IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v57y2009i4p720-745.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006

Author

Listed:
  • Armèn Hakhverdian

Abstract

The left–right scheme is the most widely used and parsimonious representation of political competition. Yet, long time series of the left–right position of governments are sparse. Existing methods are of limited use in dynamic settings due to insufficient time points which hinders the proper specification of time‐series regressions. This article analyses legislative speeches in order to construct an annual left–right policy variable for Britain from 1956 to 2006. Using a recently developed content analysis tool, known as Wordscores, it is shown that speeches yield valid and reliable estimates for the left–right position of British government policy. Long time series such as the one proposed in this article are vital to building dynamic macro‐level models of politics. This measure is cross‐validated with four independent sources: (1) it compares well to expert surveys; (2) a rightward trend is found in post‐war British government policy; (3) Conservative governments are found to be more right wing in their policy outputs than Labour governments; (4) conventional accounts of British post‐war politics support the pattern of government policy movement on the left–right scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:57:y:2009:i:4:p:720-745
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00763.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00763.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00763.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. Stimson, James A. & Mackuen, Michael B. & Erikson, Robert S., 1995. "Dynamic Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 543-565, September.
    2. Soroka, Stuart N. & Wlezien, Christopher, 2005. "Opinion–Policy Dynamics: Public Preferences and Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 665-689, October.
    3. Sara Binzer Hobolt & Robert Klemmemsen, 2005. "Responsive Government? Public Opinion and Government Policy Preferences in Britain and Denmark," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 379-402, June.
    4. 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.
    5. A. Smithies, 1941. "Optimum Location in Spatial Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(3), pages 423-423.
    6. Michael Laver, 1998. "Party Policy in Britain 1997: Results from an Expert Survey," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(2), pages 336-347, June.
    7. James P. Allan & Lyle Scruggs, 2004. "Political Partisanship and Welfare State Reform in Advanced Industrial Societies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 496-512, July.
    8. Laver, Michael & Benoit, Kenneth & Garry, John, 2003. "Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(2), pages 311-331, May.
    9. Suzanna De Boef & Luke Keele, 2008. "Taking Time Seriously," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 184-200, January.
    10. Hofferbert, Richard I. & Budge, Ian, 1992. "The Party Mandate and the Westminster Model: Election Programmes and Government Spending in Britain, 1948–85," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 151-182, April.
    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. Carlo V. Fiorio & Simon Mohun & Roberto Veneziani, 2013. "Social Democracy and Distributive Conflict in the UK, 1950-2010," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2013-06, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    2. Jørgen Bølstad, 2015. "Dynamics of European integration: Public opinion in the core and periphery," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 23-44, March.
    3. Eiselt, H.A. & Marianov, Vladimir, 2020. "Maximizing political vote in multiple districts," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    4. Stephen Greasley & Chris Hanretty, 2012. "Culling the quangos: when is delegation revoked," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2012-12, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    5. Rivas, Javier & Rockey, James, 2021. "Expressive voting with booing and cheering: Evidence from Britain," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    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. Will Jennings & Peter John, 2009. "The Dynamics of Political Attention: Public Opinion and the Queen's Speech in the United Kingdom," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 838-854, October.
    2. Jørgen Bølstad, 2015. "Dynamics of European integration: Public opinion in the core and periphery," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 23-44, March.
    3. Alejandro Saporiti, 2010. "Power, ideology, and electoral competition," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1003, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    4. Marcinkiewicz, Kamil & Auffenberg, Jennie & Kittel, Bernhard, 2012. "Politikpositionen im Reformprozess des öffentlichen Dienstes: Zur Übertragbarkeit der quantitativen Textanalyse," TranState Working Papers 162, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    5. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    6. James Tilley & Christopher Wlezien, 2008. "Does Political Information Matter? An Experimental Test Relating to Party Positions on Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 192-214, March.
    7. Alessandro Morselli, 2021. "Individual decisions and collective choices in the history of economic thought," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 77-96,97-11.
    8. Jelle Koedam, 2021. "Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 655-675, December.
    9. Federico Podestà, 2016. "Do Big Governments Promote Trade Liberalization? A Long-Term Analysis of 18 OECD Countries, 1975-2000," FBK-IRVAPP Working Papers 2016-02, Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies (IRVAPP), Bruno Kessler Foundation.
    10. Bruno Amable & Donatella Gatti & Elvire Guillaud, 2008. "How does Party Fractionalization convey Preferences for Redistribution in Parliamentary Democracies ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00348878, HAL.
    11. Tanner, Thomas Cole, 1994. "The spatial theory of elections: an analysis of voters' predictive dimensions and recovery of the underlying issue space," ISU General Staff Papers 1994010108000018174, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Fuchs, Dieter, 1997. "Kriterien demokratischer Performanz in Liberalen Demokratien," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 97-203, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    13. Marcelin Joanis, 2011. "The road to power: partisan loyalty and the centralized provision of local infrastructure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 117-143, January.
    14. Arnesen, Sveinung, 2012. "Forecasting Norwegian elections: Out of work and out of office," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 789-796.
    15. Fournier, Gaëtan & Van Der Straeten, Karine & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2020. "Spatial competition with unit-demand functions," TSE Working Papers 20-1072, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    16. Melvin J. Hinich & Michael C. Munger, 1992. "A Spatial Theory of Ideology," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 5-30, January.
    17. Osterloh, Steffen, 2012. "Words speak louder than actions: The impact of politics on economic performance," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 318-336.
    18. Mostapha Diss & Eric Kamwa, 2019. "Simulations in Models of Preference Aggregation," Working Papers hal-02424936, HAL.
    19. Bärbel M. R. Stadler, 1998. "Abstention Causes Bifurcations in Two-Party Voting Dynamics," Working Papers 98-08-072, Santa Fe Institute.
    20. 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.

    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:57:y:2009:i:4:p:720-745. 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.