Chapter 6 Studying and Comparing Second-Order Elections
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 6 Studying and Comparing Second-Order Elections. Examples from Greece, Portugal and Spain. Stavros Skrinis and Eftichia Teperoglou University of Athens,Greece Abstract Since the formulation of the second-order election model there have been many studies comparing first and second order contests, in particular national and European elections. However, few analyses have been conducted on the relationship between different types of SOEs. This paper uses the Index of Dissimilarity, a measure used to compare elections of different types, in order to shed light on the relationship between municipal (local level) and European (supra-national level) elections in three Southern European countries, Greece, Portugal and Spain. We use aggregate electoral results from the capitals of Greek prefectures (51), the capitals of Portuguese districts (18 district capitals of mainland Portugal plus the capitals of Azores and Madeira) and the capitals of Spanish provinces (50). We focus on the last three municipal elections in each country, which are compared with the closest European (and parliamentary) contests. We observe high dissimilarity, which makes us believe that local and European contests are quite independent from one another and that voting choice is affected by different criteria. 164 Stavros Skrinis and Eftichia Teperoglou Introduction In the study of different types of elections in Europe, there are some topics that have been examined more than others. One of the less favoured ones deals with the relationship between local and European contests. Interest in examining the relationship between the two different sorts of second order elections may be placed in a narrow framework about the application and the prospects of the second order model or in a broader one. In favour of the latter case, there are arguments about the importance of local administration, local politics and the respective elections. The second-order elections model In Europe, the first study of the electoral cycle and the popularity of the government was done by Reiner Dinkel and was formulated in terms of the ‘minor elections’ theory (Dinkel 1977). Dinkel observed that the performance of the federal government parties in the German Länder elections depended on the timing of the election within the federal cycle. The characteristics of the mid-term and Länder elections led to the formulation of the theoretical model of ‘national second-order elections’. Karlheinz Reif and Hermann Schmitt’s model is a turning point in the study of elections that were overshadowed by general ones (Reif and Schmitt 1980, Reif 1985, Schmitt and Mannheimer 1991, C. van der Eijk and Franklin 1996, Reif 1997, Norris 1997, Marsh 1998 and 2005, Freire 2004, Schmitt 2005, W. van der Brug and C. van der Eijk 2005). These writers have made the distinction between first-order national elections and second-order national elections. In their 1980 article, Reif and Schmitt studied the first European Election which took place in June 1979 and represented a typical example of a second-order election. The main hypothesis and novelty of Reif and Schmitt’s theoretical model was that the European Election political arena combined nine different second-order political arenas. Each member-state of the European Studying and comparing second-order elections 165 Community (EEC) had a national (first-order) political arena (FOPA) and, therefore, the European Election result (second-order political arena/SOPA) was clearly affected by the current national policies and the national first- order political arena. Thus, at the time of the European Election, the FOPA played an important role in the SOPA (Reif and Schmitt 1980, Reif 1985). Reif and Schmitt place the European Election within each national electoral cycle and claim that participation will be lower, and that new parties will fare better and null votes will increase. They also elaborate on the performance of larger and governing parties or coalitions, and claim that it is worse in second order than in general elections. All these trends derive from the fact that less is at stake, since the national government will not change. Most of the studies are focused on the first and most important dimension of the model (less at stake) and its effects. Moreover, there is emphasis on the way in which national politics constrains European elections and how electoral behaviour in European elections is shaped, depending on the timing of the contest within the first-order electoral cycle. Special focus has been on comparisons of turnout (Blondel et al 1996, 1997; Franklin 1996, 2001a, 2001b; Mattila 2003), voting choice (Marsh 1998, 2005), specific arena (Küchler 1991; Wüst 2006) and campaign dimensions (Banducci & Semetco 2003; De Vreese et al 2006) between national and European contests. The SOE model has been invaluable in shedding light on these matters. Closely related to the formulation of the model is the study of local elections, either in comparison with national contests or as case studies. Depending on the political system of each country, the set of local elections may be comprised of several contests, such as Länder, Provincial, Regional, Prefecture, Municipal etc. The research focuses on the relationship between local and national elections in terms of turnout, small parties and national government popularity (suggestively Dinkel 1977, 1978, 1989; Morlan 1984; Abedi & Siaroff 1999, 2006; Jeffery & Hough 2001, 2003a, 2003b, 2006, Pallarés & Keating 2003, 2006; Moschonas 2003, 2006). 166 Stavros Skrinis and Eftichia Teperoglou Figure 1: Schematic Representation of different types of elections Local | National | Supra-national National elections Local European elections ? Elections Figure 1 shows a schematic of the relationship betweem elections. The various types of elections have been studied, as well as the relationship between national and local, and national and European. What is the relationship between local elections (all or any kind of local elections) and elections for the European Parliament? How does electoral behaviour change from one type to another? These are questions that will define if and how the interplay of different level SOEs is formed. Uncharted territory Until now, only a few articles have been written, comparing British local government and European Parliament elections in 1994 and 2004. Their emphasis was mainly on the classification of different types of elections and they concluded that “some SOEs are more SOEs than others” (McLean 1996), “…the elections to local councils as one and three quarters order” (Heath et al 1999), Studying and comparing second-order elections 167 “local elections as less second order than pan-European ones” (Rallings & Thrasher 2005). Moreover, André Freire (2004) has claimed that «Empirical studies of second-order elections in the European context have usually compared legislative and European Parliament elections, and have usually lacked a longitudinal perspective», and has tried to overcome some of these shortcomings by using only Portuguese electoral data (1975-2004), extending comparisons to more types of second-order elections and introducing a long-run perspective. Studying and Comparing Second-Order Elections: Examples from Greece, Portugal and Spain The main aim of this study is to shed light on this perspective by comparing second-order elections in Greece, Portugal and Spain. We attempt to look at some aspects of the relationship between local and European elections in a comparative perspective, and explore whether there are different patterns of voting behaviour in the same region in local, compared to European and national, elections and in European, compared to national, contests. At the local level, we have decided to use municipal elections because this is the only common type of local contest in the three countries (see Table 1). In particular, we use aggregate electoral results from the capitals of Greek prefectures (51), the capitals of Portuguese districts (18 district capitals of mainland Portugal plus the capitals of Azores and Madeira) and the capitals of Spanish provinces (50).1 Furthermore, larger cities often have more official (party supported) candidacies and there are few independent candidates that would require a more in-depth approach in each case/municipality. 168 Stavros Skrinis and Eftichia Teperoglou Table 1: Levels of elections Local National Supra-national Municipal and Parliamentary European Greece Prefecture Municipal (Parishes, Presidential and Portugal European Municipalities) Parliamentary Municipal, Provincial (direct elections only in Parliamentary the Basque Country) Spain (Congress & European and Regional Senate) (Autonomous Communities) We have chosen to study the last three municipal elections in each country and compared them with the closest European and parliamentary contests. We have examined the two larger parties2 in each country and the rest of the parties in each country considered as a whole. The analytical tool we use is the index of dissimilarity (Johnston 1980, Abedi & Siaroff 1999). We have chosen this index because it is used in comparisons of different types of elections (Abedi & Siaroff 1999 and 2006; Jeffery and Hough 2003). Until now it has been used in the comparison of national and regional elections. We attempt to introduce it in the study of European elections. Applying the index of dissimilarity in our study, we focus on the electoral results of municipal elections in 121 cities in the three countries and compare them