Skip to main content

It’s the responsibility, stupid!

It’s the responsibility, stupid!

Determinanten der Verantwortlichkeitszuschreibung zwischen Europäischer Union und nationaler Regierung für die wirtschaftliche Lage

Explaining economic accountability of the European Union and national governments

  • Aufsätze
  • Chapter
Europa, europäische Integration und Eurokrise

Zusammenfassung

Modelle ökonomischen Wählens rekurrieren auf zwei Elemente: die Evaluation ökonomischer Verhältnisse und die Zuschreibung von Verantwortlichkeit. So wird eine demokratietheoretisch wichtige Kontrollfunktion ermöglicht; bei schlechter Lage und perzipierter Regierungsverantwortung wird eine Stimme für die Regierung unwahrscheinlicher. In letzter Zeit finden sich vermehrt Studien, die einen Bias bei der Evaluation und teilweise auch bei der Zuschreibung von Verantwortlichkeit nachweisen.

Unser Beitrag transferiert diese Beobachtungen in den Kontext der EU. Die Ergebnisse dieser vergleichenden Analyse bestätigen, dass sowohl Parteineigungen zugunsten der Regierung als auch Einstellungen gegenüber der EU die Verantwortungszuschreibung, konditional zur wirtschaftlichen Lage, verzerren. Die demokratietheoretische Relevanz des Ansatzes ist somit stark beeinträchtigt.

Abstract

Two elements constitute economic voting models: the evaluation of economic conditions and responsibility. This enables an important control mechanism rooted in democratic theory. The combination of bad conditions and perceived accountability decreases the likelihood that votes will be cast for the incumbent. Recent studies have shown that these evaluations are biased; some studies state similar findings with regard to accountability.

Our contribution applies these observations to the EU context. Results of this comparative analysis confirm that both party identification in favour of the incumbent and positive attitudes towards the EU distort accountability. The degree of distortion depends on economic conditions. Thus the relevance of the approach in the context of democratic theory is strongly impaired.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Alt, James E., und Robert C. Lowry. 2010. Transparency and accountability: Empirical results for US states. Journal of Theoretical Politics 22 (4): 379–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Christopher J. 2000. Economic voting and political context: A comparative perspective. Electoral Studies 19 (1): 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Christopher J. 2007. The end of economic voting? Dilemmas and the limits of democratic accountability. Annual Review of Political Science 10 (2): 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Christopher J., Silvia M. Mendes, und Yuliya V. Tverdova. 2004. Endogenous economic voting: Evidence from the 1997 British election. Electoral Studies 23 (4): 683–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Larry M. 2002. Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior 24 (2): 117–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blais, André, Mathieu Turgeon, Elisabeth Gidengil, Neil Nevitte, und Richard Nadeau. 2004. Which matters most? Comparing the impact of issues and the economy in American, British and Canadian elections. British Journal of Political Science 34 (3): 555–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus, Philip Converse, Warren E. Miller, und Donald Stokes. 1960. The American voter . New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Harold D., Marianne C. Stewart, und Paul F. Whiteley. 2002. Emotions, expectations and the dynamics of party support in Britain. In Economic voting, Hrsg. Han Dorussen und Michaell Taylor, 235–260. Milton Park: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, Catherine E., Wouter van der Brug, Marcel van Egmond, und Cees van der Eijk. 2011. Individual and contextual variation in EU issue voting: The role of political information. Electoral Studies 30 (1): 16–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorussen, Han, und Michaell Taylor. 2002. Group economic voting: A comparison of the Netherlands and Germany. In Economic voting, Hrsg. Han Dorussen und Michaell Taylor, 92–120. Milton Park: Routledge. Duch, Raymond M., und Harvey D. Palmer. 2002. Heterogeneous perceptions of economic conditions in cross-national perspective. In Economic voting, Hrsg. Han Dorussen und Michaell Taylor, 139–172. Milton Park: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, Andrew, und Neil Malhotra. 2013. Retrospective voting reconsidered. Annual Review of Political Science 16 (1): 285–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hering, Martin. 2008. Welfare state restructuring without grand coalitions: The role of informal cooperation in blame avoidance. German Politics 17 (2): 165–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobolt, Sara B., James Tilley, und Jill Wittrock. 2013. Listening to the government: How information shapes responsibility attributions. Political Behavior 35 (1): 153–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1986. Comparative economic voting: Britain, France, Germany, Italy. American Journal of Political Science 30 (2): 315–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis-Beck, Michael S., und Mary Stegmaier. 2000. Economic determinants of electoral outcomes. Annual Review of Political Science 3:183–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norpoth, Helmut. 2001. Divided government and economic voting. The Journal of Politics 63 (2): 414–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paldam, Martin. 1991. How robust is the vote function? A study of seventeen nations over four decades. In Economics and Politics, Hrsg. Helmuth Norpoth, Michael S. Lewis-Beck, und Jean Dominique Lafay, 9-32. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffley, Mark, und John T. Williams. 1985. Attributing presidential responsibility for national economic problems. American Politics Research 13 (4): 393–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. Bingham, und Guy D. Whitten. 1993. A cross-national analysis of economic voting: Taking account of the political context. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2): 391–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rattinger, Hans, und Charlotte Kellermann. 2007. Wahrnehmungen der Wirtschaftslage und Wahlverhalten. In Der gesamtdeutsche Wähler: Stabilität und Wandel des Wählerverhaltens im wiedervereinigten Deutschland, Hrsg. Hans Rattinger, Oscar W. Gabriel, und Jürgen W. Falter, 329–356. Baden-Baden: Nomos

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rattinger, Hans, Sigrid Roßteutscher, Rüdiger Schmitt-Beck, und Bernhard Weßels. 2011. Nachwahl-Querschnitt (GLES 2009) . GESIS Datenarchiv, Köln. ZA5301 Datenfile Version 4.0.0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, Donald B. 2004. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Wileys Classics Library Edition . Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, Thomas J. 2003. Institutional context and the assignment of political responsibility. The Journal of Politics 65 (01): 190–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuck, Andreas R. T., Georgios Xezonakis, Matthijs Elenbaas, Susan A. Banducci, und Claes H. De Vreese. 2011. Party contestation and Europe on the news agenda: The 2009 European Parliament Elections. Electoral Studies 30 (1): 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, Nils D., und Markus Steinbrecher. 2012. Wirtschaft und Wahlverhalten in Westdeutschland zwischen 1977 und 2007: Wer sind die ökonomischen Wähler? In Politische Vierteljahresschrift, Sonderheft (45): Wählen in Deutschland, Hrsg. Rüdiger Schmitt-Beck, 321–344. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, James, und Sara B. Hobolt. 2011. Is the government to blame? An experimental test of how partisanship shapes perceptions of performance and responsibility. The Journal of Politics 73 (02): 316–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Brug, Wouter, Cees van der Eijk, und Mark Franklin. 2007. The Economy and the vote: Economic conditions and elections in Fifteen countries . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Egmond, Marcel, Wouter van der Brug, Sara Hobolt, Mark Franklin, und Eliyahu V. Sapir. 2011. European Parliament Election Study 2009, Voter Study . GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5055 Data file Version 1.0.0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Eijk, Cees, und Mark Franklin. 1996. The problem: Representation and democracy in the European Union. In Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of the union, Hrsg. Cees Van der Eijk und Mark Franklin, 3–10. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1983. Economic voting and the „Symbolic Politics“ argument: A reinterpretation and synthesis. The American Political Science Review 77 (1): 158–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer VS | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wagner, A., Giebler, H. (2014). It’s the responsibility, stupid!. In: Steinbrecher, M., Bytzek, E., Rosar, U., Roßteutscher, S. (eds) Europa, europäische Integration und Eurokrise. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft Comparative Governance and Politics. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05382-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics