Salient Political Issue Research Articles

Moral foundations and political ideology in the UK

Moral foundations theory is one of the most popularised and tested lenses of recent years, with its ability to account for differences in political ideology. For the first time using a nationally representative random probability sample, we assess how the newly refined moral foundation questionnaire may explain differences in political ideology and views on political issues in the UK. We confirm a six-factor model with robust estimates for the moral intuitions of care, equality, proportionality, authority, loyalty, and purity. We then use moral intuitions to predict (a) economic left-right and socially liberal-conservative ideology and (b) the relationship between political ideology and views on salient political issues. We find moral intuitions mostly play a unifying role across a series of issues, with the exception of feelings toward patriotism and Brexit.

Measuring norm pluralism and perceived polarization in US politics.

Recent research has shown how norms shape political and economic decision-making. Much of this work assumes that a single norm influences the behavior of all people, but in fact, many situations are characterized by the existence of competing normative viewpoints. We apply a method for measuring belief in the simultaneous existence of multiple norms. Such multiplicity arises naturally when norms are associated with distinctive groups, and thus political polarization can be characterized, in part, as a product of diverging norms between groups. We thus assess the validity of our measurement technique by testing whether it can recover polarization on seven salient political issues on which US Democrats and Republicans tend to hold different views. We then compare the norms elicited by our method to the norms of Democrats and Republicans elicited in a separate sample using an established and validated-but methodologically less rich-measurement approach. Our study uncovers a wide range of co-existing views between and within political groups. Partisans understand their group's norms and hold personal views that align with them. They can also recognize the diversity and polarization in US public opinion by identifying norms specific to political parties and acknowledging the variety of views within their own parties, which may indicate internal divisions. This research underscores the importance of nuanced approaches to political norms that go beyond party lines. By acknowledging a plurality of views, we can encourage productive discussions and bridge ideological divides.

Justifying opposition and support to EU‐Africa cooperation on deportation in West Africa

AbstractMigration, in general, is not a salient political issue in West Africa. However, one migration aspect that remains highly controversial and unpopular is cooperation on the deportation of undocumented emigrants with the EU and its member states. In this paper, we set out a typology of justification frames for studying how political actors in West Africa might frame their support or opposition to cooperation on deportation. We distinguished three types of justifications: identity‐related, moral, and utilitarian. While the moral (human rights) and utilitarian (political, economic, securitarian, labor) frames are rather classic justifications in migration politics and governance, our analysis shows that identity‐related (‘neo‐colonial resistance’ and ‘neo‐colonial compliance’) justification frames highlight how historical path dependencies matter in understanding the drivers of (migration) politics and governance in West Africa. This is particularly evident when the images of cuffed and shackled deportees from Europe evoke memories of dark historical pasts.

A Dwarf Among Giants: A Diplomatic and Political Reading of Florence’s First Commercial Expedition to Ottoman Constantinople

ABSTRACT This article investigates the start of Florence’s approach to Ottoman Constantinople. It analyses the elements that enticed the Florentine Signoria to reconsider its commercial interest in Constantinople by highlighting the political role of the Ottoman sultan. In addition, this study intends to shed light on the difficulties the Florentine establishment faced in its diplomatic effort to successfully establish a profitable state trade route with the former Byzantine capital. The Signoria’s diplomatic groundwork has never been extensively studied, but doing so reveals how an apparently routine matter of administration, the negotiations over the safe-conduct with the Kingdom of Naples, became a salient political issue that took nearly three years (1455–1458) to resolve. The article also aims to make an original contribution to the history of the Florentine Mediterranean thanks to material from previously unconsulted sources.

The moral community of redistribution: interregional fiscal grievances in working-class urban Catalonia

ABSTRACT Nationwide interregional redistribution has recently become a salient political issue in several wealthy regions in Europe, to the point of becoming a powerful motivation for pursuing political independence. Catalonia is a case in point. Rather than focus on the core of the nationalist movement, the present ethnographic study approaches its margins: it examines how working-class second-generation immigrants from southern Spain living in Barcelona voice their disapproval of what they see as an unfair territorial redistribution within Spain that allows for generous social protection in their parents’ places of origin in the poor South at the expense of the hard-pressed workers in the productive North. The second generation’s critique of interregional redistribution is a way of denouncing economic hardships in the absence of an effective alternative discourse for explaining inequalities within Catalonia. However, rather than expressing some sort of welfare chauvinism following a nationalist Catalan–Spanish divide, these particular fiscal grievances can be better understood against the background of migratory memories and subjectivities, and particularly of the imagination concerning the urban–rural cleavage. Ultimately, this ethnographic case invites us to recognize multiple and embedded rationales of social sharing, which I attempt to encompass within the concept of the ‘moral community of redistribution’.

Issue trade‐offs and the politics of representation: Experimental evidence from four European democracies

AbstractThe politics of representation has become increasingly complex in recent years. Amid weakening traditional political cleavages, the emergence of new political divides and mounting anti‐elitism that have helped the rise of radical populist parties, voters face significant cross‐pressures when casting their ballots. Despite a wealth of studies on the role of issue preferences in voting behaviour, there are still many unknowns when it comes to understanding how voters trade off competing issue preferences against each other. Studying issue trade‐offs is also important against the backdrop of the well‐documented preferences of radical left and right voters for redistribution and restrictive immigration policies, respectively. To investigate the strength of issue preferences among radical left, radical right and mainstream party voters and the willingness to compromise on their most important issues, we conducted a conjoint survey experiment with 2,000 participants in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. The voting scenario in the experiment featured proposals on salient political issues and different (non)populist stances on political representation. The results from the cross‐country study, as well as a large replication study with a sample of 4,000 German respondents, show that voters of radical right parties are willing to accept large trade‐offs regarding their other issue preferences as long as their preference for restrictive immigration policies is fulfilled. Differently, radical left, Green and mainstream party voters have a more variegated range of issue preferences, some of them so strong that they are not traded off for their preferred redistribution and European Union integration positions, respectively. The findings shed light on trade‐offs related to emerging issues such as climate change and the distinct logics behind support for radical parties. They also have implications for the electoral prospects of mainstream and radical parties when trying to reposition themselves in the diversifying issue space of contemporary democracies. As such, understanding how voters navigate issue cross‐pressures helps to explain the broader dynamics that are (re)configuring political conflict and voting behaviour in Europe.

Private infrastructure in weaponized interdependence

The ability of states to exploit private resources at an international level is an increasingly salient political issue. In explaining the mechanisms of this shift, the framework of Weaponized Interdependence has quickly risen to prominence, arguing that those states that are centrally placed in global networks can exploit their centrality given the appropriate domestic institutions. Building on this framework, I suggest that the relationship between states and the private corporations holding the resources states seek to exploit is more dynamic and contested than assumed. Drawing on developments in the industry for constructing and operating submarine cables, I find that a paradigm shift in the market has significantly limited the authority of states vis-à-vis key market players. The contribution of this finding is to expand Weaponized Interdependence as a framework, paying closer attention to the relationship between private companies and states. This expansion allows for the utilization of Weaponized Interdependence as a framework for a broader set of cases, explaining not only when a network is prone to weaponization but also the limitations states face when they seek to do so.

Updating with Others: Testing the Effect of Informational Social Influence on Political Attitudes

AbstractWhat role does information concerning the beliefs of others play in the correction, or persistence, of misperceptions? Can social pressure affect whether someone will change their mind on a salient political issue? Building on the “backfire effect” and informational context literatures, we theorize that informational social influence can affect one's willingness to accept new information. Specifically, when individuals receive partisan cues, their attitudes will be different compared to individuals without similar social influence. We test our theory and hypotheses using a unique experimental between‐subjects design using a student sample (N = 839) as well as a nationally representative sample (N = 777). Using the salient debate over voter identification laws, we find some evidence for our theory. We conclude by considering the policy implications of our analysis and directions for future research.Related ArticlesCaillier, James. 2010. “Citizen Trust, Political Corruption, and Voting Behavior: Connecting the Dots.” Politics & Policy 38 (5): 1015‐1035. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00267Dettrey, Bryan J. 2013. “Relative Losses and Economic Voting: Sociotropic Considerations or ‘Keeping up with the Joneses?’” Politics & Policy 41 (5): 788‐806. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12038Nielson, Lindsay. 2017. “Ranked Choice Voting and Attitudes toward Democracy in the United States: Results from a Survey Experiment.” Politics & Policy 45 (4): 535‐570. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12212

How can state governments support healthier housing markets?

Housing affordability has become an increasingly salient political issue across the U.S. in the past several years, reflecting rapid price appreciation in many metropolitan areas. State governments are beginning to push back against the prerogative of “local control” over land use regulation and housing production. In this paper, I examine the potential benefits of more targeted state engagement with housing markets; review the kinds of policy tools through which state governments can influence housing market outcomes; outline broad goals to guide statewide housing policy; and document the contrasting approaches currently taken by five states. Current state approaches vary widely in the intensity of state engagement, policy goals and tools. Housing market outcomes also differ across and within states; statewide policy approaches should be tailored to specific goals and market conditions.

The Rhetorical Register of Class: Gender, Resistance, and Social Justice in Appalachia’s Coalfields

Abstract This article examines social justice in Appalachia through the lens of rhetoric and public deliberation, specifically with regard to mountaintop removal conflicts in West Virginia. I argue that there is a rhetorical register of class, referencing not just how certain populations are framed and/or (de)valued, but more importantly how the stratification of certain populations shapes the very rhetorical terrains they navigate. That is, the way certain populations ground their arguments, articulate their identities, and appeal for credibility with regard to salient political and social issues is animated by the same historical and material practices used to stratify said populations. This article explores the rhetorical register of class via intersectionality, focusing on the role gender plays in the articulation of class over time and, in turn, informing rhetorics of resistance and control.

Procedural Developments at International Human Rights Courts and Bodies

Abstract After exploring the most salient political and institutional issues facing international human rights courts and bodies, this column reviews some of their key procedural developments in 2019, focusing on four specific aspects: the coordination and (dis-)harmony between the multiple mechanisms; the more or less extensive scope of their jurisdiction; the parties’ potential instrumentalization of the proceedings; and States’ compliance with the international decisions.

Longitudinal dataset of political issue-positions of 411 parties across 28 European countries (2009-2019) from voting advice applications EU profiler and euandi.

This data article provides a descriptive overview of the “EU Profiler/euandi trend file (2009–2019)“ dataset and the data collection methods. The dataset compiles party position data from three consecutive pan-European Voting Advice Applications (VAAs), developed by the European University Institute for the European Parliament elections in 2009, 2014 and 2019. It includes the positions of 411 parties from 28 European countries on a wide range of salient political issues. Altogether, the dataset contains more than 20 000 unique party positions. To place the parties on the political issues, all three editions of the VAA have used the same iterative method that combines party self-placement and expert judgement. The data collection has been a collective effort of several hundreds of highly trained social scientists, involving experts from each EU member state. The political statements that the parties were placed on, were identical across all the countries and 15 of the statements remained the same throughout all three waves (2009, 2014, 2019) of data collection. Because of the unique methodology and the large volume of data, the dataset offers a significant contribution to the research on European party systems and on party positioning methodologies.

The Challenges of Implementing a National Party Message: A Comparative Analysis of the 2014 and 2018 Midterm US Senate Elections

It is commonplace in US politics for parties and candidates to organize their election efforts around a key issue, policy position, or promise. Candidates and parties will dwell on a particular topic or issue for a variety of reasons, including when they hope to capitalize on a salient political issue, or to highlight their own successes in government in contrast to their opponents’ failures. But it is also often been part of a broader strategy to centrally coordinate, or “nationalize” a party’s core message across states and campaigns. This, political marketing scholars note, has become increasingly common, and reflects what they describe as a growing effort to “implement” a single, unifying policy strategy nationally. To examine the strength of this trend during the last two midterm elections, this paper examines the degree of coordination that occurred between each of the parties and incumbent Democrats and Republicans who sought reelection to the Senate in 2014 and 2018. I will do so by looking at the continuity between the party and the candidates on two distinct policy issues, immigration, and health care reform.

Attitudes towards climate change migrants

While climate change has become a salient political and social issue in Western societies, we know relatively little about how these societies will react to one of the potentially important consequences of climate change: increasing migration flows. By means of a representative online survey in Germany, this paper therefore investigates for the very first time to what extent citizens in industrialized societies are willing to accept climate change migrants, especially in comparison with other groups of migrants and refugees, and the circumstances and principles under which they would accept them. The findings show that climate change migrants receive high support levels comparable with those enjoyed by political refugees (migrants who need special protection) and that contrast with attitudes towards economic migrants (who are often not seen as in need of special protection). We also see that people are more likely to accept justifications for taking climate change migrants when they realize that the expected number of migrants is relatively low. While arguments about morality, corrective justice, and a country’s capacity lead to similar acceptance rates in general, the latter argument plays a more important role for highly educated people and non-environmentalists than the former two. The findings of this study allow us to better prepare for potential conflicts that might emerge with increasing migration flows caused by climate change.

The Limits of Partisan Loyalty

While partisan cues tend to dominate political choice, prior work shows that competing information can rival the effects of partisanship if it relates to salient political issues. But what are the limits of partisan loyalty? How much electoral leeway do co-partisan candidates have to deviate from the party line on important issues? We answer this question using conjoint survey experiments that characterize the role of partisanship relative to issues. We demonstrate a pattern of conditional party loyalty. Partisanship dominates electoral choice when elections center on low-salience issues. But while partisan loyalty is strong, it is finite: the average voter is more likely than not to vote for the co-partisan candidate until that candidate takes dissonant stances on four or more salient issues. These findings illuminate when and why partisanship fails to dominate political choice. They also suggest that, on many issues, public opinion minimally constrains politicians.

When Do Opponents of Gay Rights Mobilize? Explaining Political Participation in Times of Backlash against Liberalism

Existing research suggests that supporters of gay rights have outmobilized their opponents, leading to policy changes in advanced industrialized democracies. At the same time, we observe the diffusion of state-sponsored homophobia in many parts of the world. The emergence of gay rights as a salient political issue in global politics leads us to ask, “Who is empowered to be politically active in various societies?” What current research misses is a comparison of levels of participation (voting and protesting) between states that make stronger and weaker appeals to homophobia. Voters face contrasting appeals from politicians in favor of and against gay rights globally. In an analysis of survey data from Europe and Latin America, we argue that the alignment between the norms of sexuality a state promotes and an individual’s personal attitudes on sexuality increases felt political efficacy. We find that individuals who are tolerant of homosexuality are more likely to participate in states with gay-friendly policies in comparison with intolerant individuals. The reverse also holds: individuals with low education levels that are intolerant of homosexuality are more likely to participate in states espousing political homophobia.

Conditional Party Loyalty

While partisan cues tend to dominate political choice, prior work shows that competing information can mute the effects of partisanship if it relates to salient political issues. But what are the limits of partisan loyalty? How much electoral leeway do co-partisan candidates have to deviate from the party line on important issues? We answer this question using conjoint survey experiments that characterize the role of partisanship relative to issues. We demonstrate a pattern of conditional party loyalty. Partisanship dominates electoral choice when elections center on low-salience issues. But while partisan loyalty is strong, it is finite: voters are more likely than not to vote for the co-partisan candidate until that candidate takes dissonant stances on four or more salient issues. These findings illuminate when and why partisanship fails to dominate political choice. They also suggest that, on many issues, public opinion minimally constrains politicians.

Where Will the British Go? And Why?*

ObjectiveImmigration is a highly salient political issue. We examine the migration preferences of potential emigrants from the United Kingdom to determine whether the migration calculus is primarily economic or political.MethodsA conjoint survey experiment was conducted with U.K. subjects drawn from the CESS, Nuffield College, Oxford University, student subject pool to identify causal drivers of emigration preferences.ResultsLogit estimation of emigration preferences indicates that economics and politics matters. Anti‐immigrant rhetoric, “Trumpian policies,” and the United States deter high‐skilled U.K. potential emigrants; economic growth, education, and social benefits attract them. Politics and social benefits are more important for those on the political left, while economics and education weigh more heavily for those on the right.ConclusionWhat will attract the highly skilled migrants from a post‐Brexit United Kingdom? Economics matters of course but for many of these potential emigrants politics is important—they are particularly sensitive to anti‐immigrant rhetoric.

Stormwater the final frontier: Exploratory study of state-level implementation of the phase II municipal stormwater program

ABSTRACTThe importance of water to support all aspects of human and non-human life has led to debates over the quality of water in the United States and continues to be a salient political issue. S...

When do they put all of their eggs in one basket? past election result, issue salience, and the nicheness of radical right-wing parties

ABSTRACTWhen do radical right-wing parties (RRPs) become more or less niche? In other words, when do they restrict their policy platform and emphasize their core issues (e.g. immigration) more or expand their policy platform incorporating other, particularly traditional socioeconomic issues? Using data on party manifestos and public opinion in Western Europe between 1980 and 2017, we find that in response to poor election results, the parties become more niche if the salience of their core issue (immigration) is high among party supporters, but become less niche if the salience is low. This result implies that if mainstream parties can influence the salience of particular issues, they can alter RRPs’ electoral strategy. The result also implies that RRPs will either maintain or even strengthen their niche party characteristics and compete primarily on immigration issues as long as immigration stays as a salient political issue.