Abstract
Evidence suggests that as public opinion towards immigration becomes more negative, so the descriptive representation of ethnic minority groups is increasingly restricted. Recently, some initial research into the causal mechanism hinted that this effect is driven by patterns of candidacy. This suggests that political parties are creating an ‘ethnic penalty’ of their own in the selection stage. This paper investigates the relationship between patterns of candidacy, party strategy, and public opinion in Great Britain from 1997 to 2019, and proposes that ‘punitive parties’ are strongly responsible for shaping the representational outcomes of minority groups. I find support for earlier suggestions that parties are increasingly likely to place ethnic minority candidates away from ‘winnable’ contests as anti-immigrant hostility rises. These findings are important for our conceptions of ethnic penalties, of party behaviour in selection processes, and for the study and cause of improving political representation.
Highlights
The moment in which a candidate is successfully elected is the final step in a long, meandering river of opportunities and processes which feed into election day, and end with representation
While much research tends to focus on those election day outcomes, there is a much larger size and spread of interconnected and interdependent exclusionary forces pushing against minority-group participation
I aimed to demonstrate that there has been a systematic impact of public opinion on patterns of minority candidacy in British elections over the past 23 years
Summary
The moment in which a candidate is successfully elected is the final step in a long, meandering river of opportunities and processes which feed into election day, and end with representation. Political parties are charged with being ‘gatekeepers’ to representation, and while they provide the vast majority of representational opportunities, they can create punitive pressures on (prospective) candidates from ‘non-traditional’ backgrounds seeking to become representatives. Those in less advantageous positions face what literature articulates as ‘barriers’ to representation, which can be found from spring to estuary along the course of representation. While much research tends to focus on those election day outcomes (the ‘estuary’), there is a much larger size and spread of interconnected and interdependent exclusionary forces pushing against minority-group participation (the ‘upstream’)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
