Referendums have received increasing attention after the recent round of votes on the Maastricht treaty and the widening process of the European Union. Despite this increased interest in these instruments of decision making, scholarship has not provided us with insights into the relationship between the institutional characteristics and voter's decision. The authors provide a theoretical argument on how the voter's choice is affected by the nature of the referendum. Relevant factors are whether the referendum is required, whether the people's decision has a binding character, or which government coalition is presently in power. These institutional features mediate the impact of political factors, above all partisanship, on voting behavior. The authors test their theoretical arguments on the basis of empirical material from 14 referendums on European integration and find consistent support for their theoretical contentions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bille, Lars . (1994). Denmark. European Journal of Political Research, 26, 279-287.
2.
Bjorklund, Tor . (1996). The three Nordic 1994 referenda concerning membership in the EU. Cooperation and Conflict, 31, 11-36.
3.
Bogdanor, Vernon . (1994). Western Europe. In David Butler & Austin Ranney (Eds.), Referendums around the world (pp. 24-97). London: Macmillan.
4.
Borre, Ole . (1986). The Danish referendum on the EC Common Act. Electoral Studies, 5, 189-193.
5.
Butler, David , & Ranney, Austin. (Eds.). (1980). Referendums: A comparative study of practice and theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Butler, David , & Ranney, Austin. (Eds.). (1994). Referendums around the world. London: Macmillan.
7.
Della Chiesa, Bruno . (1993). Ein knappes “Ja.” Die Franzosen und die Verträge von Maastricht (A close “yes” vote. The French and the treaties of Maastricht). In Holger Rust (Ed.), Europa-Kampagnen. Dynamik öffentlicher Meinungsbildung in Dänemark, Frankreich und der Schweiz (pp. 59-100). Wien: Schriftenreihe des Zentrums für angewandte Politikforschung.
8.
Franklin, Mark , Marsh, Michael, & McLaren, Lauren. (1994). Uncorking the bottle: Popular opposition to European unification in the wake of Maastricht. Journal of Common Market Studies, 32, 455-472.
9.
Franklin, Mark , Marsh, Michael, & Wlezien, Christopher. (1994). Attitudes toward Europe and referendum votes: A response to Siune and Svensson. Electoral Studies, 13, 117-121.
10.
Franklin, Mark , van der Eijk, Cess, & Marsh, Michael. (1995). Referendum outcomes and trust in government: Public support for Europe in the wake of Maastricht. West European Politics, 18, 101-117.
11.
Gallagher, Michael . (1996). Ireland: The referendum as a conservative device. In Michael Gallagher & Pier Vincenzo Uleri (Eds.), The referendum experience in Europe (pp. 86-105). London: Macmillan.
12.
Gallagher, Michael , & Uleri, Pier Vincenzo. (Eds.). (1996). The referendum experience in Europe. London: Macmillan.
13.
Hamon, Francis . (1995). Le référendum. Etude comparative [The referendum. Comparative study]. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence.
14.
Hellevik, Ottar , & Gleditsch, Nils Peter. (1973). The common market decision in Norway: A clash between direct and indirect democracy. Scandinavian Political Studies, 8, 227-235.
15.
Jahn, Detlef , & Storsved, Ann-Sofie. (1995). Legitimacy through referendum? The nearly successful domino-strategy of the EU-referendums in Austria, Finland, Sweden and Norway. West European Politics, 18, 18-37.
16.
King, Anthony . (1991). Referendums and the European Community. In Austen Ranney (Ed.), The referendum device (pp. 113-122). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
17.
Körkemeyer, Stephan . (1995). Direkte Demokratie und Europäische Integration. (Direct democracy and European integration). Bern: Verlag Stämpfli + Cie.
18.
Kriesi, Hanspeter , Longchamp, Claude, Passy, Florence, & Sciarini, Pascal. (1993). Analyses des votations fédérales du 6 décembre 1992 (Analysis of the federal referendums of December 6, 1992). Adliswil, Genève: GfS Institut de recherche et Département de science politique, Université de Genève.
19.
Luthardt, Wolfgang . (1994). Direkte Demokratie: Ein Vergleich in Westeuropa (Direct democracy: A comparison in western Europe). Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos-Verlag.
20.
Müller, Wolfgang C. (1995). Austria. European Journal of Political Research, 28, 277-289.
21.
Petersen, Nikolaj . (1996). Denmark and the European Union 1985-96. A two-level analysis. Cooperation and Conflict, 31, 185-210.
22.
Petersen, Nikolaj , & Elklit, Jorgen. (1973). Denmark: Denmark enters the European Communities. Scandinavian Political Studies: A Yearbook, 8, 198-213.
23.
Pettersen, Arnt , Jenssen, Anders Todal, & Listhaug, Ola. (1995, April). The 1994 EU referendum in Norway: Continuity and change. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
24.
Pierce, Roy , Valen, Henry, & Listhaug, Ola. (1983). Referendum voting behavior: The Norwegian and British referenda on membership in the European Community. American Journal of Political Science, 27, 43-63.
25.
Przeworski, Adam , & Teune, Henry. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. New York: John Wiley.
26.
Rourke, John T. , Hiskes, Richard P., & Zirakzadeh, Cyrus Ernesto. (1992). Direct democracy and international politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne Riemer.
27.
Schneider, Gerald , & Weitsman, Patricia A. (1996). The punishment trap: Integration referendums as popularity contests. Comparative Political Studies, 28, 582-607.
28.
Sciarini, Pascal , & Listhaug, Ola. (1997). Single cases or a unique pair? The Swiss and Norwegian “No” to Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies, 35, 407-438.
29.
Siune, Karen , & Svensson, Palle. (1993). The Danes and the Maastricht Treaty: The Danish EC referendum of June 1992. Electoral Studies, 12, 99-111.
30.
Siune, Karen , Svensson, Palle, & Tonsgaard, Ole. (1994). The European Union: The Danes said “no” in 1992 but “yes” in 1993: How and why?Electoral studies, 13, 107-116.
31.
Smith, Gordon . (1976). The functional properties of the referendum. European Journal of Political Research, 4(1), 1-23.
32.
Sogner, Ingrid , & Archer, Clive. (1995). Norway and Europe: 1972 and now. Journal of Common Market Studies, 33, 389-410.
33.
Suksi, Markku . (1993). Bringing in the people: A comparison of constitutional forms and practices of the referendum. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
34.
Sundberg, Jan . (1995). Finland. European Journal of Political Research, 28, 323-331.
35.
Svasand, Lars , & Lindström, Ulf. (1992). Sliding towards EC membership: Norway in Scandinavian perspective. Government and Opposition, 3, 330-344.
36.
Svensson, Palle . (1994). The Danish yes to Maastricht and Edinburgh. The EC Referendum of May 1993. Scandinavian Political Studies, 17(1), 69-82.
37.
Widfeldt, Anders , & Pierre, Jon. (1995). Sweden. European Journal of Political Research, 28, 477-485.
