IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v17y1999i4p391-409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Funding of Constituency Party General Election Campaigns in Great Britain

Author

Listed:
  • R J Johnston
  • I MacAllister
  • C J Pattie

    (Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England)

Abstract

The issues of political party campaign expenditure and funding sources are again high on the British political agenda. Most attention is focused on the amounts raised and spent by the parties nationally, with much less being devoted to the separate local parties in the 641 parliamentary constituencies—where the amounts that can be spent on general election campaigns are subject to legal constraints. Little is known about the sources of funds for those campaigns, and research on the 1997 general election has shown that for most parties the legal requirement to disclose where they obtain their income does not result in the disclosure of original sources of their income. As at previous elections, however, the amounts spent in the constituencies have an impact on the outcome, sustaining the case for regulation; much is spent outside the legal constraints, however, and it is difficult to envisage ways in which this might be regulated.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:17:y:1999:i:4:p:391-409
    DOI: 10.1068/c170391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c170391
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c170391?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. 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.
    2. Johnston, R. J. & Pattie, C. J., 1998. "Campaigning and Advertising: An Evaluation of the Components of Constituency Activism at Recent British General Elections," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 677-685, October.
    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. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Sorribas-Navarro, Pilar, 2008. "The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(12), pages 2302-2319, December.
    2. Pilar Sorribas-Navarro, 2006. "(When) Are Intergovernmental Transfers Used to Bail Out Regional Governments? Evidence from Spain 1986-2001," Working Papers 2006/7, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    3. Sorribas-Navarro, Pilar, 2011. "Bailouts in a fiscal federal system: Evidence from Spain," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 154-170, March.

    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. David Soberman & Loïc Sadoulet, 2007. "Campaign Spending Limits and Political Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1521-1532, October.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    7. Benoit S Y Crutzen & Sabine Flamand, 2021. "Leaders, Factions and Electoral Success," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-041/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. 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.
    9. Matros, Alexander, 2012. "Sad-Loser contests," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 155-162.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. P J Taylor, 1996. "Creative Tensions," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(11), pages 1983-1995, November.
    13. 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.

    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:sae:envirc:v:17:y:1999:i:4:p:391-409. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.