication, and that you distribute it under an identical licence. For more information on this licence visit the Creative Commons website: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. International IDEA Strömsborg SE–103 34 Stockholm Sweden Telephone: +46 8 698 37 00 Email: [email protected] Website: <http://www.idea.int> Design and layout: International IDEA DOI: <https://doi.org/10.31752/idea.2018.71> Created with Booktype: <https://www.booktype.pro> International
    [Show full text]