What determines how ‘European’ a party’s manifesto is? This article examines the salience of European issues in national parties’ Euromanifestos during the 1979–2004 period. I argue that domestic politics, including voter, party, and party system factors, influence the European content of a party’s Euromanifesto. Using data from the Euromanifestos Project for 14 member states, I find that the differential emphasis on European issues in the national party system, intra-party dissent on European integration, voter ambivalence on membership of the European Union, and party type all influence the salience of European issues in a party’s manifesto. These findings have important implications for understanding both how parties use manifestos to manipulate the political agenda and the dimensions of contestation in elections to the European Parliament.
AdamsJSomer-TopcuS (2009) Policy adjustment by parties in response to rival parties’ policy shifts: Spatial theory and the dynamics of party competition in twenty-five post-war democracies. British Journal of Political Science39(4): 825–846.
2.
AdamsJClarkMEzrowLGlasgowG (2004) Understanding change and stability in party ideologies: Do parties respond to public opinion or to past election results?British Journal of Political Science34(4): 589–610.
3.
AdamsJClarkMEzrowLGlasgowG (2006) Are niche parties fundamentally different than mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of Western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976–1998. American Journal of Political Science50(3): 513–529.
4.
AdamsJHauptABStollH (2009) What moves parties? The role of public opinion and global economic conditions in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies42(5): 611–639.
5.
BeckNKatzJN (1995) What to do (and not to do) with time series cross-section data. American Political Science Review89(3): 634–647.
6.
BeckNKatzJN (1996) Nuisance vs substance: Specifying and estimating time-series-cross-section models. Political Analysis6(1): 1–36.
7.
BombergE (1998) Green Parties and Politics in the European Union, London: Routledge.
8.
BombergE (2002) The Europeanisation of green parties: Exploring the EU’s impact. West European Politics25(3): 29–50.
9.
BombergECarterN (2006) The greens in Brussels: Shaping or shaped?European Journal of Political Research45(1): 99–125.
10.
BraunDSalzwedelMStumpfMWüstAM (2004) Euromanifesto Documentation, Mannheim: Mannheim Center for European Social Research.
11.
BurchellJ (2002) The Evolution of Green Politics: Development and Change within European Green Parties, London: Earthscan.
12.
CarminesEGStimsonJA (1989) Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13.
ClarkNRohrschneiderR (2009) Second-order elections versus first-order thinking: How voters perceive the representation process in a multi-layered system of governance. European Integration31(5): 613–632.
14.
De VreeseC (2003) Framing Europe: Television News and European Integration, Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers.
15.
De VriesCE (2007) Sleeping giant: Fact or fairytale? How European integration affects vote choice in national elections. European Union Politics8(3): 363–385.
16.
De VriesCEVan der BrugWVan EgmondMHVan der EijkC (2011) Individual and contextual variation in EU issue voting: The role of political information. Electoral Studies30(1): 16–28.
17.
De WinterL(1998) Conclusion: A comparative analysis of the electoral, office and policy success of ethnoregionalist parties. In: De WinterLTürsanH (eds) Regionalist Parties in Western Europe, London: Routledge, 204–247.
18.
Döring H and Manow P (2011) Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov): An Infrastructure for Empirical Information on Parties, Elections and Governments in Modern Democracies. Version 11/07 – 26 July 2011. www.parlgov.org.
19.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper & Row.
20.
DruckmanJDParkinM (2005) The impact of media bias: How editorial slant affects voters. Journal of Politics67(4): 1030–1049.
21.
EichnerV (1997) Effective European problem solving: Lessons from the regulation of occupational safety and environmental protection. Journal of European Public Policy4(4): 591–608.
22.
EzrowL (2010) Linking Citizens and Parties: How Electoral Systems Matter for Proportional Representation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
Ezrow L and Hellwig T (2011) Responding to voters or responding to markets? Political parties and public opinion in an era of globalization. Paper presented at the European Political Science Association General Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 16–18 June.
24.
EzrowLDe VriesCESteenbergenMREdwardsEE (2011) Mean voter representation and partisan constituency representation: Do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters?Party Politics17(3): 275–301.
25.
FranklandEGLucardiePRihouxB (2008) Green Parties in Transition: The End of Grass-roots Democracy?, Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
26.
GabelMHixS (2002) Defining the EU political space: An empirical study of European election manifestos, 1979–1999. Comparative Political Studies35(8): 934–964.
27.
Green Party of England and Wales (2009) It’s the Economy Stupid: The Green Party Manifesto for the European Parliament Elections 2009, London: Green Party of England and Wales.
28.
HarmelRJandaK (1994) An integrated theory of party goals and party change. Journal of Theoretical Politics6(3): 259–287.
29.
HarmelRTanA (2003) Party actors and party change: Does factional dominance matter?European Journal of Political Research42(3): 409–424.
30.
HixSMarshM (2007) Punishment or protest? Understanding European Parliament elections. Journal of Politics69(2): 495–510.
31.
HixSMarshM (2011) Second-order effects plus pan-European political swings: An analysis of European Parliament elections across time. Electoral Studies30(1): 4–15.
32.
HoboltSB (2009) Europe in Question: Referendums on European Integration, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
HoboltSBSpoonJ (2012) Motivating the European voter: Parties, issues, and campaigns in European Parliament elections. European Journal of Political Research. (accessed 25 April 2012).
34.
HoboltSBSpoonJTilleyJ (2009) A vote against Europe? Explaining defection at the 1999 and 2004 European Parliament elections. British Journal of Political Science39(1): 93–115.
35.
HoogheLMarksG (2009) A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science39(1): 1–23.
36.
HoogheLBakkerRBrigevichADe VriesCEEdwardsEEMarksGRovnyJSteenbergenMR (2010) Reliability and validity of measuring party positions: The Chapel Hill expert surveys of 2002 and 2006. European Journal of Political Research49(5): 687–703.
37.
JensenCBSpoonJ (2010) Thinking locally, acting supranationally: Niche party behavior in the European Parliament. European Journal of Political Research49(2): 174–201.
38.
JollySK (2007) The Europhile fringe? Regionalist party support for European integration. European Union Politics8(1): 109–130.
39.
KeatingM(1995) Europeanism and regionalism. In: JonesBKeatingM (eds) The European Union and the Regions, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–22.
40.
KeatingM(1998) Is there a regional level of government in Europe? In: Le GalèsPLequesneC (eds) Regions in Europe: The Paradox of Power, London: Routledge, 11–29.
41.
KlingemannHDVolkensABaraJBudgeIMcDonaldM (2006) Mapping Policy Preferences II: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments in Eastern Europe, the European Union and the OECD, 1990–2003, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42.
Klüver H and Casarramona TR (2011) Whom do they represent? Determinants of policy position choice of Europarties. Paper presented at the European Political Science Association General Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 16–18 June.
43.
KriesiHGrandeELachatRDolezalMBornschierS (2008) West European Politics in the Age of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Lynch P (2007) Organising for a Europe of the regions: The European Free Alliance-DPPE and political representation in the European Union. Paper presented at the European Union Studies Association Conference, Montreal, Quebec, 17–19 May.
45.
MarksGWilsonCJ (2000) The past in the present: A theory of party response to European integration. British Journal of Political Science30(3): 433–459.
46.
MeguidBM (2005) Competition between unequals: The role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success. American Political Science Review99(3): 347–359.
47.
Meyer TM and Wagner M (2011) Explaining changes in niche party status. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, 31 March – 3 April.
48.
NetjesCEBinnemaHA (2007) The salience of the European integration issue: Three data sources compared. Electoral Studies26(1): 39–49.
49.
NewellJL(1998) The Scottish National Party: Development and change. In: De WinterLTürsanH (eds) Regionalist Parties in Western Europe, London: Routledge, 105–124.
50.
NorrisPCurticeJSandersDScammellMSemetkoHA (1999) On Message: Communicating the Campaign, London: Sage.
51.
PenningsP (2002) The dimensionality of the EU policy space. European Union Politics3(1): 59–80.
52.
RabierJInglehartR (1981) Eurobarometer 12 – October–November 1979, Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
53.
RabierJRiffaultHInglehartR (1986) Eurobarometer 22: Energy Problems and the Atlantic Alliance – October 1984, Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
54.
RaworthP (1995) Regional harmonization of occupational health rules: The European example. American Journal of Law and Medicine21(1): 7–44.
55.
RayL (1999) Measuring party orientations toward European integration: Results from an expert survey. European Journal of Political Research36(2): 283–306.
56.
ReifK (1984) National election cycles and European elections, 1979 and 1984. Electoral Studies3(3): 244–255.
57.
ReifKSchmittH (1980) Nine second-order national elections – a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results. European Journal for Political Research8(1): 3–44.
58.
SchmittHVan der EijkCScholzEKleinM (2001) European Election Study, 1994, Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
59.
SchmittH (2004) European Election Study, 2004, Mannheim: Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung.
60.
SchmittH (2005) Euromanifestos, 1979–2004, Mannheim: Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung.
61.
SchmitterPC (1969) Three neofunctional hypotheses about international integration. International Organization23(1): 161–166.
62.
ShullT (1999) Redefining Red and Green: Ideology and Strategy in European Political Ecology, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
63.
SteenbergenMRMarksG (2007) Evaluating expert judgments. European Journal of Political Research46(3): 347–366.
64.
SteenbergenMRScottDJ(2004) Contesting Europe? The salience of European integration as a party issue. In: MarksGSteenbergenMR (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict, New York: Cambridge University Press, 165–194.
65.
SteenbergenMREdwardsEEDe VriesCE (2007) Who’s cuing whom? Mass–elite linkages and the future of European integration. European Union Politics8(1): 13–35.
66.
StrømK (1990) A behavioral theory of competitive parties. American Journal of Political Science34(2): 565–598.
67.
TaggartP (1998) A touchstone of dissent: Euroscepticism in contemporary western European party systems. European Journal of Political Research33(3): 363–388.
68.
TillmanER (2004) The European Union at the ballot box? European integration and voting behaviour in the new member states. Comparative Political Studies27(5): 590–610.
69.
TsebelisG (1994) The power of the European Parliament as a conditional agenda setter. American Political Science Review88(1): 128–142.
70.
TsebelisGKalandrakisA (1999) The European Parliament and environmental legislation: The case of chemicals. European Journal of Political Research36(1): 119–154.
71.
TsebelisGJensenCBKalandrakisAKreppelA (2001) Legislative procedures in the European Union: An empirical analysis. British Journal of Political Science31(4): 573–599.
72.
Van de WardtM (2012) Putting the damper on: Do parties de-emphasize issues in response to internal divisions among their supporters?Party Politics18(2.
73.
Van der EijkCFranklinM (1996) Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
74.
Van der EijkCFranklinM(2004) Potential for contestation on European matters at national elections in Europe. In: MarksGSteenbergenMR (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 32–50.
75.
Van der EijkCOppenhuisESchmittH (1994) European Election Study, 1989, Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
76.
Van der EijkCFranklinMSchönbachKSchmittHSemetkoH (2002) European Election Study, 1999, Amsterdam: Steinmetz Archive.
77.
Wagner M (2011) Defining and measuring niche parties. Party Politics, Published online before print, 18 May 2011, DOI: 10.1177/1354068810393267.
78.
WattenbergMBriansCL (1999) Negative campaign advertising: Demobilizer or mobilizer?American Political Science Review93(4): 891–899.
79.
WüstAMSchmittH(2007) Comparing the views of parties and voters in the 1999 election to the European Parliament. In: Van der BrugWVan der EijkC (eds) European Elections and Domestic Politics: Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 73–93.
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.
