Do parties respond to voters’ preferences on European integration in elections to the European Parliament? In this article, we argue that political parties do respond to voters’ Euroskeptic attitudes, but that party type conditions responsiveness. In particular, we posit that larger parties are more responsive and that governing parties are less responsive to aggregate Euroskepticism. To test our theoretical expectations, we use data from the Euromanifestos Project and European Election Study from 1989 to 2009 for 252 parties across 26 European Union Member States. Our findings have important implications for understanding democratic representation in the European Union and the second-order nature of elections to the European Parliament.
AdamsJClarkMEzrowL (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.
2.
AdamsJClarkMEzrowL (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.
3.
AdamsJHauptABStollH (2009) What moves parties? The role of public opinion and global economic conditions in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies42(5): 611–639.
4.
AdamsJSomer-TopcuZ (2009) Policy adjustment by parties in response to rival parties’ shifts: Spatial theory and the dynamics of party competition in twenty-five post-war democracies. British Journal of Political Science39(4): 825–846.
5.
ArnoldCSapirEVde VriesCE (2012) Parties’ positions on European integration: Issue congruence, ideology or context?West European Politics35(6): 1341–1362.
6.
BaleTBergmanT (2006) A taste of honey is worse than none at all? Coping with generic challenges of support party status in Sweden and New Zealand. Party Politics12(2): 189–209.
7.
BeckNKatzJN (1995) What to do (and not to do) with time-series–cross-section data in comparative politics. American Political Science Review89(3): 634–647.
8.
BeckNKatzJN (1996) Nuisance vs. substance: Specifying and estimating time-series-cross-section models. Political Analysis6(1): 1–36.
9.
BevanSJenningsW (2014) Representation, agendas and institutions. European Journal of Political Research53(1): 37–56.
10.
BolleyerN (2007) Small parties: From party pledges to government policy. West European Politics30(1): 121–147.
BraunDMikhaylovSSchmittH (2010) European Parliament Election Study 2009, Manifesto Study, Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
13.
BurdenBC (2004) Candidate positioning in US Congressional elections. British Journal of Political Science34(2): 211–227.
14.
CoxGW (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems, New York: Cambridge University Press.
15.
CrumB (2007) Party stances in the referendums on the EU constitution. European Union Politics8(1): 61–81.
16.
DahlRA (1971) Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, New Haven: Yale University Press.
17.
DaltonRJ (1985) Political parties and political representation: Party supporters and party elites in nine nations. Comparative Political Studies18(3): 267–299.
18.
DaltonRJFarrellDMMcAllisterI (2011) Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
De SwannA (1973) Coalition Theories and Cabinet Formations: A Study of Formal Theories of Coalition Formation Applied to Nine European Parliaments after 1918, Amsterdam: Elsevier.
20.
Döring H and Manow P (2012) 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. Available at: www.parlgov.org (accessed 15 July 2013).
21.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper.
22.
DuvergerM (1954) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State, New York: Wiley.
23.
EgmondMvan der BrugWHoboltSB (2013) European Parliament Election Study 200, Vote Study, Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
24.
EES (2009) European Parliament Election Study 2009, Manifesto Study Data, Advance Release.
25.
EzrowLde VriesCESteenbergenMR (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.
26.
Ezrow L and Hellwig T (2014) Responding to voters or responding to markets? Political parties and public opinion in an era of globalization. International Studies Quarterly 58(4): 816–827.
27.
FøllesdalAHixS (2006) Where there is a democratic deficit in the EU: A response to Majone and Moravcsik. Journal of Common Market Studies44(3): 533–562.
28.
HarmelRJandaK (1994) An integrated theory of party goals and party change. Journal of Theoretical Politics6(3): 259–287.
29.
HixSMarshM (2007) Punishment or protest? Understanding European Parliament elections. Journal of Politics69(2): 495–510.
30.
HixSMarshM (2011) Second-order effects plus pan-European political wings: An analysis of European Parliament elections across time. Electoral Studies30(1): 4–15.
31.
HoboltSBKlemmensenR (2008) Government responsiveness and political competition in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies41(3): 309–337.
32.
HoogheLMarksGWilsonCJ (2002) Does left/right structure party positions on European integration?Comparative Political Studies35(8): 965–989.
33.
HuntingtonSP (1968) Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
34.
JonesBDBaumgartnerFR (2004) Representation and agenda-setting. Policy Studies Journal32(1): 1–24.
35.
KaedingM (2006) Determinants of transposition delay in the European Union. Journal of Public Policy26(3): 229–253.
36.
Katz RS and Mair P (1995) Changing models of party organization and party democracy: The emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics 1(1): 5–28.
37.
KeyVO (1964) Parties, Politics and Pressure Groups, New York: Crowell.
38.
KirchheimerO (1966) The transformation of the Western European party Systems. In: LaPalombaraJWeinerM (eds) Political Parties and Political Development, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 177–200.
39.
KitscheltH (1988) Left-libertarian parties: Explaining innovation in competitive party systems. World Politics40(2): 194–234.
40.
KlingemannHDVolkensABaraJL (2006) Mapping Policy Preferences II: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments in Eastern Europe, European Union, and OECD, 1990–2003, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41.
Klüver H and Spoon J (2014) Who responds? Voters, parties, and issue attention. Forthcoming. British Journal of Political Science. DOI: 10.1017/S0007123414000313.
42.
LawsonK (1980) Political parties and linkage. In: LawsonK (ed.) Political Parties and Linkage: A Comparative Perspective, New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 3–24.
43.
MarksGWilsonCJRayL (2002) National parties and European integration. American Journal of Political Science46(3): 585–594.
44.
MbayeHAD (2001) Why national states comply with supranational law. European Union Politics2(3): 259–281.
45.
MeguidBM (2005) Competition between unequals: The role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success. American Political Science Review99(3): 347–359.
46.
NanouKDorussenH (2013) European integration and electoral democracy: How the European Union constrains party competition in the member states. European Journal of Political Research52(1): 71–93.
47.
PanebiancoA (1988) Political Parties: Organization and Power, New York: Cambridge University Press.
48.
ParkREMitchellBM (1980) Estimating the autocorrelated error model with trended data. Journal of Econometrics13(2): 185–201.
49.
PlümperTTroegerVEManowP (2005) Panel data analysis in comparative politics: Linking method to theory. European Journal of Political Research44(2): 327–354.
50.
PrzeworskiASpragueJ (1986) Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51.
ReifK (1984) National election cycles and European elections, 1979 and 1984. Electoral Studies3(3): 244–255.
52.
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.
53.
RikerWH (1962) The Theory of Political Coalitions, New Haven: Yale University Press.
54.
SchattschneiderEE (1942) Party Government, New York: Rinehart.
55.
SchmittHBartoliniSvan der BrugW (2009) European Election Study 2004, 2nd ed. Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
56.
SchmittHvan der EijkCScholzE (1997) European Election Study 1994 (EES 1994), Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
57.
SchmittHWüstAM (2012) Euromanifestos Project (EMP) 1979–2004, Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
58.
SchumacherGde VriesCEVisB (2013) Why do parties change position? Party organization and environmental incentives. Journal of Politics75(2): 464–477.
59.
SpoonJ (2011) Political Survival of Small Parties in Europe, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
60.
SpoonJKlüverH (2014) Do parties respond? How electoral context influences party responsiveness. Electoral Studies35: 48–60.
61.
SteenbergenMREdwardsEEde VriesCE (2007) Who’s cueing whom? Mass-elite linkages and the future of European integration. European Union Politics8(1): 13–35.
62.
SteenbergenMRScottDJ (2004) Contesting Europe? The salience of European integration as a party issue. In: MarksGSteenbergenMR (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 165–191.
63.
SteunenbergBRhinardM (2010) The transposition of European law in EU member states: Between process and politics. European Political Science Review2(3): 495–520.
64.
StimsonJAMackuenMBEriksonRS (1995) Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review89(3): 543–565.
65.
StrømKMüllerWC (1999) Political parties and hard choices. In: MüllerWCStrømK (eds) Policy, Office or Votes? How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–35.
66.
TaggartP (1998) A touchstone of dissent: Euroskepticism in contemporary Western European party systems. European Journal of Political Research33(3): 363–388.
67.
TaggartPSzczerbiakA (2013) Coming in from the cold? Euroskepticism, government participation and party position on Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies51(1): 17–37.
68.
TavitsM (2007) Principle vs. pragmatism: Policy shifts and political competition. American Journal of Political Science51(1): 151–165.
69.
van der EijkCFranklinM (1996) Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
70.
van der EijkCFranklinMSchoenbackK (1999) European Election Studies, Hamburg: IPSOS.
71.
van der EijkCOppenhuisESchmittH (1993) European Election Study 1989 (EES 1989), Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
72.
van de WardtM (2014) Putting the damper on: Do parties de-emphasize issues in response to internal divisions among their supporters?Party Politics20(3): 330–340.
73.
WagnerMMeyerT (2014) Which issues do parties emphasise? Salience strategies and party organization in multiparty systems. West European Politics37(5): 1019–1045.
74.
WalgraveSLefevereJTreschA (2012) The associative dimension of issue ownership. Public Opinion Quarterly76(4): 771–782.
75.
WestKJSpoonJ (2013) Credibility vs. competition: The impact of party size on decisions to enter presidential elections in South America and Europe. Comparative Political Studies46(4): 513–539.
76.
WittmanD (1973) Parties as utility maximizers. American Political Science Review67(2): 490–498.
77.
WittmanD (1983) Candidate motivation: A synthesis of alternative theories. American Political Science Review77(1): 142–157.
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.
