IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v52y2014i6p1194-1198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘European Elections are Second‐Order Elections’: Is Received Wisdom Changing?

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Corbett

Abstract

Is it still right to classify European elections as ‘second‐order elections’? There are some reasons used to justify such a classification that are changing or evolving, while others are not. A neat and tidy first‐/second‐order division may not be appropriate. But is the ‘lead candidate’ (Spitzenkandidat) development one of the reasons to re‐evaluate? In most Member States, it had little impact on the election campaign and, at the time of writing, the effect on the final choice of Commission President is not definitively settled, but it looks as though it has changed the expectations of many politicians involved in that choice. Its longer term evolution remains to be seen and could well become more important for political actors, but the jury is still out as to how far this might eventually impact on the wider public.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Corbett, 2014. "‘European Elections are Second‐Order Elections’: Is Received Wisdom Changing?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(6), pages 1194-1198, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:52:y:2014:i:6:p:1194-1198
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12187
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.12187?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. Esben Hogh & Martin Vinæs Larsen, 2016. "Can Information Increase Turnout in European Parliament Elections? Evidence from a Quasi-experiment in Denmark," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(6), pages 1495-1508, November.

    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:jcmkts:v:52:y:2014:i:6:p:1194-1198. 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=0021-9886 .

    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.