Representation最新文献

{"title":"The Voter Experience Around the World: A Human Reflexivity Approach","authors":"Toby S. James, Holly Ann Garnett","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2290714","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2290714","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"2 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138976439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Squeezing Blood from a Turnip? The Resilience of Social Democratic Governmental Power in Western Europe (1871–2022)","authors":"Vincenzo Emanuele, Federico Trastulli","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2292174","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2292174","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"100 S102","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138976958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Representational Counterbalancing: The Case of Cabinet Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada","authors":"John A. Scherpereel","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2281309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2281309","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139251135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Do Governments Always Take Unpopular Decisions Knowingly? How Perceptual Inaccuracy Affects Policy Decisions","authors":"Chris Butler","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2281312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2281312","url":null,"abstract":"Governments ’ occasional failures to respond to voters ’ preferences are usually ascribed to ‘ rational ’ behaviours; that they are knowingly being ‘ responsible ’ rather than ‘ responsive ’ , prioritising perceived policy bene fi ts over electoral goals. Yet given the increasing evidence that decision-makers are poor at estimating public opinion, could an additional explanation for their occasional failure to respond simply be that they fail to anticipate the unpopularity of such decisions? In this study, I trace the decision-making process in three cases where UK governments took electorally costly decisions to explore whether and why decision-makers misjudged voters ’ reactions. I fi nd that key decision-makers dismissed signals that voters would punish them for these actions, often prioritising information that reinforced their existing policy preferences. The results support fi ndings that decision-makers ’ judgements are compromised by motivated reasoning and shed light on how politicians ’ failure to estimate public opinion plays out in practise.","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139257315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Market-oriented Political Engagement – A Problematised Ideal? Attitudes Towards Political Consumerism among Elected Representatives in Sweden","authors":"Elin Alfredsson Malmros","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2274610","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2274610","url":null,"abstract":"Market-oriented political participation, often referred to as political consumerism, is one of the most rapidly proliferating modes of citizen participation in the Western world. Argued to circumvent the political sphere, this rising mode of engagement has caused scholars to consider the relationship between political consumerism and the functioning of representative democracy. So far, however, the implications of market-oriented participation for the role of elected representatives have been widely overlooked. Drawing from the theory of responsibilisation, I consider whether political consumerism, by circumventing the traditional political arena, risk challenging the role of representatives as responsible actors within the confines of representative democracy. Resorting to a mixed-method approach, using data from the online panel of Swedish politicians, as well as interview material with Swedish MPs, this article investigates representatives’ attitudes to political consumerism and finds a considerable support among the elected, with the greatest approval among representatives to the left. But when considered in relation to representative democracy, political consumerism is argued to challenge its core functions, including the responsibility and accountability assigned to representatives. Together the results accentuate a strong reliance on market-oriented participation among representatives in Sweden, but also a recognition of potential democratic perils related to the same.","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"166 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135372075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"An Unheard Confidence Crisis? An Analysis of Indigenous Peoples’ Perception of Settler Institutions and Politics","authors":"Joanie Bouchard, Sabrina Bourgeois","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2265930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2265930","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTFocusing on the case of Canada, this paper offers an investigation of how members of Indigenous nations perceive the system of government using data from the 2019 Canadian Election Study (CES). Given the legacies of colonialism, we consider if Indigenous individuals in Canada adopt a distinct outlook on political institutions, actors, and democracy when compared to other Canadian voters by leveraging quantitative tools. We find that Indigenous people have a significantly more negative perception of several political institutions, politicians, and democracy in Canada.KEYWORDS: Indigenous peoplespolitical institutionssettler colonialismCanada Aknowledgements:The authors would like to thank Daniel Rubenson for comments on a previous version of this manuscript as well as the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.Disclosure StatementAt the time of writing this article, Sabrina Bourgeois was employed by the Government of Canada. The authors would like to emphasize that the views and opinions expressed in this article are their own and do not reflect the official policies or positions of any Canadian federal departments.Notes1 On February 6, 2020, notably, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) intervened to enforce a court injunction from the British Columbia Supreme Court (Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd. v. Hudson, 2019). They cleared Indigenous camps to free up access to the Coastal Gaslink pipeline.2 Use of terms: We use terms such as ‘Indigenous peoples’ to refer to collectives (‘peoples’ as nations), which are the First Nations, Métis, and Inuit in Canada. We use terms such as ‘Indigenous individuals’ to refer to the attitudes or opinions of individuals, and more specifically ‘Indigenous respondents’ to refer to the respondents to the Canadian Election Study (CES). The term ‘Aboriginal’ is used to refer to legal concepts. The word ‘Indian’ was formerly used to refer to First Nations – we use it only to refer to the Indian Act and ‘Indian status.’ Furthermore, we use the term ‘settler’ to refer to non-Indigenous institutions and politics, as well as to the colonial reality facing Indigenous nations because of settler colonialism. We also use ‘Canadian’ institutions and politics to refer to the Canadian context.3 TC Energy signed twenty project agreements with elected First Nations governments along the approved route (Coastal Gaslink, Citation2021). These impacts and benefits agreements (IBAs) are private agreements between the industry and Indigenous nations, which usually contain mitigation measures and a package of benefits – contracts, jobs, etc. (O'Faircheallaigh, Citation2013). They negotiated with band councils; local First Nation government created by the Indian Act (Abele, Citation2007), a federal law that defines \"Indian status\" as well as the administration and governance of Indigenous lands. Meanwhile, Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs had not consented to the project. Hereditary chiefs are part of traditional political","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135483568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Communicating Solidarity? Public Responses to UK Government Communication of COVID-19","authors":"Giles Moss, Nely Konstantinova","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2263465","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2263465","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores public responses to UK government communication of COVID-19, focusing on public solidarity as a crucial part of an effective pandemic response. Drawing on focus group research with members of the public, we identify three limitations in the way solidarity was communicated by government. What solidarity meant and entailed was not always (1) clear and understandable, (2) adequately justified to all, or (3) demonstrated by the actions of political leaders themselves. In conclusion, we consider the implications of our analysis for how the communication of solidarity could have been improved. Beyond any specific communicative shortcomings, communicating solidarity was always bound to be difficult. What solidarity meant and entailed in the context of the pandemic was never normatively self-evident, especially given the different values and interests at stake. Given this, we suggest that a more deliberative-democratic approach to solidarity would have been both normatively desirable and more likely to be effective in sustaining solidarity. But the need for this approach reveals an underlying systemic weakness in the political-communication environment: the lack of adequate opportunities for those called upon to show solidarity to reflect on, contest, and shape its meaning.","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135590877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Crowded Out: The Effects of Concurrent Elections on Political Engagement, Candidate Evaluation, and Campaign Learning in the United States","authors":"David Andersen","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2261450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2261450","url":null,"abstract":"Holding multiple elections simultaneously, also known as concurrent elections, is well known to benefit electoral systems by increasing the rate of voter turnout. Essentially, the public becomes more willing to participate in voting because they can vote for more offices, and more prominent offices, at once and thus have a greater influence upon the functioning of government in a more efficient manner. However, very little is known about what happens with the electorate outside of the simple increase in voting. Just because citizens choose to vote, it does not mean that they actually pay attention to all the campaigns or feel that their participation is valuable. Using 20 years of American National Election Study survey data, and focusing primarily on the relatively low-salience House of Representatives, this paper examines the psychological effects of concurrent elections in the United States. It concludes that, while concurrent elections do boost turnout, lower-salience candidates receive less attention during concurrent elections, leading the public to rate them more negatively and know less about them. Higher-salience office candidates avoid these negative consequences. Thus there is a trade-off with concurrent elections – more people tend to vote when multiple offices are contested simultaneously but those voters also tend to focus on the higher offices and ignore the bottom of the ballot.","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":"101-102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135579718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Are the Young Undemocratic? Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment","authors":"Janette Huttunen, I. Saikkonen","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2242386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2242386","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Are younger generations less supportive of democracy than older generations? This article adds to ongoing scholarly debates on young people’s support for democracy. We contribute to the field by using evidence from a conjoint experiment embedded in a survey with a representative sample of the Finnish population (n = 1030) to examine whether support for core democratic principles is weaker among the younger generations (Generation Z and Millennials) than the older generations (Generation X and Baby Boomers). Our results do not support the expectation that the younger generations in Finland would be systematically less committed to democratic norms than the older generations. However, we find some generational differences in responses to different democratic norm violations. Our findings make a second contribution to the field of youth and democracy by extending our analyses to the youngest generations of age, Generation Z, whose democratic support has not yet been broadly examined. Our study contributes both to the ongoing debate on democratic deconsolidation in established democracies as well as to the literature on young people’s attitudes towards democratic institutions.","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49523969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Are Personality Traits Related to Politicians’ Positions on Immigration?","authors":"Mike Medeiros, Patrik Öhberg, C. Scott","doi":"10.1080/00344893.2023.2242378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2023.2242378","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35158,"journal":{"name":"Representation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46718591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}