Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:28:29.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Policy Voting and Incumbency: Unemployment in Western Europe*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2013

Ruth Dassonneville  and
Michael S. Lewis-Beck
Ruth Dassonneville
Affiliation:
Centre for Citizenship and Democracy, University of Leuven
Michael S. Lewis-Beck
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The economic voting literature has been dominated by the incumbency-oriented hypothesis, in which voters reward or punish governments at the ballot box according to the nation's economic performance. The alternative (policy-oriented) hypothesis, in which voters favor parties that are closest to their issue position(s), has been neglected in this literature. This article explores policy voting with respect to an archetypal economic policy issue—unemployment. Voters who favor lower unemployment should tend to vote for left parties, since they “own” the issue. Examining a large time-series cross-sectional pool of Western European nations, this study finds some evidence for economic policy voting. However, it is conditioned by incumbency. According to varied tests, left incumbents experience a net electoral cost if the unemployment rate climbs. Incumbency, then, serves to break any natural economic policy advantage that might accrue to the left due to the issue of unemployment.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Political Science Research and Methods , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , June 2013 , pp. 53 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © The European Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Ruth Dassonneville is a PhD student of the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) at the Centre for Citizenship and Democracy, University of Leuven, Parkstraat 45 – box 3602, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium ([email protected]). Michael S Lewis-Beck is F. Wendell Miller Distinguished Professor of Political Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, United States ([email protected]).

References

Allison, Paul D. 2009. Fixed Effects Regression Models. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Anderson, Theodore W.Hsiao, Cheng. 1982. ‘Formulation and Estimation of Dynamic Models Using Panel Data’. Journal of Econometrics 18(1):47–82.Google Scholar
Arellano, ManuelBond, Stephen. 1991. ‘Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations’. Review of Economic Studies 58(2):277–297.Google Scholar
Arellano, ManuelBover, Olympia. 1995. ‘Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models’. Journal of Econometrics 68(1):29–51.Google Scholar
Arnesen, Sveinung. 2012. ‘Forecasting Norwegian Elections: Out of Work and Out of Office’. International Journal of Forecasting 28(4):789–796.Google Scholar
Bell, Andrew, Jones, Kelvyn. 2012. Explaining Fixed Effects: Random Effects Modeling of Time-Series Cross-Sectional and Panel-Data: University of Bristol.Google Scholar
Blundell, RichardBond, Stephen. 1998. ‘Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Moments’. Journal of Econometrics 87(1):115–143.Google Scholar
Butler, DavidStokes, Donald. 1969. Political Change in Britain. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dassonneville, RuthHooghe, Marc. 2012. ‘Election Forecasting under Opaque Conditions: A Model for Francophone Belgium, 1981–2010’. International Journal of Forecasting 28(4):777–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Döring, Holger, Manow, Philip. 2012. Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov): An Infrastructure for Empirical Information on Parties, Elections and Governments in Modern Democracies 2011. Available from http://www.parlgov.org/. Accessed November 2012.Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Duch, Raymond M. 2007. ‘Comparative Studies of the Economy and the Vote’. In Encyclopedia of Comparative Politics, edited by Carlos Boix and Susan Stokes, 805–844. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferrera, Maurizio. 1996. ‘The ‘Southern Model’ of Welfare in Southern Europe’. Journal of European Social Policy 6(1):17–37.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Michael. 2012. Electoral Systems Website. Available from http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher/ElSystems/. Accessed December 2012.Google Scholar
Goodhart, Charles A.E.Bhansali, Rajendra J.. 1970. ‘Political Economy’. Political Studies 18(1):43–106.Google Scholar
Hellwig, Timothy T. 2010. ‘Elections and the Economy’. In Comparing Democracies 3: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, edited by Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris, 184–201. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D. Roderick. 1983. Macroeconomics and Micropolitics: The Electoral Effects of Economic Issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S.Nadeau, Richard. 2009. ‘Obama and the Economy in 2008’. PS: Political Science and Politics 42(3):479–483.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S.Nadeau, Richard. 2011. ‘Economic Voting Theory: Testing New Dimensions’. Electoral Studies 30(2):288–294.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., Nadeau, Richard, Foucault, Martial forthcoming. The Compleat Economic Voter: New Evidence from the UK. British Journal of Political Science.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S.Stegmaier, Mary. 2000. ‘Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes’. Annual Review of Political Sciences 3(1):183–219.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S.Stegmaier, Mary. 2007. ‘Economic Models of Voting’. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, edited by Russell J. Dalton and Hans-Dieter Klingeman, 518–537. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Magalhães, Pedro C., Aguiar-Conraria, LuísLewis-Beck, Michael S.. 2012. ‘Forecasting Spanish Elections’. International Journal of Forecasting 28(4):769–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norpoth, Helmuth. 1996. ‘The Economy and Elections’. In Comparative Democratic Elections, edited by Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi and Pippa Norris, 299–318. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Pacek, Alexander C.Radcliff, Benjamin. 1995. ‘Turnout and the Vote for Left-of-Centre Parties: A Cross-National Analysis’. British Journal of Political Science 25(1):137–143.Google Scholar
Pacek, Alexander C.Radcliff, Benjamin. 1999. ‘Economics and the Left Party Vote in Scandinavia: A Cross-National Analysis’. Scandinavian Political Studies 22(4):295–306.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1996. ‘Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study’. American Journal of Political Science 40(3):825–850.Google Scholar
Rattinger, Hans. 1991. ‘Unemployment and Elections in West Germany’. In Economics and Politics: The Calculus of Support, edited by Helmuth Norpoth, Michael S. Lewis-Beck and Jean-Dominique Lafay, 49–62. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.Google Scholar
Roodman, David. 2009. ‘Practitioners’ Corner. A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments’. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 71(1):135–158.Google Scholar
Stegmaier, MaryLewis-Beck, Michael S.. 2009. ‘Learning the Economic Vote: Hungarian Forecasts, 1998–2010’. Politics & Policy 37(4):769–780.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1963. ‘Spatial Models of Party Competition’. American Political Science Review 57(2):368–377.Google Scholar
International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. 2012. Voter Turnout Data. Available from http://www.idea.int/vt/. Accessed November 2012.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund. 2012. World Economic Outlook Database 2012. Available from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/02/weodata/index.aspx. Accessed November 2012.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Dassonneville and Lewis-Beck Dataset

Dataset

http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/22360
Link