DOCSLIB.ORG

EU Profiler-Euandi Trendfile Codebook

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

- Codebook - EU Profiler/euandi Trend File (2009-2019) European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies February 2020 Introduction The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File (2009-2019) combines party position data from three pan-European voting advice applications (VAAs), developed for the European Parliament elections in 2009, 2014 and 2019. It includes the positions of over 400 parties1 from the 28 EU member states on a wide range of salient political issues. The project was first launched in 2009 under the name ‘EU Profiler’ by the European University Institute (EUI), in collaboration with Smartvote (Switzerland) and Kieskompas (2009). By positioning more than 270 political parties from 30 European countries2 it was the first cross-national VAA of such magnitude. EU Profiler was succeeded by ‘euandi’ (EU and I) in 2014 and re-launched as ‘euandi2019’ five years later, in collaboration with the University of Luzern.3 To determine party positions on the political issues, all three editions of the VAA have used the same iterative method that combines party self-placement and expert judgement. All the parties were offered a chance to place themselves on the pre-selected issue-statements. The parties were also placed on the same list of issues by a group of experts from each EU member state. The results were then compared and, if necessary, calibrated in co-operation with the party representatives. If the party did not respond to the invitation to participate in the self-placement procedure, the positions were determined solely by the expert group.4 Over 100 highly trained experts across Europe worked for each of these VAAs to make such immense data collection endeavour possible. The VAAs launched in 2009 and 2014 included a set of 30 political issue-statements, out of which 28 were identical for all the countries and 2 were country-specific. In 2019, the number of statements was reduced to 22 and all the items were identical across the countries. Some of the statements were changed over the years, but 15 of them remained the same since 2009. These items – pertaining to a wide range of salient topics such as social values, ecological/green policies, immigration, European 1 The criteria for selecting parties was that they should have a certain level of relevance in the respective party system. The relevance was defined in rather lenient terms, so that parties that were credited with at least 1% of the popular vote in the polls preceding the EP election were considered for the VAA. Thus, the dataset also includes a number of rather minor parties. 2 EU Profiler included all 27 countries that at the time belonged to the European Union, and in addition also Croatia, Switzerland and Turkey. As Switzerland and Turkey were not included in the 2014 and 2019 VAAs, they are excluded from the Trend File. 3 In 2014, the EUI collaborated with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University and with LUISS University in Rome; the 2019 was carried out in cooperation with the University of Lucerne in Switzerland. 4 In 2009, approximately 40% of the parties took part in the self-placement, in 2014 and 2019, the percentage was slightly above 50%. integration and classic socioeconomic left-right issues – allow direct temporal comparisons and make this dataset especially valuable for longitudinal research. General variables COUNTRY = Alphabetic country identifier COUNTRY_CODE = Numeric country identifier YEAR = The year the party was placed (2009, 2014, 2019) PUI = Party Unique Identifier CHESS = Chapel Hill Expert Survey code of the party SELFPLACEMENT = A dummy variable indicating whether the party participated in the self-placement process (1 – yes; 0 – no). EPVOTE = The vote share of the party in the respective European Parliament election. EPVOTE_COALITION = Vote share of a party coalition that the respective party was part of (in case when the separate party vote share is not discernible).5 5 In some countries, parties formed electoral coalitions/alliances for the EP election and the vote shares of the separate parties were not discernible; yet, some of these parties were represented separately in the VAA. In these instances we have assigned the vote share of the whole coalition to the separate parties that were part of it and marked the main „EPVOTE“ variable as a missing value. Issue-statements Party positions on each statement were coded according to the following answer categories: No opinion = . Completely disagree = 0 Tend to disagree = 25 Neutral = 50 Tend to agree = 75 Completely agree = 100 Common statements 2009 Variable Statement S1_09 Social programs should be maintained even at the cost of higher taxes. S2_09 Greater efforts should be made to privatize healthcare services in the country. S3_09 State subsidies for crèches and child care should be increased substantially. S4_09 Immigration policies oriented towards skilled workers should be encouraged as a means of fostering economic growth. S5_09 Immigration into the country should be made more restrictive. S6_09 Immigrants from outside Europe should be required to accept our culture and values. S7_09 The legalisation of same sex marriages is a good thing S8_09 Religious values and principles should be shown greater respect in politics. S9_09 The decriminalization of the personal use of drugs is to be welcomed. S10_09 Euthanasia should be legalised S11_09 Government spending should be reduced in order to lower taxes S12_09 The EU should acquire its own tax raising powers S13_09 Governments should bail out failing banks with public money. S14_09 Governments should reduce workers' protection regulations in order to fight unemployment S15_09 The EU should drastically reduce its subsidies to Europe’s farmers. S16_09 Renewable sources of energy (e.g., solar or wind energy) should be supported even if this means higher energy costs. S17_09 The promotion of public transport should be fostered through green taxes (e.g., road taxing). S18_09 Policies to fight global warming should be encouraged even if it hampers economic growth or employment. S19_09 Restrictions of civil liberties should be accepted in the fight against terrorism. S20_09 Criminals should be punished more severely S21_09 On foreign policy issues, such as the relationship with Russia, the EU should speak with one voice. S22_09 The European Union should strengthen its security and defence policy S23_09 European integration is a good thing S24_09 [Your country] is much better off in the EU than outside it. S25_09 The European Union should be enlarged to include Turkey. S26_09 The European Parliament should be given more powers. S27_09 Individual member states of the EU should have less veto power S28_09 Any new European Treaty should be subject to approval in a referendum in [your country] Common statements 2014 Variable Statement S1_14 Social programs should be maintained even at the cost of higher taxes. It should be harder for EU immigrants working or staying in [your country] to get access to social assistance benefits than it is S2_14 for [your country's] citizens S3_14 Pension benefits should be reduced to limit the state debt in [your country] S4_14 To fight the problem of illegal immigration, the European Union should take responsibility in patrolling its borders S5_14 Immigration [into your country] should be made more restrictive S6_14 Immigrants from outside Europe should be required to accept our culture and values S7_14 The legalisation of same sex marriages is a good thing S8_14 Embryonic stem cell research should be stopped S9_14 The legalisation of the personal use of soft drugs is to be welcomed S10_14 Euthanasia should be legalised S11_14 Government spending should be reduced in order to lower taxes S12_14 The EU should acquire its own tax raising powers S13_14 Bank and stock market gains should be taxed more heavily S14_14 Governments should reduce workers' protection regulations in order to fight unemployment S15_14 The state should provide stronger financial support to unemployed workers S16_14 The EU should relax its austerity policy in order to foster economic growth S17_14 The promotion of public transport should be fostered through green taxes (e.g. road taxing) S18_14 Renewable sources of energy (e.g. solar or wind energy) should be supported even if this means higher energy costs S19_14 Restrictions of personal privacy on the Internet should be accepted for public security reasons S20_14 Criminals should be punished more severely S21_14 Access to abortion should become more restricted S22_14 The European Union should strengthen its security and defence policy S23_14 On foreign policy issues the EU should speak with one voice S24_14 European integration is a good thing S25_14 To tackle the sovereign debt crisis, the member states of the Eurozone should be allowed to issue common bonds (Eurobonds) S26_14 The single European currency (Euro) is a bad thing S27_14 Individual member states of the EU should have less veto power S28_14 Any new European Treaty should be subject to approval in a referendum in [your country] Common statements 2019 Variable Statement S1_19 Social programs should be maintained even at the cost of higher taxes. S2_19 The state should provide stronger financial support to unemployed workers S3_19 The EU should rigorously punish Member States that violate the EU deficit rules S4_19 Asylum-seekers should be distributed proportionally among EU Member States through a mandatory relocation system S5_19 Immigration [into your country] should be made more restrictive S6_19 Immigrants from outside Europe should be required to accept our culture and values S7_19 The legalisation of same sex marriages is a good thing S8_19 The legalisation of the personal use of soft drugs is to be welcomed S9_19 Euthanasia should be legalised S10_19 Government spending should be reduced in order to lower taxes S11_19 The EU should acquire its own tax raising powers S12_19 Bank and stock market gains should be taxed more heavily S13_19 The promotion of public transport should be fostered through green taxes (e.g.
Recommended publications
  • The Rise of Syriza: an Interview with Aristides Baltas

    The Rise of Syriza: an Interview with Aristides Baltas

    THE RISE OF SYRIZA: AN INTERVIEW WITH ARISTIDES BALTAS This interview with Aristides Baltas, the eminent Greek philosopher who was one of the founders of Syriza and is currently a coordinator of its policy planning committee, was conducted by Leo Panitch with the help of Michalis Spourdalakis in Athens on 29 May 2012, three weeks after Syriza came a close second in the first Greek election of 6 May, and just three days before the party’s platform was to be revealed for the second election of 17 June. Leo Panitch (LP): Can we begin with the question of what is distinctive about Syriza in terms of socialist strategy today? Aristides Baltas (AB): I think that independently of everything else, what’s happening in Greece does have a bearing on socialist strategy, which is not possible to discuss during the electoral campaign, but which will present issues that we’re going to face after the elections, no matter how the elections turn out. We haven’t had the opportunity to discuss this, because we are doing so many diverse things that we look like a chicken running around with its head cut off. But this is precisely why I first want to step back to 2008, when through an interesting procedure, Synaspismos, the main party in the Syriza coalition, formulated the main elements of the programme in a book of over 300 pages. The polls were showing that Syriza was growing in popularity (indeed we reached over 15 per cent in voting intentions that year), and there was a big pressure on us at that time, as we kept hearing: ‘you don’t have a programme; we don’t know who you are; we don’t know what you’re saying’.
  • Download/Print the Study in PDF Format

    Download/Print the Study in PDF Format

    GENERAL ELECTION IN GREECE 7th July 2019 European New Democracy is the favourite in the Elections monitor Greek general election of 7th July Corinne Deloy On 26th May, just a few hours after the announcement of the results of the European, regional and local elections held in Greece, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras (Coalition of the Radical Left, SYRIZA), whose party came second to the main opposition party, New Analysis Democracy (ND), declared: “I cannot ignore this result. It is for the people to decide and I am therefore going to request the organisation of an early general election”. Organisation of an early general election (3 months’ early) surprised some observers of Greek political life who thought that the head of government would call on compatriots to vote as late as possible to allow the country’s position to improve as much as possible. New Democracy won in the European elections with 33.12% of the vote, ahead of SYRIZA, with 23.76%. The Movement for Change (Kinima allagis, KINAL), the left-wing opposition party which includes the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), the Social Democrats Movement (KIDISO), the River (To Potami) and the Democratic Left (DIMAR), collected 7.72% of the vote and the Greek Communist Party (KKE), 5.35%. Alexis Tsipras had made these elections a referendum Costas Bakoyannis (ND), the new mayor of Athens, on the action of his government. “We are not voting belongs to a political dynasty: he is the son of Dora for a new government, but it is clear that this vote is Bakoyannis, former Minister of Culture (1992-1993) not without consequence.
  • Hungary Covering the Period of January to December 2020

    Hungary Covering the Period of January to December 2020

    ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANS, AND INTERSEX PEOPLE IN HUNGARY COVERING THE PERIOD OF JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2020 Hungary ACCESS TO GOODS AND SERVICES EDUCATION In December, the Equal Treatment Authority (ETA) found that On 15 December, parliament amended the Fundamental Law a hotel discriminated when refusing to host an event of a local to further entrench the anti-trans framework by establishing NGO that organised Pécs Pride. children’s “right” to identify with their birth sex, to be ‘protected’ from interventions to change it, and to be educated according to Christian values. ASYLUM On 16 July, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in the Gergely Gulyás, Minister of the Prime Minister said educators Rana v. Hungary case that an Iranian trans refugee had the who use ‘Wonderland is for Everyone’ (see Bias-motivated right to legal gender recognition. The government paid the speech and violence) may face criminal charges. Two local compensation, but the man’s documents have still not been governments banned the book in kindergartens, and a third one changed. banned LGBTQ propaganda in all institutions. BIAS-MOTIVATED SPEECH AND VIOLENCE EMPLOYMENT In August, PM Viktor Orbán called on neighbouring governments Háttér Society prepared a detailed practical guide to help to stand up for Christian values, warning against Western employers navigate difficulties arising from the ban of legal efforts to “experiment with a godless cosmos, rainbow families, gender recognition in an employment context. migration and open societies”. A coalition of NGOs issued a guide for employers on the COVID-19 Several local governments raised the rainbow flag during the pandemic’s impact on vulnerable employees, including LGBTQI Pride Festival, some of which were forcibly removed or burned by people.
  • 2019 European Elections the Weight of the Electorates Compared to the Electoral Weight of the Parliamentary Groups

    2019 European Elections the Weight of the Electorates Compared to the Electoral Weight of the Parliamentary Groups

    2019 European Elections The weight of the electorates compared to the electoral weight of the parliamentary groups Guillemette Lano Raphaël Grelon With the assistance of Victor Delage and Dominique Reynié July 2019 2019 European Elections. The weight of the electorates | Fondation pour l’innovation politique I. DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THE WEIGHT OF ELECTORATES AND THE ELECTORAL WEIGHT OF PARLIAMENTARY GROUPS The Fondation pour l’innovation politique wished to reflect on the European elections in May 2019 by assessing the weight of electorates across the European constituency independently of the electoral weight represented by the parliamentary groups comprised post-election. For example, we have reconstructed a right-wing Eurosceptic electorate by aggregating the votes in favour of right-wing national lists whose discourses are hostile to the European Union. In this case, for instance, this methodology has led us to assign those who voted for Fidesz not to the European People’s Party (EPP) group but rather to an electorate which we describe as the “populist right and extreme right” in which we also include those who voted for the Italian Lega, the French National Rally, the Austrian FPÖ and the Sweden Democrats. Likewise, Slovak SMER voters were detached from the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Group and instead categorised as part of an electorate which we describe as the “populist left and extreme left”. A. The data collected The electoral results were collected list by list, country by country 1, from the websites of the national parliaments and governments of each of the States of the Union. We then aggregated these data at the European level, thus obtaining: – the number of individuals registered on the electoral lists on the date of the elections, or the registered voters; – the number of votes, or the voters; – the number of valid votes in favour of each of the lists, or the votes cast; – the number of invalid votes, or the blank or invalid votes.
  • Estonian Research Agreement a Social Agreement to Ensure the Further Development of Estonian Research and Innovation

    Estonian Research Agreement a Social Agreement to Ensure the Further Development of Estonian Research and Innovation

    Estonian Research Agreement A social agreement to ensure the further development of Estonian research and innovation Sharing the common belief that research, development and innovation are strategically important for the well-being of the Estonian people and sustainability of society, the parties to this agreement confirm the need to guarantee the performance of the objectives agreed upon in the Estonian Research and Development and Innovation Strategy 2014–2020 “Knowledge-Based Estonia” and undertake to commit to the achievement of these objectives. For this purpose, they agree upon the following: 1. the undersigned political parties, represented by their Chairpersons, are in favour of increasing the public funding of research, development and innovation to 1% of the gross domestic product and maintaining it at least on the same level in the future. To this end, the parties agree that it will be specified in the 2019 state budget strategy that the target level is to be reached within three years with the addition of equal funding amounts; 2. Estonian research institutions, represented by the President of the Board of Universities Estonia, an association uniting Estonian public universities, affirm that research institutions will establish the institutional arrangements required for conducting and providing further incentive for performing high quality research and cooperation between researchers and entrepreneurs; 3. Estonian researchers, represented by the President of the Estonian Academy of Sciences and the President of the Estonian Young Academy of Sciences, affirm that Estonian researchers will do their best to ensure that the resources at their disposal are used for research and development in a way that guarantees a balance between basic and applied research, with the primary focus on developing fields aimed at the advancement of the Estonian economy and society; 4.
  • Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Chapter 1 Green Parties and Elections, 1979–2019 Green parties and elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Wolfgang Rüdig Introduction The history of green parties in Europe is closely intertwined with the history of elections to the European Parliament. When the first direct elections to the European Parliament took place in June 1979, the development of green parties in Europe was still in its infancy. Only in Belgium and the UK had green parties been formed that took part in these elections; but ecological lists, which were the pre- decessors of green parties, competed in other countries. Despite not winning representation, the German Greens were particularly influ- enced by the 1979 European elections. Five years later, most partic- ipating countries had seen the formation of national green parties, and the first Green MEPs from Belgium and Germany were elected. Green parties have been represented continuously in the European Parliament since 1984. Subsequent years saw Greens from many other countries joining their Belgian and German colleagues in the Euro- pean Parliament. European elections continued to be important for party formation in new EU member countries. In the 1980s it was the South European countries (Greece, Portugal and Spain), following 4 GREENS FOR A BETTER EUROPE their successful transition to democracies, that became members. Green parties did not have a strong role in their national party systems, and European elections became an important focus for party develop- ment. In the 1990s it was the turn of Austria, Finland and Sweden to join; green parties were already well established in all three nations and provided ongoing support for Greens in the European Parliament.
  • Studia Politica 32014

    Studia Politica 32014

    www.ssoar.info The 2014 European Elections. The Case of Poland Sula, Piotr Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Sula, P. (2014). The 2014 European Elections. The Case of Poland. Studia Politica: Romanian Political Science Review, 14(3), 395-406. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-445354 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de The 2014 European Elections The Case of Poland PIOTR SULA Introduction This article presents the conduct and consequence of the election to the European Parliament held in Poland on 25 May 2014. It is a commonly accepted view that elections are inherent in the democratic order. Members of the European Parliament are elected following a similar procedure to that governing the elections to national Parliaments. Probably as widespread is the opinion that, since they do not result in the election of the executive branch of government, European elections are of less significance to the competing parties – which appear to prioritise their participation in the future government – than the competition for seats in the national parliament. As a consequence, the lesser impact of the decisions made at the ballot box is also translated into a less intense interest in the European elections expressed by the electorate.
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences

    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.
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed

    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.
  • The Making of SYRIZA

    The Making of SYRIZA

    Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line Panos Petrou The making of SYRIZA Published: June 11, 2012. http://socialistworker.org/print/2012/06/11/the-making-of-syriza Transcription, Editing and Markup: Sam Richards and Paul Saba Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above. June 11, 2012 -- Socialist Worker (USA) -- Greece's Coalition of the Radical Left, SYRIZA, has a chance of winning parliamentary elections in Greece on June 17, which would give it an opportunity to form a government of the left that would reject the drastic austerity measures imposed on Greece as a condition of the European Union's bailout of the country's financial elite. SYRIZA rose from small-party status to a second-place finish in elections on May 6, 2012, finishing ahead of the PASOK party, which has ruled Greece for most of the past four decades, and close behind the main conservative party New Democracy. When none of the three top finishers were able to form a government with a majority in parliament, a date for a new election was set -- and SYRIZA has been neck-and-neck with New Democracy ever since. Where did SYRIZA, an alliance of numerous left-wing organisations and unaffiliated individuals, come from? Panos Petrou, a leading member of Internationalist Workers Left (DEA, by its initials in Greek), a revolutionary socialist organisation that co-founded SYRIZA in 2004, explains how the coalition rose to the prominence it has today.
  • Explaining Vote for Populist Parties: the Impact of the Political Trust, the Economic and the Political Context Danilo Serani De

    Explaining Vote for Populist Parties: the Impact of the Political Trust, the Economic and the Political Context Danilo Serani De

    Explaining vote for populist parties: the impact of the political trust, the economic and the political context Danilo Serani Department of Political and Social Sciences Universitat Pompeu Fabra [email protected] Abstract Over the last decades, the uneven electoral success of populist parties in Europe sparked the interest of many scholars. Until now, special attention has been devoted only to radical (especially right-wing) populist parties, at the same time as the impact of political trust on the vote for these parties has not been sufficiently addressed. In this paper, I focus on the direct and conditional effects of the trust in the main political actors on the vote for radical and non-radical populist parties. By using data from the European Social Survey (2004- 2014), this paper investigates the association between political trust and the Great Recession, as well as with the ideological convergence of the establishment parties. The results seem to confirm that political (dis)trust has a direct impact on the vote for a populist party, and its effects are accentuated during a crisis and when the establishment parties converge to the center. Key words Political trust, voting behavior, populism, multilevel analysis, economic crisis Paper prepared for the WAPOR Conference, Barcelona, November 24-25th 2016 This is a draft, please do not quote or circulate without author’s permission Introduction Over the last three decades, Europe witnessed the spread of the third wave of populism (Mudde, 2007). Far from being a transitory anomaly of liberal democracies, populist challengers of the establishment parties managed themselves to consolidate their position in the party systems.
  • Panel 4 the ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN

    Panel 4 the ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN

    The ecological movement in Greece: organizational and electoral expression in Greece 1974-2009 Bouranta Vasiliki Phd Candidate, Faculty of Law, Economics and Politics, Department of Political Sciences Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Abstract In the European elections of June 2009 and for the first time in the electoral history of Greece the Ecologist Greens managed to elect one of their candidates as a representative in the European Parliament. In the early national elections of October that followed, the party gathered 2,53% of the votes cast in the territory, their largest share in their short history. The Party failed naturally to participate in the distribution of seats of the Greek Parliament; however this percentage of valid votes is for many an indication of the rise of a new eco-movement to the Greek political space. In Western Europe, and especially in developed industrialised countries such as Germany, France, Belgium, Great Britain etc., 'green' parties acquired stable electoral stream and managed in several cases to gain “access to power” and be able to shape policies regarding the environment and other wider social and economic problems of their country. However, this was not the case of Greece where the ecological movement did not manage to develop to the point to become an equal “player” to the political deliberation but was always present in the background. More specific, my research question is why was not the greek ecological movement able to establish a mass party like the Socialists and therefore “build” a steady electoral power and influence in the political life of Greece. I aspire to answer to that question based on theories of voting behaviour of the electorate, focusing on “issue voting” theory.