Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-04T23:34:16.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Targeting the government in the referendum: the aborted 2016 Italian constitutional reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2018

Danilo Di Mauro*
Affiliation:
Department of Law and Economics, Unitelma Sapienza – University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Vincenzo Memoli
Affiliation:
Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
Get access

Abstract

This study investigates the factors explaining voting in the 2016 Italian referendum on constitutional reform. As we show through voting alignments within the Parliament and key aspects of the electoral campaign, this was a case where the government took the leadership of the entire referendum process, transforming it into a plebiscite. Within this context, we hypothesize that key elements explaining voting choices follow a government-support vs. opposition dynamics. Employing Italian National Elections Studies Association pre/post-referendum survey, we estimate the effects of factors increasing predictability (e.g. party closeness, ideology, social cleavage) or uncertainty (e.g. government performance, the economy) of voting choices. The resulting logistic regression models show that the leading role of the government in the referendum reshapes the impact of factors explaining voting choices. While some lose significance, others follow a pro- or anti-government logic.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Società Italiana di Scienza Politica 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguiar-Conraria, L. and Magalhães, P.C. (2010), ‘Referendum design, quorum rules and turnout’, Public Choice 144(1–2): 6381.Google Scholar
Bellucci, P., Garzia, D. and Lewis-Beck, M.S. (2017), ‘Understanding electoral politics in contemporary Italy: policy preferences, personalisation, partisanship and the economy’, Contemporary Italian Politics 9(1): 37.Google Scholar
Bowler, S. and Donovan, T. (2002), ‘Do voters have a cue? Television advertisements as a source of information in citizen–initiated referendum campaigns’, European Journal of Political Research 41(6): 777793.Google Scholar
Calise, M. (2007), ‘The presidentialization, Italian style’, in T. Poguntke and P. Webb (eds), The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 88106.Google Scholar
de Vreese, C.H. and Semetko, H.A. (2004), ‘News matters: influences on the vote in the Danish 2000 euro referendum campaign’, European Journal of Political Research 43(5): 699722.Google Scholar
de Vreese, C.H. (ed.) (2007), The Dynamics of Referendum Campaigns: An International Perspective, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Evans, G. (1999), ‘Europe: a new electoral cleavage?’, in G. Evans and P. Norris (eds), Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-Term Perspective, London: Sage, pp. 207222.Google Scholar
Franklin, M.N. (2002), ‘Learning from the Danish case: a comment on Palle Svensson’s critique of the Franklin thesis’, European Journal of Political Research 41(6): 751757.Google Scholar
Franklin, M.N., Van der Eijk, C. and Marsh, M. (1995), ‘Referendum outcomes and trust in government: public support for Europe in the wake of Maastricht’, West European Politics 18(3): 101117.Google Scholar
Gabel, M. (2000), ‘European integration, voters and national politics’, West European Politics 23(4): 5272.Google Scholar
Hobolt, S.B. (2006), ‘How parties affect vote choice in European integration referendums’, Party Politics 12(5): 623647.Google Scholar
Hobolt, S.B. (2009), Europe in Question: Referendums on European Integration, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, D., Thorsen, E. and Wring, D. (2016), ‘EU referendum analysis 2016: media, voters and the campaign’. Retrieved 3 January 2018 from http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/24337/1/EU%20Referendum%20Analysis%202016%20-%20Jackson%20Thorsen%20and%20Wring%20v1.pdf Google Scholar
Johnston, R., Blais, A., Gidengil, E. and Nevitte, N. (1996), The Challenge of Direct Democracy: The 1992 Canadian Referendum, Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
LeDuc, L. (2002), ‘Opinion change and voting behavior in referendums’, European Journal of Political Research 41(6): 711732.Google Scholar
LeDuc, L. and Pammett, J.H. (1995), ‘Referendum voting: attitudes and behaviour in the 1992 constitutional referendum’, Canadian Journal of Political Science 28(1): 333.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M.S. and Paldam, M. (2000), ‘Economic voting: an introduction’, Electoral Studies 19(2): 113121.Google Scholar
Lupia, A. (1992), ‘Busy voters, agenda control, and the power of information’, American Political Science Review 86(2): 390403.Google Scholar
Morel, L. (2011), ‘Referenda’, in B. Badie, D. Berg-Schlosser and L. Morlino (eds), International Encyclopedia of Political Science, Vol. 1, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 22262230.Google Scholar
Morlino, L. (ed.) (1991), Costruire la democrazia: gruppi e partiti in Italia, Vol. 292, Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Parisi, M. (2015), Il Patto del Nazareno. 18 gennaio 2014–31 gennaio 2015, Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino.Google Scholar
Pasquino, G. (2016), ‘Renzi: the government, the party, the future of Italian politics’, Journal of Modern Italian Studies 21(3): 389398.Google Scholar
Sinnott, R. (2002), ‘Cleavages, parties and referendums: relationships between representative and direct democracy in the Republic of Ireland’, European Journal of Political Research 41(6): 811826.Google Scholar
Vatter, A. (2000), ‘Consensus and direct democracy: conceptual and empirical linkages’, European Journal of Political Research 38(2): 171192.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Di Mauro and Memoli Dataset

Link