支持社会主义欧洲?2019年欧洲选举中的欧洲团结和投票行为

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
A. Pellegata, Francesco Visconti
{"title":"支持社会主义欧洲?2019年欧洲选举中的欧洲团结和投票行为","authors":"A. Pellegata, Francesco Visconti","doi":"10.1177/14651165211035054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates whether public preferences for European solidarity are associated with vote choices in the 2019 European elections. After multiple crises, the politicisation of European Union affairs has increased, polarising voters and parties between those favouring the redistribution of risks across member states and those prioritising national responsibility in coping with the consequences of the crises. We expect pro-solidarity voters to be more prone to vote for green and radical-left parties and less prone to vote for conservative and radical-right parties. Testing these hypotheses in 10 European Union countries with original survey data, we find that green and radical-left parties profited from European solidarity voting only in some countries, while being pro-solidarity reduced the likelihood of voting for both moderate and radical-right parties in each sample country.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"23 1","pages":"79 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211035054","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Voting for a social Europe? European solidarity and voting behaviour in the 2019 European elections\",\"authors\":\"A. Pellegata, Francesco Visconti\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14651165211035054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article investigates whether public preferences for European solidarity are associated with vote choices in the 2019 European elections. After multiple crises, the politicisation of European Union affairs has increased, polarising voters and parties between those favouring the redistribution of risks across member states and those prioritising national responsibility in coping with the consequences of the crises. We expect pro-solidarity voters to be more prone to vote for green and radical-left parties and less prone to vote for conservative and radical-right parties. Testing these hypotheses in 10 European Union countries with original survey data, we find that green and radical-left parties profited from European solidarity voting only in some countries, while being pro-solidarity reduced the likelihood of voting for both moderate and radical-right parties in each sample country.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Union Politics\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"79 - 99\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211035054\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Union Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211035054\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Union Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211035054","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

本文调查了公众对欧洲团结的偏好是否与2019年欧洲选举的投票选择有关。在多次危机之后,欧盟事务的政治化加剧,选民和政党两极分化,既有支持在成员国之间重新分配风险的政党,也有优先考虑应对危机后果的国家责任的政党。我们预计,支持团结的选民更倾向于投票给绿色和激进左翼政党,而不太倾向于投票支持保守和激进右翼政党。用原始调查数据在10个欧盟国家测试这些假设,我们发现绿色和激进左翼政党只在一些国家从欧洲团结投票中获利,而支持团结则降低了每个样本国家投票给温和和激进右翼政党的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Voting for a social Europe? European solidarity and voting behaviour in the 2019 European elections
This article investigates whether public preferences for European solidarity are associated with vote choices in the 2019 European elections. After multiple crises, the politicisation of European Union affairs has increased, polarising voters and parties between those favouring the redistribution of risks across member states and those prioritising national responsibility in coping with the consequences of the crises. We expect pro-solidarity voters to be more prone to vote for green and radical-left parties and less prone to vote for conservative and radical-right parties. Testing these hypotheses in 10 European Union countries with original survey data, we find that green and radical-left parties profited from European solidarity voting only in some countries, while being pro-solidarity reduced the likelihood of voting for both moderate and radical-right parties in each sample country.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Union Politics
European Union Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
21.70%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: European Union Politics is an international academic journal for advanced peer-reviewed research and scholarship on all aspects of the process of government, politics and policy in the European Union. It aims to stimulate debate and provide a forum to bridge the theoretical and empirical analysis on the political unification of Europe. It represents no particular school or approach, nor is it wedded to any particular methodology. In particular it welcomes articles that offer a new theoretical argument, analyze original data in a novel fashion or present an innovative methodological approach. The Editors invite submissions from all sub-fields of contemporary political science, including international relations, comparative politics, public administration, public policy and political theory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信