IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v55y2007i3p629-655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Green

Abstract

There has been much talk of valence, consensus or competence politics but little theoretical explanation or empirical investigation of how this has arisen. In this article I argue that British political competition has become competence‐based because the major parties and the electorate have converged on the dominant left–right dimension of British voting behaviour. As a result, commonly cited core vote explanations for party polarisation have only limited application. The electorate has converged on left–right issues, narrowing the policy space and the available positional strategies of political parties. A different pattern is found for the issue of Europe, and this is interpreted in light of possible causal mechanisms. The article offers a formal model for a rise in valence politics as parties and voters converge, and the implications are discussed for theories of party competition. I argue in favour of competence and salience‐based theories of party strategy in place of a reliance on traditional spatial models.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Green, 2007. "When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(3), pages 629-655, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:55:y:2007:i:3:p:629-655
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00671.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00671.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00671.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Endersby, James W & Galatas, Steven E, 1998. "British Parties and Spatial Competition: Dimensions of Party Evaluation in the 1992 Election," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 363-382, December.
    2. Wittman, Donald, 1983. "Candidate Motivation: A Synthesis of Alternative Theories," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 142-157, March.
    3. McLEAN, IAIN, 2002. "William H. Riker and the Invention of Heresthetic(s)," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 535-558, July.
    4. Enelow,James M. & Hinich,Melvin J., 1984. "The Spatial Theory of Voting," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521275156.
    5. Enelow, James M & Munger, Michael C, 1993. "The Elements of Candidate Reputation: The Effect of Record and Credibility on Optimal Spatial Location," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 757-772, December.
    6. Norman Schofield, 2003. "Valence Competition in the Spatial Stochastic Model," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 371-383, October.
    7. Andersen, Robert & Tilley, James & Heath, Anthony F., 2005. "Political Knowledge and Enlightened Preferences: Party Choice Through the Electoral Cycle," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 285-302, April.
    8. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    9. Sean Carey & Jonathan Burton, 2004. "Research Note: The Influence of the Press in Shaping Public Opinion towards the European Union in Britain," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(3), pages 623-640, October.
    10. Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Spatial Models of Party Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(2), pages 368-377, June.
    11. Sean Carey & Jonathan Burton, 2004. "Research Note: The Influence of the Press in Shaping Public Opinion towards the European Union in Britain," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(3), pages 623-640, October.
    12. Dunleavy, Patrick & Ward, Hugh, 1981. "Exogenous Voter Preferences and Parties with State Power: Some Internal Problems of Economic Theories of Party Competition," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 351-380, July.
    13. Norman Schofield & Gary Miller & Andrew Martin, 2003. "Critical Elections and Political Realignments in the USA: 1860–2000," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(2), pages 217-240, June.
    14. MARK FRANKLIN & MICHAEL MARSH & LAUREN McLAREN, 1994. "Uncorking the Bottle: Popular Opposition to European Unification in the Wake of Maastricht," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 455-472, December.
    15. Aldrich, John H., 1983. "A Downsian Spatial Model with Party Activism," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(4), pages 974-990, December.
    16. Macdonald, Stuart Elaine & Listhaug, Ola & Rabinowitz, George, 1991. "Issues and Party Support in Multiparty Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1107-1131, December.
    17. Chappell, Henry W. & Keech, William R., 1986. "Policy Motivation and Party Differences in a Dynamic Spatial Model of Party Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(3), pages 881-899, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Soorjith Illickal Karthikeyan & Stefan Jonsson & Filippo Carlo Wezel, 2016. "The Travails of Identity Change: Competitor Claims and Distinctiveness of British Political Parties, 1970–1992," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 106-122, February.
    2. James Hart & Matt Henn, 2017. "Neoliberalism and the Unfolding Patterns of Young People’s Political Engagement and Political Participation in Contemporary Britain," Societies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Stephen Drinkwater & Colin Jennings, 2017. "Expressive voting and two-dimensional political competition: an application to law and order policy by New Labour in the UK," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 79-96, March.
    4. Gavoille, Nicolas & Verschelde, Marijn, 2017. "Electoral competition and political selection: An analysis of the activity of French deputies, 1958–2012," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 180-195.
    5. Jennings, Colin & Drinkwater, Stephen, 2012. "An Analysis of the Electoral Use of Policy on Law and Order by New Labour," SIRE Discussion Papers 2012-77, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    6. Wilde, Pieter de & Junk, Wiebke Marie & Palmtag, Tabea, 2016. "Accountability and opposition to globalization in international assemblies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 22(4), pages 823-846.
    7. Sijeong Lim & Andreas Duit, 2018. "Partisan politics, welfare states, and environmental policy outputs in the OECD countries, 1975–2005," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 220-237, June.
    8. Robert Johns & Ann‐Kristin Kölln, 2020. "Moderation and Competence: How a Party's Ideological Position Shapes Its Valence Reputation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 649-663, July.
    9. Luigi Curini, 2015. "Explaining party ideological stances," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 79-96, January.
    10. Geys, Benny, 2012. "Success and failure in electoral competition: Selective issue emphasis under incomplete issue ownership," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship & Project "The Future of Fiscal Federalism" SP II 2012-102, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stuart Elaine Macdonald & George Rabinowitz, 1993. "Direction and Uncertainty in a Model of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 61-87, January.
    2. John Jackson, 2014. "Location, location, location: the Davis-Hinich model of electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 197-218, April.
    3. Justin Buchler, 2011. "The proximity paradox: the legislative agenda and the electoral success of ideological extremists," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 1-19, July.
    4. M. Roth, 2011. "Resource allocation and voter calculus in a multicandidate election," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 337-351, September.
    5. Alexei Zakharov, 2009. "A model of candidate location with endogenous valence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 347-366, March.
    6. Irwin L. Morris & George Rabinowitz, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: IV," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 75-88, January.
    7. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    8. Mikael Gilljam, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: I," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-12, January.
    9. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard & Stéphane Rossignol, 2011. "An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(2), pages 309-340, July.
    10. Alexander A. Schuessler, 2000. "Expressive Voting," Rationality and Society, , vol. 12(1), pages 87-119, February.
    11. Gersbach, Hans & Tejada, Oriol, 2018. "A Reform Dilemma in polarized democracies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 148-158.
    12. Kristin Kanthak, 2002. "Top-Down Divergence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 301-323, July.
    13. Kenneth Benoit & Michael Laver, 2005. "Mapping the Irish Policy Space - Voter and Party Spaces in Preferential Elections," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 36(2), pages 83-108.
    14. De Donder, Philippe & Gallego, Maria, 2017. "Electoral Competition and Party Positioning," TSE Working Papers 17-760, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    15. A. J. McGann, 2002. "The Advantages of Ideological Cohesion," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 37-70, January.
    16. Zakharov Alexei, 2005. "Candidate location and endogenous valence," EERC Working Paper Series 05-17e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
    17. N/A, 1997. "Individual Perception and Models of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 13-21, January.
    18. Do Won Kim, 2020. "Populism Amidst Prosperity: Dimensionality, party competition and voter preference in the era of populism: The case of England, 2010-2017," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 160, European Institute, LSE.
    19. Aragones, Enriqueta & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2002. "The Effect of Candidate Quality on Electoral Equilibrium: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 1138, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    20. Claudio Bonilla, 2004. "A Model of Political Competition in the Underlying Space of Ideology," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(1), pages 51-67, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:55:y:2007:i:3:p:629-655. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.