In this article we assess the electoral effects of the nomination of ethnic minority candidates. We argue that descriptive representation is an important factor in how parties in SMD systems establish their coalitions over multiple elections. We demonstrate this by showing that descriptive representation has a consistent effect on voting behavior, and thus that parties can rely on descriptive representation to win over specific segments of the voting population. Previous studies have been limited to single election years and single countries, but we collect original data from multiple election cycles in Australia and the UK to test our argument. We find that descriptive representation is consistently associated with a 10-percentage point bump in support from ethnic minority independents and Labour supporters. We conclude by highlighting the importance of this finding for party competition.
AdamsJMerrillSIIIGrofmanB (2005) A Unified Theory of Party Competition.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
AlvarezMRNaglerJ (1998) When politics and models collide: Estimating models of multiparty elections. American Journal of Political Science42(4): 55–96
3.
AndersenK (1979) The Creation of a Democratic Majority, 1928–1936. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4.
AnwarM (1984) Ethnic minorities and the 1983 general election: A research report. London: Commission for Racial Equality.
5.
ArzheimerKCarterE (2006) Political opportunity structures and right-wing extremist party success. European Journal of Political Research45(3): 419–433.
6.
BarretoMSeguraGMWoodsND (2004) The mobilizing effect of majority-minority districts on Latino turnout. American Political Science Review98(1): 65–75.
7.
BirdKSaalfeldTWustAK (eds) (2010) The Political Representation of Immigrants and Minorities: Voters, Parties and Parliaments in Liberal Democracies. London: Routledge.
8.
BloemraadI (2006) Becoming a citizen in the United States and Canada: Structured mobilization and immigrant political incorporation. Social Forces85(2): 667–695.
9.
BoboLGilliamFDJr (1990) Race, sociopolitical participation, and black empowerment. American Political Science Review84(2): 377–393.
BudgeIFarlieDJ (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections. London: George Allen and Unwin.
12.
ButlerDKavanaghD (1997) The British General Election of 1997. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
13.
ChongD (1991) Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14.
ChongDKimD (2006) The experiences and effects of economic status among racial and ethnic minorities. American Political Science Review100(3): 335–351.
15.
ChongDRogersR (2005) Racial solidarity and political participation. Political Behavior27(4): 347–374.
16.
ClarkCJ (2014) Collective descriptive representation and black voter mobilization in 2008. Political Behavior36(2): 345–333.
17.
CoxG (1997) Making Votes Count. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
CurticeJFisherSSteedM (2005) Appendix 2: The results analysed. In: KavanaghDButlerD (eds) The British General Election of 2005. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 235–259.
19.
DancygierR (2010) Immigration and Conflict in Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
DancygierRSaundersEN (2006) A new electorate? Comparing preferences and partisanship between immigrants and natives. American Journal of Political Science50(4): 962–981.
21.
DawsonM (1994) Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African American Politics. New York: Princeton University Press.
22.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
23.
EzrowL (2010) Linking Citizens and Parties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
FordR (2011) Acceptable and unacceptable immigrants: How opposition to immigration in Britain is affected by migrants’ region of origin. The Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies37(7): 1017–1037.
26.
FranzmannS (2011) Competition, contest, and cooperation: The analytic framework of the issue market. Journal of Theoretical Politics23(3): 317–343.
27.
GayC (2001) The Effect of Minority Districts and Minority Representation on Political Participation in California. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
28.
GeddesA (2003) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. London: SAGE.
29.
GlasgowG (2001) Mixed logit models for multiparty elections. Political Analysis9(2): 116–136.
30.
GolderM (2003) Electoral institutions, unemployment and extreme right parties: A correction. British Journal of Political Science33(3): 525–534.
31.
GriffinJDKeaneM (2006) Descriptive representation and the composition of African American turnout. American Journal of Political Science50(4): 998–1012.
32.
HeathAFFisherSDRosenblattG. (2013) The Political Integration of Ethnic Minorities in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
HinichMMungerMC (1997) Analytical Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
34.
HugS (2001) Altering Party Systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
35.
JesseeSA (2009) Spatial voting in the 2004 presidential election. American Political Science Review103(1): 59–81.
36.
JonesP (2014) Does the Descriptive Representation of Gender Influence Accountability for Substantive Representation?Gender and Politics10(2): 175–199.
37.
Le LohéMJ (1993) Ethnic minority candidates in general elections. Political Quarterly64(1): 107–117.
38.
LintonM (1987) The colour of your money beats racial prejudice at the polls. The Guardian, 19 June.
39.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent ‘yes’. The Journal of Politics61(3): 628–657.
40.
MeguidB (2010) Party Competition between Unequals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
MerrillSIIIGrofmanB (1999) A Unified Theory of Voting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
OrdeshookPCShvetsovaOV (1994) Ethnic heterogeneity, district magnitude, and the number of parties. American Journal of Political Science38(1): 100–123.
49.
PantojaARamirezRSeguraG (2001) Does ethnicity matter? Descriptive representation in legislatures and political alienation among Latinos. Social Science Quarterly84(2): 441–460.
50.
PitkinH (1972) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
51.
PreuhsR (2007) Descriptive representation as a mechanism to mitigate policy backlash: Latino incorporation and welfare policy in the American states. Political Research Quarterly60(2): 277–292.
52.
Saggar S (2000) Race and Representation: Electoral Politics and Ethnic Pluralism in Britain. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
53.
SchererNCurryB (2010) Does descriptive representation enhance institutional legitimacy? The case of the U.S. courts. Journal of Politics72(1): 90–104.
54.
ScheveKSlaughterM (2001) Labor market competition and individual preferences over immigration policy. The Review of Economics and Statistics83(1): 133–145.
55.
SimonBKlandermansB (2001) Politicized collective identity. American Psychologist56(4): 319–331.
56.
SobolewskaM (2005) Ethnic agenda: Relevance of political attitudes to party choice. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties15(2): 197–214.
57.
SobolewskaM (2013) Party strategies and the descriptive representation of ethnic minorities: The 2010 British general election. West European Politics36(3): 615–633.
58.
StegmaierMLewis-BeckMSmetsK (2013) Standing for Parliament: Do Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Candidates Pay Extra?Parliamentary Affairs66: 268–285.
59.
TateK (2003) Black opinion on the legitimacy of racial redistricting and minority-majority districts. American Political Science Review97(1): 44–56.
60.
WhitbeyKJ (2007) The effect of black descriptive representation on black electoral turnout in the 2004 elections. Social Science Quarterly88(4): 1010–1023.
61.
WolfingerR (1965) The development and persistence of ethnic voting. American Political Science Review59(4): 896–908.
ZingherJNThomasMS (2012) Patterns of immigrant political behaviour in Australia: An analysis of immigrant voting in ethnic context. Australian Journal of Political Science47(3): 377–397.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
