PIREDEU Design Study - Providing an Infrastructure for Research on Electoral Democracy in the European Union 2009 European Election Candidate Study ­ Methodological Annex Heiko Giebler & Bernhard Weßels Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB) Reichpietschufe r 50 10785 Berlin Germany If you have any comments or questions, please, contact Heiko Giebler ([email protected]) or Bernhard Weßels ([email protected]). CONTENT 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................................................2 2. Country teams .................................................................................................................................................2 3. Sample.................................................................................................................................................................4 4. Fieldwork and Design ..................................................................................................................................5 Development of the Questionnaire ........................................................................................................5 Translation........................................................................................................................................................8 Fieldwork Time...............................................................................................................................................9 Dual Mode Design ..........................................................................................................................................9 5. Response Rates ............................................................................................................................................10 6. Candidate Contact Information.............................................................................................................14 7. Quality of Data Input and Data Punching .........................................................................................18 8. Representativeness and Weights.........................................................................................................20 9. Coding of open‐ended answers.............................................................................................................22 Annex ....................................................................................................................................................................23 Annex 1: Tasks of country teams .........................................................................................................23 Annex 2: Response rates by parties....................................................................................................24 Annex 3: Coding schemes........................................................................................................................48 Annex 4: Core questionnaire..................................................................................................................53 Please, cite as follows: Giebler, Heiko and Bernhard Weßels (2010): 2009 European Election Can­ didate Study ­ Methodological Annex. Berlin: WZB. 1 1. Introduction The 2009 European Parliament Election Candidate Study (EECS) is part of the larger research project PIREDEU that investigates electoral democracy and political represen‐ tation in the European Union in conjunction with the European Parliament Elections 2009. The EECS was conducted in all 27 member states of the Union. It is a core part of the PIREDEU project, funded by the European Union’s 7th Framework Programme. The PIREDEU project is also engaged in the study of the electorate, party programs, and the role of the mass media in all member countries. The general aim of the candidate survey is to analyze – in conjunction with the other components of the PIREDEU project – the link between the peoples of the member coun‐ tries and the European level as it is organized through elections. One of the major ques‐ tions is as to which degree political representation at the European level follows the re‐ sponsible party model of the nation states. The survey is concerned with a variety of aspects of being a candidate to the European Parliament. The substantive questions to be answered by the project are concerned with the relationship between citizens and candidates as well as representatives with regard to mobilization efforts, contacts, the issues in the election, and how candidates and elected conceptualize political represen‐ tation at the European level. This report gives additional information on methodological and related issues for the 2009 European Election Candidate Study. Various aspects are covered in this document, ranging from sampling and data collection to things like post‐processing and response rates. Information on individual survey items and variables can be found in the code‐ book.1 2. Country teams Although the 2009 European Election Candidate Study was centrally coordinated at the Social Science Research Centre Berlin (WZB), the establishment of a network of country teams was indispensable. For implementing the fieldwork, namely generating the addresses of candidates and providing them in a machine‐readable form, checking the translations of contact letters as well as the questionnaires, support of country col‐ 1 Giebler, Heiko, Elmar Haus, and Bernhard Weßels (2010): 2009 European Election Candidate Study - Code- book. Berlin: WZB. 2 laborators was essential.2 For this reason, the candidate study team has worked from the very beginning on getting country collaborators involved and committed.3 Table 1 displays all country collaborators. TABLE 1: Country Teams Country Experts Institution E­Mail Sylvia Kritz‐ Austria University of Vienna [email protected] inger Lieven de Win‐ Belgium University of Louvain [email protected] ter Blagovesta Bulgaria Université libre de Bruxelles [email protected] Cholova Bambos Papa‐ Cyprus European University Cyprus [email protected] georgiou Czech Repub‐ Academy of Sciences of the Lukáš Linek [email protected] lic Czech Republic Robert Klem‐ University of Southern Den‐ Denmark [email protected] mensen mark Estonia Piret Ehin University of Tartu [email protected] Mikko Mattila University of Helsinki [email protected] Finland Tapio Raunio University of Tampere [email protected] Olivier Rozen‐ France Sciences Po olivier.rozenberg@sciences‐po.fr berg Social Science Research Cen‐ Heiko Gieble r [email protected] tre Berlin Germany Bernhard Social Science Research Cen‐ [email protected] Weßels tre Berlin Theodore Ch ad‐ Aristotle University of Thes‐ [email protected] jipadelis saloniki Greece Eftichia Aristotle University of Thes‐ [email protected] Teperoglou saloniki Hungary Zsolt Enyedi Central European University [email protected] Michael Marsh Trinity College Dublin [email protected] Ireland Maria Laura Trinity College Dublin [email protected] Sudulich Massimiliano University of Pisa [email protected] Andretta Italy Luciano Bardi University of Pisa [email protected] 2 A more detailed description of the tasks can be found in Annex 1. 3 The research team is very grateful for all the effort of the country teams. 3 TABLE 1: Country Teams, continued Country Experts Institution E­Mail Latvia Janis Iksten s University of Latvia [email protected] Algis Kru‐ Kaunas University of Tech‐ Lithuania [email protected] pavicius nology Patrick University of Luxembourg [email protected] Dumont Luxembourg Astrid University of Luxembourg [email protected] Spreitzer Dominic Malta University of Malta [email protected] Fenech Netherland s Martin Rosema University of Twente [email protected] Mikolaj Czes‐ Poland Polish Academy of Science [email protected] nik Portugal André Freire Lisbon University Institute [email protected] Marina Pope‐ Romania University of Essex [email protected] scu Olga Gyarfas‐ Institute for Public Affairs Slovakia [email protected] ova (IVO) Slovenia Cirila Toplak University of Ljubljana [email protected]‐lj.si Autonomous University of Ignacio Molina [email protected] Madrid Spain Alberto Sanz Autonomous University of [email protected] Cazorla Madrid Louise Göteborg University [email protected] Haglund Sweden Sören Holm‐ Göteborg University [email protected] berg United King‐ Thomas Saal‐ University of Kent [email protected] dom feld 3. Sample More than 10,000 candidates run in the 2009 European Parliament Election. The fi‐ nancial resources of the 2009 European Election Candidate Study were too limited to enable the survey of all those candidates. At the same time, it is reasonable to introduce restrictions to the sample from a theoretical perspective as well: Parties and/or candi‐ dates without the smallest possibility to win at least one seat or to become an MEP are of no interest for the 2009 European Election Study. In contrary, they might lead to distor‐ tions in any kind of analyses. Nevertheless, the basic aim of the project was to enable research on the whole universe of relevant parties and candidates, meaning that not just candidates of parties with seats in the national or former European Parliament or top‐ 4 candidates (in terms of, e.g., list positions) should be surveyed. To come as close as pos‐ sible to the golden mean, a specific strategy to identify relevant parties and candidates was