Abstract
This article critically assesses the applicability of the second-order election model to regional elections. It offers first a critique of the second-order election model, arguing that the model has imported an inappropriate ‘nationalizing’ bias into the study of regional elections. Second, the article conducts an empirical analysis that shows that second-order election predictions do not appear to hold for regional elections which take place (1) in political settings where regional elections do not have the potential to signal a future alternation of government at the national level; (2) in authoritative, powerful regions; and (3) in regions where non-state-wide parties compete in regional elections.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 323-341 |
| Journal | Regional Studies |
| Volume | 47 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Early online date | 15 Jun 2012 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 |
Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)
- Regional elections
- Second-order model
- Methodological nationalism
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Are Regional Elections Really ‘Second-Order’ Elections?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver