DOCSLIB.ORG

Review Des Élections Européennes Et Nationales

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review Des Élections Européennes Et Nationales Review des élections européennes et nationales Deuxième actualisation Février 2016 ETUDE Série Suivi de l'Opinion Publique Direction générale pour la Communication EPRS | Service de Recherche du Parlement Européen Auteur: Jacques Nancy, Unité Suivi de l'Opinion Publique | PE 570.422 Directorate-General for Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit II Update REVIEW LES ÉLECTIONS EUROPÉENNES ET NATIONALES EN CHIFFRES EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS FIGURED OUT Mise à jour – 4 février 2016 Updated – 4 February 2016 Élections européennes 2014 2014 European elections B-1047 Brussels - Tel. +32 2 28 42485 F-67070 Strasbourg - Tel. +33 3 88 1 74082 [email protected] - www.europarl.europa.eu DANS CETTE EDITION Page IN THIS EDITION Page EDITORIAL11 EDITORIAL I. COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT EUROPEEN 44I. COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT A. COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT 44A. COMPOSITION OF THE PARLIAMENT ·5·5AU 04/02/2016 ON 04/02/2016 ·6·6AU 01/07/2014 ON 01/07/2014 B. REPARTITION FEMMES - HOMMES PAR GROUPE B. PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND MEN IN THE 77 POLITIQUE POLITICAL GROUPS ·8·8AU 04/02/2016 ON 04/02/2016 ·10·10AU 01/07/2014 ON 01/07/2014 ·11·11DEPUIS 1979 SINCE 1979 II. ELECTIONS EUROPEENNES 2014 - II. EUROPEAN ELECTIONS 2014 - 12 12 EVOLUTIONS AU 04/02/2016 EVOLUTIONS ON 04/02/2016 États Membres mis à jour CZ, DK, DE, EL, ES, FR, HR, IT, Updated Member States CZ, DK, DE, EL, ES, FR, HR, IT, CY, LT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SE, UK CY, LT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SE, UK --TABLEAUX COMPARATIFS EE2014 ET 04/02/2016 COMPARATIVE TABLES EE2014 AND 04/02/2016 --PARTIS POLITIQUES REPRESENTES AU PE POLITICAL PARTIES REPRESENTED IN THE EP --REPARTITION DES ELUS PAR GROUPE POLITIQUE ELECTED MEMBERS BY POLITICAL GROUP RESULTATS DES DEUX DERNIERES ELECTIONS NATIONALES RESULTS OF THE LAST TWO NATIONAL ELECTIONS AND OF --ET DES EUROPEENNES DE 2014 THE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS 2014 TABLEAUX COMPARATIFS TAUX DE PARTICIPATION DES COMPARATIVE TABLES TURNOUT IN THE TWO LAST --DEUX DERNIERES ELECTIONS NATIONALES ET DEUX LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS AND THE TWO LAST EUROPEAN DERNIERES EUROPEENNES ELECTIONS ELECTIONS PRESIDENTIELLES AU SUFFRAGE UNIVERSEL DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS --DIRECT --SOURCES SOURCES NB Dans cette édition, nous ne reprenons que les tableaux ayant fait l'objet d'une modification dans certains pays ( changement de MEP, changement de groupe, nouveau groupe, élections nationales et présidentielles ) depuis le 24 juillet 2015, date de la première actualisation de la Review, jusqu'au 4 février 2016. NB This edition includes only the tables of those Member States where changes occurred from 24 July 2015 (first update of the Review) to 4 February 2016 (change of MEP, change of group, new group, national and presidential elections). Review des élections européennes et nationales en chiffres. Edition spéciale - Novembre 2014: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/558343/EPRS_STU%282015%29558343_FR.pdf DG COMM / Public Opinion Monitoring Unit Actualisation de l'édition spéciale EE2014 – 4 février 2016 Update of the special edition EE2014 – 4 February 2016 EDITORIAL EDITORIAL Cette édition du 4 février 2016 est la The edition of 4 February 2016 is the second deuxième actualisation de la Review des update of the Review of the European and élections européennes et nationales, National Elections, published in November publiée en novembre 2014 par l'Unité de Suivi 2014 by the Public Opinion Monitoring Unit of de l'Opinion Publique de la DG DG Communication. Communication. The edition of November 2014 focused on Cette publication de novembre 2014 était results of the European elections of May 2014, consacrée aux résultats des élections historic report on the 35 years of direct européennes de mai 2014, à l'historique de 35 elections of the European Parliament - since ans des élections directes du Parlement 1979, and various national polls. européen depuis 1979, ainsi qu'aux différents scrutins nationaux. The first update referred to the composition of Sa première actualisation date du 24 juillet the EP as of 24 July 2015. 2015. Which are then the noticeable events that Quels sont les faits marquants à relever au occurred in the period from July 2015 to cours de cette période qui va de juillet 2015 à February 2016? février 2016 ? I. Évolution de la composition du I. How the composition of the Parlement Européen European Parliament has changed L'actualisation porte en premier lieu sur les The current update focuses first on the modifications intervenues au sein du changes that have happened within the Parlement européen depuis la publication de European Parliament since the publication of la première mise à jour en juillet 2015. the first update of the Review EE2014. On notera tout particulièrement le Particularly noteworthy is the replacement of remplacement de huit députés européens eight MEPs who for one reason or another do qui, pour une raison ou une autre ne siègent not longer sit in the European Parliament. plus au Parlement européen. À retenir Furthermore, three Members have changed également que trois Membres du PE ont political groups since the previous update. changé de groupe politique. * http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/558343/EPRS_STU%282015%29558343_FR.pdf DG COMM / Public Opinion Monitoring Unit 1 Compte tenu du non-remplacement actuel Given the present non-replacement of one d'un député européen (CZ-GUE/NGL), le MEP (CZ-GUE/NGL), the European Parliament Parlement européen compte, au 4 février comprises, as of 4 February 2016, 750 2016, 750 membres, soit : 216 affiliés au Members, that is to say: 216 MEPs of the EPP groupe PPE, 190 au groupe S&D, 75 au groupe group, 190 of the S&D group, 75 of the ECR CRE, 70 au groupe ADLE, 51 au groupe GUE- group, 70 of the ALDE group, 51 of the NGL, 50 au groupe Verts/ALE, 45 au groupe GUE/NGL group, 50 of the Greens/EFA group, ELDD, 38 au groupe ENF et 15 Non-inscrits. 45 of the EFDD group, 38 of the ENF group and 15 Non-Attached Members. II. Évolution du nombre de partis II. How the number of national parties nationaux au Parlement européen in the European Parliament has changed Lors de la constitutive de juillet 2014, le At the constitutive session of July 2014, there Parlement européen comptait 203 partis were 203 parties represented by 751 MEPs. As politiques nationaux pour 751 députés. Au 4 of 4 February 2016, the number of parties has février 2016, ce nombre s'élève à 209. risen to 209. Du fait de certaines évolutions politiques au As a result of political changes in the Member sein des États Membres, 6 nouveaux partis States, there have been six new parties sont rentrés au Parlement européen depuis la represented in the European Parliament since première actualisation du 24 juillet 2015: the first update of 24 July 2015: Allianz für Fortschritt und Aufbruch (DE- Allianz für Fortschritt und Aufbruch (DE- ECR), fondé et représenté au PE depuis le ECR), founded on 19 July 2015 and 19 juillet 2015; represented since then; Λαϊκή Ενότητα/Popular Unity (EL- Λαϊκή Ενότητα/Popular Unity (EL- GUE/NGL), créé le 21 aout 2015 et GUE/NGL), founded on 21 August 2015, représenté au PE depuis le 2 septembre represented since 2 September 2015; 2015; Génération Citoyens (FR-ALDE), founded Génération Citoyens (FR-ALDE), fondé le on 17 July 2015, represented since 2 17 July 2015, représenté depuis le 2 September 2015; septembre 2015; Les Français Libres (FR-NI), founded on Les Français Libres (FR-NI), créé et 13 January 2016 and represented since représenté au PE depuis le 13 janvier then; 2016; Conservatori e Riformisti (IT-ECR), Conservatori e Riformisti (IT-ECR), fondé founded on 16 July 2015, represented le 16 juillet 2015 et représenté depuis le since 7 December 2015; 7 décembre 2015; Partido Democratico Republicano (PT- Partido Democratico Republicano (PT- ALDE), founded on 5 October 2014, ALDE), créé le 5 october 2014 et represented since 27 October 2015; représenté depuis 27 october 2015 Par ailleurs, notons que le parti roumain Besides, we point out that the Romanian Partidul Conservator ne fait désormais plus Partidul Conservator ceased to be represented partie du Parlement européen depuis août in the European Parliament since August 2015. 2015 ; DG COMM / Public Opinion Monitoring Unit 2 Actualisation de l'édition spéciale EE2014 – 4 février 2016 Update of the special edition EE2014 – 4 February 2016 Enfin, le lecteur remarquera le changement du Finally, the reader will note the change of nom du parti suédois Folkpartiet Liberalerna name of the Swedish party Folkpartiet (FP), devenu Liberalerna (L). Liberalerna (FP) to Liberalerna (L). III. Résultats comparatifs par pays III. Comparative results per country Cette actualisation tient également compte The current update also takes into account the des élections qui se sont tenues dans les États elections held in the Member States since the membres depuis la mise à jour du 24 juillet update of 24 July 2015. From that date to 4 2015. Au 4 février 2016, 5 scrutins législatifs February 2016, there were held five general ont eu lieu (EL, ES, HR, PL, PT), ainsi qu'une elections (EL, ES, HR, PL, and PT) and one élection présidentielle au suffrage universel presidential election by direct universal direct (PT). suffrage (PT). Au total, depuis la constitutive du 1er juillet From the Constituent session of 1 July 2014, 2014, il y a donc eu au sein de l'UE : 14 there have been in the EU: fourteen general élections législatives, 4 élections elections, four presidential elections by direct présidentielles au suffrage universel direct et 1 universal suffrage and one indirect élection présidentielle indirecte. presidential election. Enfin, pour chaque État membre, le lecteur For each Member State, the results of the last trouvera les résultats des deux dernières two national elections have been indicated.
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]
  • Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 3
    COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS - MODULE 3 (2006-2011) CODEBOOK: APPENDICES Original CSES file name: cses2_codebook_part3_appendices.txt (Version: Full Release - December 15, 2015) GESIS Data Archive for the Social Sciences Publication (pdf-version, December 2015) ============================================================================================= COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS (CSES) - MODULE 3 (2006-2011) CODEBOOK: APPENDICES APPENDIX I: PARTIES AND LEADERS APPENDIX II: PRIMARY ELECTORAL DISTRICTS FULL RELEASE - DECEMBER 15, 2015 VERSION CSES Secretariat www.cses.org =========================================================================== HOW TO CITE THE STUDY: The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 3 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. December 15, 2015 version. doi:10.7804/cses.module3.2015-12-15 These materials are based on work supported by the American National Science Foundation (www.nsf.gov) under grant numbers SES-0451598 , SES-0817701, and SES-1154687, the GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, the University of Michigan, in-kind support of participating election studies, the many organizations that sponsor planning meetings and conferences, and the many organizations that fund election studies by CSES collaborators. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations. =========================================================================== IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING FULL RELEASES: This dataset and all accompanying documentation is the "Full Release" of CSES Module 3 (2006-2011). Users of the Final Release may wish to monitor the errata for CSES Module 3 on the CSES website, to check for known errors which may impact their analyses. To view errata for CSES Module 3, go to the Data Center on the CSES website, navigate to the CSES Module 3 download page, and click on the Errata link in the gray box to the right of the page.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook CPDS I 1960-2013
    1 Codebook: Comparative Political Data Set, 1960-2013 Codebook: COMPARATIVE POLITICAL DATA SET 1960-2013 Klaus Armingeon, Christian Isler, Laura Knöpfel, David Weisstanner and Sarah Engler The Comparative Political Data Set 1960-2013 (CPDS) is a collection of political and institu- tional data which have been assembled in the context of the research projects “Die Hand- lungsspielräume des Nationalstaates” and “Critical junctures. An international comparison” directed by Klaus Armingeon and funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. This data set consists of (mostly) annual data for 36 democratic OECD and/or EU-member coun- tries for the period of 1960 to 2013. In all countries, political data were collected only for the democratic periods.1 The data set is suited for cross-national, longitudinal and pooled time- series analyses. The present data set combines and replaces the earlier versions “Comparative Political Data Set I” (data for 23 OECD countries from 1960 onwards) and the “Comparative Political Data Set III” (data for 36 OECD and/or EU member states from 1990 onwards). A variable has been added to identify former CPDS I countries. For additional detailed information on the composition of government in the 36 countries, please consult the “Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set – Government Com- position 1960-2013”, available on the CPDS website. The Comparative Political Data Set contains some additional demographic, socio- and eco- nomic variables. However, these variables are not the major concern of the project and are thus limited in scope. For more in-depth sources of these data, see the online databases of the OECD, Eurostat or AMECO.
    [Show full text]
  • The Czech Republic Is a Landlocked State Located in Central Europe Covering an Area of 30,450 Square Miles (78,866 Square Kilometres)
    CZECH REPUBLIC COUNTRY ASSESSMENT APRIL 2002 COUNTRY INFORMATION & POLICY UNIT IMMIGRATION & NATIONALITY DIRECTORATE HOME OFFICE, UNITED KINGDOM CONTENTS I. Scope of document 1.1 - 1.5 II. Geography 2.1 - 2.2 Economy 2.3 - 2.6 III. History 3.1 - 3.14 IV. State Structures The Constitution 4.1 Political System 4.2 - 4.12 Judiciary 4.13 - 4.14 Military 4.15 - 4.17 Internal Security 4.18 - 4.19 Legal Rights/Detention 4.20 - 4.24 Prison 4.25 Medical Service 4.26 - 4.28 Education System 4.29 V. Human Rights V.A. Human Rights Issues Overview 5.1 - 5.16 Freedom of Speech 5.17 - 5.26 Freedom of Religion 5.27 - 5.30 Freedom of Assembly & Association 5.31 - 5.34 Employment Rights 5.35 - 5.37 People Trafficking 5.38 - 5.40 Freedom of Movement 5.41 - 5.44 V.B. Human Rights - Specific Groups Women 5.45 - 5.51 Children 5.52 - 5.54 Roma 5.55 - 5.161 Conscientious Objectors & Deserters 5.162 Homosexuals 5.163. - 5.169 Political Activists 5.170 Journalists 5.171 Prison Conditions 5.172 V.C. Human Rights - Other Issues Citizenship 5.173 People with Disabilities 5.174 Annexes ANNEX A: CHRONOLOGY ANNEX B: PROMINENT PEOPLE ANNEX C: POLITICAL ORGANISATIONS BIBLIOGRAPHY I. SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information and Policy Unit, Immigration and Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources. 1.2 The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum determination process.
    [Show full text]
  • Journals Muni Cz
    Středoevropské politické studie / Central European Political Studies Review, ISSN 1212-7817 Ročník XVI, Číslo 1, s. 75–92 / Volume XVI, Issue 1, pp. 75–92 DOI: 10.5817/CEPSR.2014.1.75 (c) Mezinárodní politologický ústav / International Institute of Political Science Strana svobodných občanů – čeští monotematičtí euroskeptici?1 Petr Kaniok Abstract: The Party of Free Citizens: A Czech Single Issue Eurosceptic Party? When, in the beginning of 2009, the Party of Free Citizens was founded, it was believed that the main impulse for establishing a new political party was the generally positive approach towards the Lisbon Treaty adopted by the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) a couple of months before. Thus, since its foundation, the media, commentators and political analysts have labelled the Party of Free Citizens as a single issue Eurosceptic party. This article challenges this prevailing evaluation of the Party of Free Citizens and subsequently confronts the party´s programs and press releases with three concepts – the concept of Euroscepticism connected with the work of Taggart and Szczerbiak, the concept of a single issue party developed by Mudde, and the concept of a niche party brought into political science by Meguide. The article concludes that while the Party of Free Citizens is undoubtedly a Eurosceptic party, both in terms of its soft and hard versions, its overall performance as a political entity does not meet the criteria of Mudde´s concept of a single issue party. As the Party of Free Citizens puts a strong emphasis on European issues (compared to other mainstream Czech political parties), it can, at most, be described as a niche party.
    [Show full text]
  • Of European and National Election Results Update: September 2018
    REVIEW OF EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTION RESULTS UPDATE: SEPTEMBER 2018 A Public Opinion Monitoring Publication REVIEW OF EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTION RESULTS UPDATE: SEPTEMBER 2018 Directorate-General for Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit September 2018 - PE 625.195 TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL 1 1. COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 5 DISTRIBUTION OF SEATS EE2019 6 OVERVIEW 1979 - 2014 7 COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LAST UPDATE (10/09/2018) 8 CONSTITUTIVE SESSION (01/07/2014) 9 PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND MEN PROPORTION - LAST UPDATE 10 PROPORTIONS IN POLITICAL GROUPS - LAST UPDATE 11 PROPORTION OF WOMEN IN POLITICAL GROUPS - SINCE 1979 12 2. NUMBER OF NATIONAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 13 3. TURNOUT: EE2014 15 TURNOUT IN THE LAST EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS 16 TURNOUT IN THE EE2014 18 TURNOUT COMPARISON: 2009 (2013) - 2014 19 TURNOUT IN THE EE2014 - BREAKDOWN BY GENDER 20 TURNOUT IN THE EE2014 - BREAKDOWN BY AGE 21 TURNOUT OVERVIEW SINCE 1979 22 TURNOUT OVERVIEW SINCE 1979 - BY MEMBER STATE 23 4. NATIONAL RESULTS BY MEMBER STATE 27-301 GOVERNMENTS AND OPPOSITION IN MEMBER STATES 28 COMPOSITION OF THE EP: 2014 AND LATEST UPDATE POLITICAL PARTIES IN THE EP MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - BY MEMBER STATE EE2014 TOTAL RESULTS EE2014 ELECTORAL LISTS - BY MEMBER STATE RESULTS OF TWO LAST NATIONAL ELECTIONS AND THE EE 2014 DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS SOURCES EDITORIAL First published in November 2014, the Review of European and National Elections offers a comprehensive, detailed and up-to-date overview on the composition of the European Parliament, national elections in all EU Member States as well as a historical overview on the now nearly forty years of direct elections to the European Parliament since 1979.
    [Show full text]
  • This Document Does Not Meet the Current Format Guidelines of The
    DISCLAIMER: This document does not meet current format guidelines Graduate School at the The University of Texas at Austin. of the It has been published for informational use only. Copyright by Kathryn Quinn O’Dowd 2017 The Thesis committee for Kathryn Quinn O’Dowd Certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Beyond the Spectrum: Understanding Czech Euroscepticism Outside Left- Right Classification APPROVED BY SUPERVISING COMMITTEE: ______________________________________ Rachel Wellhausen, Supervisor __________________________________________ Mary Neuburger Beyond the Spectrum: Understanding Czech Euroscepticism Outside Left- Right Classification By Kathryn Quinn O’Dowd, B.A. Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School Of the University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts The University of Texas at Austin May 2017 Acknowledgements There are so many people who have aided in the thesis writing process. First, thank you to all of the professors that I have had over the years, whose courses have either directly or indirectly influenced the development of this work. The office staff at the Center for Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies- especially Roy Flores, Jenica Jones, and Agnes Sekowski- have been an enormous support. Christian Hilchey, thank you for your Czech instruction over the last two years. Martin thank you for your advice on how to conduct research in the Czech Republic, as well as connecting me with many of the researched parties. Mary Neuburger, thank you for reading my drafts and providing feedback throughout the process. Most importantly I need to thank my advisor Rachel Wellhausen, without whose guidance this project would have failed miserably.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence of New Small Parties
    THE EMERGENCE OF NEW SMALL PARTIES – THE CASES OF REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA AND THE CZECH REPUBLIC By Iva Popova Submitted to Central European University Department of Public Policy in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Arts in Public Policy Supervisor: Professor Agnes Batory Budapest, Hungary CEU eTD Collection 2013 CEU eTD Collection Author’s Declaration I, the undersigned ………………Iva Popova………………………………. hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. To the best of my knowledge this thesis contains no material previously published by any other person except where due acknowledgement has been made. This thesis contains no material which has been accepted as part of the requirements of any other academic degree or non-degree program, in English or in any other language. This is a true copy of the thesis, including final revisions. Date: …31 December 2013……………………………………………… Name (printed letters): …………Iva Popova…………………………………………… Signature: …………Iva Popova…………………………………………… CEU eTD Collection CEU eTD Collection CEU eTD Collection Abstract Republic of Bulgaria and the Czech Republic are Central Eastern European countries, as well as members of the European Union. They experienced similar communist past and transition to democracy period in the early 1990s. Currently the countries are parliamentary democracies with multi-party systems. In their recent history they both experience the phenomenon of fast emergence of new small political parties, which equally fast dissolve from the political arena or transform into different fractions. The purpose of this paper is to analyze this process by identifying the reasons behind its existence and compare it in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook CPDS III 1990-2012
    Codebook: COMPARATIVE POLITICAL DATA SET III 1990-2012 Klaus Armingeon, Laura Knöpfel, David Weisstanner and Sarah Engler The Comparative Political Data Set III 1990-2012 is a collection of political and institutional data. This data set consists of (mostly) annual data for a group of 36 OECD and/or EU- member countries for the period 1990-20121. The data are primarily from the data set created at the University of Berne, Institute of Political Science and funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation: The Comparative Political Data Set I (CPDS I). However, the present data set differs in several aspects from the CPDS I dataset. Compared to CPDS I Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus (Greek part), Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia have been added. The present data set is suited for cross-national, longitudinal and pooled time series analyses. The data set contains some additional demographic, socio- and economic variables. However, these variables are not the major concern of the project and are thus limited in scope. For more in-depth sources of these data, see the online databases of the OECD. For trade union membership, excellent data for European trade unions is provided by Jelle Visser (2013). When using the data from this data set, please quote both the data set and, where appropriate, the original source. This data set is to be cited as: Klaus Armingeon, Laura Knöpfel, David Weisstanner and Sarah Engler. 2014. Comparative Political Data Set III 1990-2012. Bern: Institute of Political Science, University of Berne. Last updated: 2014-09-30 1 Data for former communist countries begin in 1990 for Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta, Romania and Slovakia, in 1991 for Poland, in 1992 for Estonia and Lithuania, in 1993 for Lativa and Slovenia and in 2000 for Croatia.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Journal of Contemporary European Research Volume 12, Issue 3 (2016) Research Article Vincenzo Emanuele, LUISS, Rome Nicola Maggini, University of Florence Bruno Marino, Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence Citation Emanuele, V., Maggini, N and Marino, B. (2016). ‘Gaining Votes in Europe against Europe? How National Contexts Shaped the Results of Eurosceptic Parties in the 2014 European Parliament Elections’, Journal of Contemporary European Research. 12 (3), 697 - 715. First published at: www.jcer.net Volume 12, Issue 3 (2016) Vincenzo Emanuele, Nicola Maggini and Bruno Marino Abstract In the wake of the harshest economic crisis since 1929, in several European countries there has been a rise of Eurosceptic parties that oppose EU integration. The 2014 European Parliament elections were a fundamental turning point for these parties. In this article, after a theoretical discussion on the concept of Euroscepticism, we provide an updated classification of Eurosceptic parties after the 2014 European Parliament elections. We show the cross-country variability of such parties’ results and present two hypotheses aiming at explaining Eurosceptic parties’ results, one related to each country’s economic context and one related to each country’s political-institutional context. Through a comparative approach and the use of quantitative data, we test the two hypotheses by creating two standardised indices of economic and political-institutional contexts. Three important findings are shown: Eurosceptic parties perform better in either rich, creditor countries or in poor countries; Eurosceptic parties perform better in countries with peculiar political-institutional features, such as high levels of party system instability and a more permissive electoral system; finally, and crucially, favourable political-institutional contexts seem to be more important than favourable economic contexts for Eurosceptic parties’ electoral results.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Hradec Králové Philosophical Faculty Department of History
    University of Hradec Králové Philosophical Faculty MASTER’S THESIS 2019 Luciana Carolina Serrano Parra University of Hradec Králové Philosophical Faculty Department of History Electoral performance of the radical right in Central Europe. The cases of Hungary and Czech Republic. Master’s Thesis Author: Luciana Carolina Serrano Parra Study programme: International Territorial Studies Branch of Study: Central European Studies Tutor: Mgr. Milan Hrubeš, Ph.D. Hradec Králové 2019 I declare that I have written this Master’s thesis independently (under the supervising of the head supervisor of the thesis) and stated all employed sources and literature. In Hradec Králové 29.07.2019 …………………… Signature Annotation Serrano Parra, Luciana Carolina Radikální pravice je jedna z rodin politických stran, které odborníci věnují více pozornosti. Volební kampaně těchto stran byly zkoumány z mnoha různých úhlů pohledu. I přesto se jim v regionech střední Evropy věnuje podstatně méně pozornosti než jejím protějškům v západní Evropě. Úspěch radikální pravice ve střední Evropě je mnohem méně stabilnější než v jiných případech a navazuje na jiný historický odkaz. Tato práce se zaměřuje na.volební kampaně radikálně pravicových stran ve střední Evropě, konkrétně SPD v České republice a Jobbik v Maďarsku, ale také faktory, které hrají důležitou roli v jejich kampaních, tj. interakce nabídky a poptávky, rámcování problémů a role mainstreamových stran. Pro tento účel byly vybrány volby z r. 2013 a 2017 v České republice a z r. 2010 a 2014 v Maďarsku. Klíčová slova Radikální pravice, volební výkon, rámcování problémů, Česká republika, Maďarsko Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 2 Overview ...................................................................................................... 3 2.1 The radical right. Discussions regarding the accurate terminology.
    [Show full text]
  • Krajské Volby 2012 V Jihočeském Kraji
    Jiho česká univerzita v Českých Bud ějovicích Ekonomická fakulta Katedra strukturální politiky EU a rozvoje venkova Diplomová práce Krajské volby 2012 v Jiho českém kraji Vypracovala: Bc. Miroslava Marchalová Vedoucí práce: doc. PhDr. Jaroslav Čmejrek, CSc. České Bud ějovice 2014 Prohlášení Prohlašuji, že svoji diplomovou práci na téma „Krajské volby v Jiho českém kraji v roce 2012“ jsem vypracovala samostatn ě pouze s použitím pramen ů a literatury uvedených v seznamu citované literatury. Prohlašuji, že v souladu s § 47 zákona č. 111/1998 Sb. v platném zn ění souhlasím se zve řejn ěním své diplomové práce, a to - v nezkrácené podob ě - v úprav ě vzniklé vypušt ěním vyzna čených částí archivovaných Ekonomickou fakultou - elektronickou cestou ve ve řejn ě p řístupné části databáze STAG provozované Jiho českou univerzitou v Českých Bud ějovicích na jejích internetových stránkách, a to se zachováním mého autorského práva k odevzdanému textu této kvalifika ční práce. Souhlasím také s tím, aby toutéž elektronickou cestou byly v souladu s uvedeným ustanovením zákona č. 111/1998 Sb. zve řejn ěny posudky školitele a oponent ů práce i záznam o pr ůběhu a výsledku obhajobykvalifika ční práce. Rovn ěž souhlasím s porovnáním textu mé kvalifika ční práce s databází kvalifika čních prací Theses.cz provozovanou Národním registrem vysokoškolských kvalifika čních prací a systémem na odhalování plagiát ů. V Českých Bud ějovicích, dne 17. dubna 2014 …………………………… podpis Pod ěkování Na tomto míst ě děkuji doc. PhDr. Jaroslavu Čmejrkovi CSc. za odborné vedení, cenné poznámky a rady, kterými p řisp ěl k zpracování mé diplomové práce. OBSAH 1 ÚVOD ................................................................................................................... 9 2 LITERÁRNÍ REŠERŠE ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]