Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Issue Yield: A Model of Party Strategy in Multidimensional Space

  • LORENZO DE SIO (a1) and TILL WEBER (a2)
Abstract

Parties in pluralist democracies face numerous contentious issues, but most models of electoral competition assume a simple, often one-dimensional structure. We develop a new, inherently multidimensional model of party strategy in which parties compete by emphasizing policy issues. Issue emphasis is informed by two distinct goals: mobilizing the party's core voters and broadening the support base. Accommodating these goals dissolves the position-valence dichotomy through a focus on policies that unite the party internally while also attracting support from the electorate at large. We define issue yield as the capacity of an issue to reconcile these criteria, and then operationalize it as a simple index. Results of multilevel regressions combining population survey data and party manifesto scores from the 2009 European Election Study demonstrate that issue yield governs party strategy across different political contexts.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Lorenzo De Sio is Assistant Professor, LUISS Guido Carli University, Department of Political Science, Viale Romania 32, 00197 Rome, Italy (ldesio@luiss.it).
Till Weber is Assistant Professor, Baruch College, City University of New York, Department of Political Science, 1 Bernard Baruch Way, Box B5-280, New York, NY 10010 (till.weber@baruch.cuny.edu).
References
Hide All
Adams, James. 1998. “Partisan Voting and Multiparty Spatial Competition: The Pressure for Responsible Parties.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 10 (1): 531.
Adams, James, Ezrow, Lawrence, and Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2011. “Is Anybody Listening? Evidence that Voters Do Not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements during Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 55 (2): 370–82.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Snyder, James M.. 2000. “Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models.” Public Choice 103 (3): 327–36.
Arrow, Kenneth J. 1951. Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley.
Bélanger, Éric, and Meguid, Bonnie M.. 2008. “Issue Salience, Issue Ownership, and Issue-Based Vote Choice.” Electoral Studies 27 (3): 477–91.
Brambor, Thomas, Clark, William Roberts, and Golder, Matt. 2006. “Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analysis.” Political Analysis 14 (1): 6382.
Budge, Ian, and Farlie, Dennis J.. 1983. Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A.. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Clarke, Harold D., Sanders, David, Stewart, Marianne C., and Whiteley, Paul. 2009. Performance Politics and the British Voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, Otto A., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1966. “A Mathematical Model of Policy Formation in a Democratic Society.” In Mathematical Applications in Political Science, ed. Bernd, Joseph. Dallas: Southern Methodist University, 175205.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
Duncan, Otis D., and Davis, Beverly. 1953. “An Alternative to Ecological Correlation.” American Sociological Review 18 (6): 665–66.
Ezrow, Lawrence. 2010. Linking Citizens and Parties: How Electoral Systems Matter for Electoral Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feld, Scott L., and Grofman, Bernard. 1991. “Incumbency Advantage, Voter Loyalty and the Benefit of the Doubt.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 3 (2): 115–37.
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Green, Jane, and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2008. “Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections.” Electoral Studies 27 (3): 460–76.
Grofman, Bernard. 2004. “Downs and Two-party Convergence.” Annual Review of Political Science (7): 25–46.
Grofman, Bernard. 2010. “Constraints on the Turnout Gap between High and Low Knowledge (or Income) Voters: Combining the Duncan-Davis Method of Bounds with the Taagepera Method of Bounds.” Electoral Studies 29 (4): 673–77.
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News that Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kam, Cindy D., and Franzese, Robert J. Jr. 2007. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kitschelt, Herbert P. 1989. The Logics of Party Formation: Ecological Politics in Belgium and West Germany. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Laakso, Markku, and Taagepera, Rein. 1979. “The Effective Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe.” Comparative Political Studies 12 (1): 327.
Laver, Michael, and Sergenti, Ernest. 2011. Party Competition: An Agent-based Model. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lewin, Kurt. 1935. “The Conflict between Aristotelian and Galilean Modes of Thought in Contemporary Psychology.” In A Dynamic Theory of Personality, ed. Lewin, Kurt. New York: McGraw-Hill, 142.
Marks, Gary, Hooghe, Liesbet, Steenbergen, Marco R., and Bakker, Ryan. 2007. “Crossvalidating Data on Party Positioning on European Integration.” Electoral Studies 26 (1): 2338.
Meguid, Bonnie M. 2008. Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Müller, Wolfgang C., and Strøm, Kaare. 1999. Policy, Office, or Votes? How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McKelvey, Richard D. 1986. “Covering, Dominance, and Institution-Free Properties of Social Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 30 (2): 283314.
Petrocik, John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (3): 825–50.
Plott, Charles R. 1967. “A Notion of Equilibrium and Its Possibility under Majority Rule.” American Economic Review 57 (4): 787806.
Przeworski, Adam, and Sprague, John D.. 1986. Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rabinowitz, George, and Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1989. “A Directional Theory of Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 83 (1): 93121.
Reif, Karlheinz, and Schmitt, Hermann. 1980. “Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results.” European Journal of Political Research 8 (1): 344.
Riker, William H. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Robertson, David B. 1976. A Theory of Party Competition. New York: Wiley.
Rovny, Jan. 2012. “Who Emphasizes and Who Blurs? Party Strategies in Multidimensional Competition.” European Union Politics 13 (2): 269–92.
Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Schofield, Norman, and Sened, Itai. 2006. Multiparty Democracy: Elections and Legislative Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stokes, Donald E. 1963. “Spatial Models of Party Competition.” American Political Science Review 57 (2): 368–77.
Stokes, Donald E. 1992. “Valence Politics.” In Electoral Politics, ed. Kavanagh, Dennis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 141–62.
Van der Brug, Wouter. 2004. “Issue Ownership and Party Choice.” Electoral Studies 23 (2): 209–33.
Van der Brug, Wouter, Franklin, Mark N., and Tóka, Gábor. 2008. “One Electorate or Many? Differences in Party Preference Formation between New and Established European Democracies.” Electoral Studies 27 (4): 589600.
Wagner, Markus. 2012a. “When Do Parties Emphasise Extreme Positions? How Strategic Incentives for Policy Differentiation Influence Issue Importance.” European Journal of Political Research 51 (1): 6488.
Wagner, Markus. 2012b. “Defining and Measuring Niche Parties.” Party Politics 18 (6): 845–64.
Wittman, Donald A. 1973. “Parties as Utility Maximizers.” American Political Science Review 67 (2): 490–98.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

De Sio and Weber Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material

 PDF (175 KB)
175 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 25
Total number of PDF views: 366 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1107 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd May 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.