IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v89y1995i04p969-983_09.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Winning the Local Vote: The Effectiveness of Constituency Campaign Spending in Great Britain, 1983–1992

Author

Listed:
  • Pattie, Charles J.
  • Johnston, Ronald J.
  • Fieldhouse, Edward A.

Abstract

Much recent analysis of British politics has assumed, explicitly or implicitly, that constituency campaigns have no impact upon an electorate that draws on an increasingly nationalized media for its information. We employ data on constituency campaign spending to challenge this interpretation. Local party campaigners are rational in their use of funds, spending most in seats where the competition is close and least where there is little hope of winning. What is more, campaign spending is clearly associated with voting, increasing support for the spending party and decreasing support for its rivals. Contrary to the accepted wisdom, local campaign spending can result in important shifts in the vote. However, local campaigning seems to be of much more value to challengers than to incumbents.

Suggested Citation

  • Pattie, Charles J. & Johnston, Ronald J. & Fieldhouse, Edward A., 1995. "Winning the Local Vote: The Effectiveness of Constituency Campaign Spending in Great Britain, 1983–1992," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 969-983, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:89:y:1995:i:04:p:969-983_09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S000305540009821X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Abel François & Michael Visser & Lionel WILNER, 2016. "Campaign spending and legislative election outcomes: Exploiting the French political financing reforms of the mid-1990s," Working Papers 2016-28, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    2. Charles Pattie & Patrick Seyd & Paul Whiteley, 2003. "Citizenship and Civic Engagement: Attitudes and Behaviour in Britain," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(3), pages 443-468, October.
    3. Benoit S Y Crutzen & Sabine Flamand, 2021. "Leaders, Factions and Electoral Success," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-041/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. David Soberman & Loïc Sadoulet, 2007. "Campaign Spending Limits and Political Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1521-1532, October.
    5. Kenneth Benoit & Michael Marsh, 2008. "The Campaign Value of Incumbency: A New Solution to the Puzzle of Less Effective Incumbent Spending," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 874-890, October.
    6. Matros, Alexander, 2012. "Sad-Loser contests," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 155-162.
    7. C J Pattie & R J Johnston, 1996. "The Value of Making an Extra Effort: Campaign Spending and Electoral Outcomes in Recent British General Elections—A Decomposition Approach," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(11), pages 2081-2090, November.
    8. Robert K. Fleck, 1999. "Electoral Incentives, Public Policy, and the New Deal Realignment," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 377-404, January.
    9. David Denver & Gordon Hands & Iain MacAllister, 2004. "The Electoral Impact of Constituency Campaigning in Britain, 1992–2001," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(2), pages 289-306, June.
    10. Carl Müller-Crepon, 2022. "Local ethno-political polarization and election violence in majoritarian vs. proportional systems," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(2), pages 242-258, March.
    11. R J Johnston & I MacAllister & C J Pattie, 1999. "The Funding of Constituency Party General Election Campaigns in Great Britain," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 17(4), pages 391-409, August.
    12. Abel François & Michael Visser & Lionel Wilner, 2022. "The petit effect of campaign spending on votes: using political financing reforms to measure spending impacts in multiparty elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 192(1), pages 29-57, July.
    13. Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher, 2003. "Explaining Split‐Ticket Voting at the 1979 and 1997 General and Local Elections in England," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(3), pages 558-572, October.
    14. P J Taylor, 1996. "Creative Tensions," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(11), pages 1983-1995, 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:cup:apsrev:v:89:y:1995:i:04:p:969-983_09. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.