The article explains the variation of climate change salience in party manifestos, examining the effects of party characteristics. Creating a novel measure of parties’ climate change salience based on Comparative Manifesto Project data, the article finds that parties have broadly not made climate change a salient issue, though significant differences remain. Left–right ideology significantly helps explain these differences and is more important than any other party characteristic in explaining the variation. This underlines the importance of ideology over economic and policy preferences, size and strategic incentives and incumbency constraints and points towards the partisan (as opposed to the valence) nature of the climate change issue. These results contrast to those of an identical analysis of environmental salience where ideology is found to have no effect, underlining how the two issues should be treated differently and lending further support to the argument that climate change is not a valence issue.
Abou-ChadiTOrlowskiM (2016) Moderate as necessary: the role of electoral competitiveness and party size in explaining parties’ policy shifts. The Journal of Politics78(3): 868–881.
2.
BakkerREdwardsEHoogheL. (2015) 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey Version 2015.1. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Available at: http://www.chesdata.eu(accessed 28 January 2016).
3.
BåtstrandS (2014) Giving content to new politics: from broad hypothesis to empirical analysis using Norwegian manifesto data on climate change. Party Politics20(6): 930–939.
4.
BåtstrandS (2015) More than markets: a comparative study of nine conservative parties on climate change. Politics and Policy43(4): 538–5561.
5.
BernauerTBöhmeltTKoubiV (2013) Is there a democracy–civil society paradox in global environmental governance?Global Environmental Politics13 (1): 88–107.
6.
BombergE (1998) Green Parties and Politics in the European Union. London: Routledge.
7.
BudgeI (2002) Mapping policy preferences: 21 years of the comparative manifestos project. European Political Science1(3): 60–68.
8.
CarterN (2006) Party politicization of the environment in Britain. Party Politics12(6): 747–67.
9.
CarterN (2013) Greening the mainstream: party politics and the environment. Environmental Politics22 (1): 73–94.
10.
CarterNClementsB (2015) From ‘greenest government ever’ to ‘get rid of all the green crap’: David Cameron, the conservatives and the environment. British Politics10: 204–225.
11.
DaltonR (2002) Citizen Politics. New York: Chatham House Publishers.
12.
DaltonR (2009) Economics, environmentalism and party alignments: a note on partisan change in advanced industrial democracies. European Journal of Political Research48(2): 161–175.
13.
DaltonRFlanaganSBeckP (eds) (1984) Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
14.
De VriesCEHoboltSB (2012) When dimensions collide: the electoral success of issue entrepreneurs. European Union Politics13(2): 246–268.
15.
DunlapREMcCrightAM (2008) A widening gap: republican and democratic views on climate change. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development50: 26–35.
16.
DunlapREMcCrightAMYaroshJH (2016) The political divide on climate change: partisan polarization widens in the U.S. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development58(5): 4–23.
17.
DunlapREXiaoCMcCrightAM (2001) Politics and environment in America. Environmental Politics10(4): 23–48.
18.
EckersleyR (2013) Poles apart? The social construction of responsibility for climate change in Australia and Norway. Australian Journal of Politics and History59(3): 382–396.
19.
FellaSRuzzaC (2006) Changing political opportunities and the re-invention of the Italian right. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies8(2): 179–200.
20.
FeyginaIJostJTGoldsmithRE (2010) System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of ‘system-sanctioned change’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin36: 326–38.
21.
FieldingKSHeadBWLaffanW. (2012) Australian politicians’ beliefs about climate change: political partisanship and political ideology. Environmental Politics21 (5): 712–733.
22.
FranzmannST (2015) Towards a real comparison of left-right indices: a comment on Jahn. Party Politics21(5): 821–828.
23.
GemenisK (2013) What to do (and not to do) with the comparative manifestos project data. Political Studies61: 3–23.
24.
GemenisKKatsanidouAVasilopoulouS (2012) The politics of anti-environmentalism: positional issue framing by the European radical right. In: MPSA Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, 12–15 April 2012. Latest version available at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4736878/MPSA.pdf(accessed 15 May 2016).
25.
InglehartR (1990) Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
26.
JensenCBSpoonJJ (2011) Testing the ‘party matters’ thesis: explaining progress towards Kyoto protocol targets. Political Studies59: 99–115.
27.
KitscheltHP (1989) Left-libertarian parties: explaining innovation in competitive party systems. World Politics40(2): 194–234.
28.
KlingemannHDHofferbertRBudgeI (1995) Parties, Policies and Democracy. Boulder: Westview.
29.
KnillCDebusMHeichelS (2010) Do parties matter in internationalised policy areas? The impact of political parties on environmental policy outputs in 18 OECD countries, 1970-2000. European Journal of Political Research49: 301–336.
30.
KnutsenO (1987) The impact of structural and ideological cleavages on West European democracies. British Journal of Political Science18(3): 323–352.
31.
KnutsenO (1997) From old politics to new politics. In: StrømKSvåsandL (eds) Challenges to Political Parties. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 229–262.
32.
KrönigJ (2010) Climate Change: The Challenge for Social Democracy. London: Policy Network.
33.
LaverMGarryJ (2000) Estimating policy positions from political texts. American Journal of Political Science44 (3): 619–634.
34.
LipsetSMRokkanS (eds) (1967) Party Systems and Voter Alignments. New York: Free Press.
35.
McCrightAMDunlapRE (2011) The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001-2010. The Sociological Quarterly52: 155–194.
36.
MölderM (2013) The validity of the RILE left–right index as a measure of party policy. Party Politics22(1): 37–48.
37.
Müller-RommelFPoguntkeT (2002) Green Parties in National Governments. London: Frank Cass Publishers.
38.
OwensS (1986) Environmental politics in Britain: new paradigm or placebo?Area18(3): 195–201.
39.
Pardos-PradoS (2012) Valence beyond consensus: party competence and policy dispersion from a comparative perspective. Electoral Studies31: 342–352.
40.
RichardsonDRootesC (eds) (2006) The Green Challenge: The Development of Green Parties in Europe. London: Routledge.
41.
RohrschneiderR (1993) New party versus old left realignments: environmental attitudes, party policies, and partisan affiliations in four west European Countries. The Journal of Politics55(3): 682–701.
42.
RootesCZitoABarryJ (2012) Climate change, national politics and grassroots action: an introduction. Environmental Politics21(5): 677–690.
43.
SchulzeK (2014) Do parties matter for international environmental cooperation? An analysis of environmental treaty participation by advanced industrialised democracies. Environmental Politics23: 115–139.
44.
SpoonJJ (2009) Holding their own: explaining the persistence of green parties in France and the UK. Party Politics15(5): 615–634.
45.
SpoonJJHoboltSBDe VriesCE (2014) Going green: explaining issue competition on the environment. European Journal of Political Research53: 363–380.
46.
StokesDE (1963) Spatial models of party competition. American Political Science Review57: 368–377.
47.
TranterB (2013) The great divide: political candidate and voter polarisation over global warming in Australia. Australian Journal of Politics and History59(3): 397–413.
VolkensALehmannPMerzN. (2014) The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2014a. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).
50.
WagnerM (2012) When do parties emphasise extreme positions? How strategic incentives for policy differentiation influences issue importance. European Journal of Political Research51: 64–88.
51.
WareA (1996) Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
WitherspoonS (1994) The greening of Britain: romance and rationality. In: JowellRCurticeJBrookLAhrendtDParkA (eds) British Social Attitudes: The 11th Report. Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp. 107–139.
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.
