IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v99y2018i4p1363-1376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Exceptionalism of the Open Space Issue in American Politics

Author

Listed:
  • William R. Lowry

Abstract

Objective Our objective is to illustrate the need to differentiate specific issue types within broad policy categories by showing the exceptional support in American politics for open space issues. Methods We test this assertion with econometric analyses of outcomes from over 600 state ballot measures on environmental and energy issues. Results We find exceptional support for open space ballot measures in simple comparisons and in fuller models of ballot measure passage. As one example, over 80 percent of the open space measures pass, whereas 50 percent of all the other measures pass. Conclusion Exceptional support for open space is important for this policy area specifically but also as an illustration of the need to differentiate broad policy categories into specific issues.

Suggested Citation

  • William R. Lowry, 2018. "The Exceptionalism of the Open Space Issue in American Politics," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1363-1376, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:99:y:2018:i:4:p:1363-1376
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12499
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12499?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Prendergast, Patrick & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna & Lang, Corey, 2019. "The individual determinants of support for open space bond referendums," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 258-268.

    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:socsci:v:99:y:2018:i:4:p:1363-1376. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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=0038-4941 .

    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.