Success and failure in electoral competition: Selective issue emphasis under incomplete issue ownership
AbstractPolitical parties are often argued to compete for voters by stressing issues they feel they own - a strategy known as 'selective emphasis'. While usually seen as an electorally rewarding strategy, this article argues that cultivating your themes in the public debate is not guaranteed to be electorally beneficial and may even become counter-productive. It describes the conditions under which 'selective emphasis' becomes counter-productive, and applies the argument to recent discussions regarding the strategies of mainstream parties confronting the extreme right. --
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB) in its series Discussion Papers, Research Professorship & Project "The Future of Fiscal Federalism" with number SP II 2012-102.
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Phone: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 0
Fax: ++49 - 30 - 25491 - 684
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/
More information through EDIRC
issue salience; issue ownership; party competition;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-04-03 (All new papers)
- NEP-CDM-2012-04-03 (Collective Decision-Making)
- NEP-POL-2012-04-03 (Positive Political Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Jane Green, 2007. "When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55, pages 629-655, October.
- Jørgen Juel Andersen & Jon H. Fiva & Gisle James Natvik, 2010.
"Voting when the Stakes are High,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
3167, CESifo Group Munich.
- Jørgen Juel Andersen & Jon H. Fiva & Gisle James Natvik, 2013. "Voting When the Stakes Are High," Working Papers 0017, Centre for Applied Macro- and Petroleum economics (CAMP), BI Norwegian Business School.
- Gisle James Natvik & Jørgen Juel Andersen & Jon H. Fiva, 2010. "Voting when the stakes are high," Working Paper 2010/15, Norges Bank.
- Philip Jones & John Hudson, 1998.
"The role of political parties: An analysis based on transaction costs,"
Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 175-189, January.
- Jones, Philip R & Hudson, John, 1998. " The Role of Political Parties: An Analysis Based on Transaction Costs," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(1-2), pages 175-89, January.
- Geys, Benny & Vermeir, Jan, 2008.
"Party cues and yardstick voting,"
European Journal of Political Economy,
Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 470-477, June.
- Geys, Benny & Vermeir, Jan, 2008. "Party cues and yardstick voting," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-05, Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB).
- Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135.
- Tim Bale & Christoffer Green-Pedersen & André Krouwel & Kurt Richard Luther & Nick Sitter, 2010. "If You Can't Beat Them, Join Them? Explaining Social Democratic Responses to the Challenge from the Populist Radical Right in Western Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 410-426, 06.
- Benny Geys, 2006. "'Rational' Theories of Voter Turnout: A Review," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 4(1), pages 16-35.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.