Search results

The literature on regionalist parties has traditionally focused on the origins of their electoral strength while their ideology remains an under-explored aspect of territorial party politics. This is surprising because for the question of whether decentralization 'accommodates' or 'empowers' regionalist pressure one needs to consider both. In this paper we single out the factors that increase the probability of adopting a radical (secessionist) as opposed to a moderate (autonomist) ideological stance, with a particular focus on the effect of decentralization. We make use of a large and original dataset, covering 11 countries, 49 regions, and 78 parties for the 1940s–2000s. Beyond the level of decentralization and decentralization reforms, we analyze the impact of two sets of factors: the first concerns regional identity and includes regional language, regional history and geographical remoteness; while the second concerns institutional/political variables which include voting systems, competition from statewide parties and from other regionalist parties, and office responsibility. We find that all variables matter for regionalist party ideology but with different effects across regional and national electoral arenas. We also find that level of decentralization and regional reform is significantly associated with radicalism, which suggests that policy success and accommodative strategies by statewide parties may lead to a polarization on the centre-periphery dimension.

AbstractThis article addresses the effects of decentralisation reforms on regionalist parties' electoral strength. It takes up the debate between 'accommodatists' (i.e., electoral loss due to policy accommodation) and 'institutionalists' (i.e., electoral gain due to institutional empowerment). These effects depend on the electoral venue considered – regional or national – and on the ideological radicalism of a given regionalist party – secessionist or autonomist. This study finds that increases in the level of decentralisation are positively associated with higher scores for autonomist parties in regional elections, while they are not statistically significantly correlated with secessionist parties' electoral performances. In contrast, in national elections, decentralisation reforms seem to penalise autonomist parties more than secessionist ones. These findings are based on the analysis of a novel dataset which includes regional and national vote shares for 77 regionalist parties in 11 Western democracies from 1950 until 2010.

"This book examines the seismic impact of Brexit on the British political system, assessing its likely long-term effect in terms of a significantly changed political and constitutional landscape. Starting with the 2015 general elections and covering key developments up to 'Brexit day', it shows how Brexit 'transformed' British politics. The unprecedented turmoil - two snap elections, three Prime Ministers, the biggest ever defeat for the Government in Parliament, an impressive number of rebellions and reshuffles in Cabinet and repeated requests for a second independence referendum in Scotland - as a result of leaving the EU, calls into question what sort of political system the post-Brexit UK will become. Taking Lijphart's 'Westminster model' as its reference, the book assesses the impact of Brexit along three dimensions: elections and parties; executive-legislative relationships, and the relationship between central and devolved administrations. Based on a wealth of empirical material, including original interviews with key policy-makers and civil servants, it focuses on the 'big picture' and analytically maps the direction of travel for the UK political system. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of Brexit, British Politics, constitutional, political, and contemporary history, elections and political parties, executive politics, and territorial politics as well as more broadly related practitioners and journalists"--

Westminster model; UK politics; Brexit

Westminster model; UK politics; Brexit

Introduction : European party-based populism and territory / Reinhard Heinisch, Emanuele Massetti and Oscar Mazzoleni -- Regionalist populism in Britain's Celtic peripheries : a longitudinal analysis of Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party / Emanuele Massetti -- Populism and ethno-territorial parties in Belgium / Emilie Van Haute -- Claiming regionalism and nationalism at the same time : how the Italian and Swiss Leagues can engage incontradictory claims and get away with it / Oscar Mazzoleni and Carlo Ruzza -- The populist dimensions of Catalan secessionism : rhetoric, mobilization and institutional practices / Astrid Barrio, Oscar Barberà and Juan Rodríguez-Teruel -- Regional nativism in East Germany : the case of the AfD / Hans-Georg Betz and Fabian Habersack -- The Carinthian model : the role of sub-national claims in the Freedom Party's dominance in Austria's southernmost state / Reinhard Heinisch -- The territorialization of national-populist politics : a case study of the Front National in France / Gilles Ivaldi and Jerôme Dutozia -- Progressive regionalist populism vs. conservative nationalist populism in Poland : the case of the Silesian Autonomy Movement-RAS / Magdalena Solska -- Regionalist populism in Croatia : the case of the Croatian Alliance of Slavonia and Baranja-HDSSB / Marko Kukec -- Ethnic politics and competition amongst right-wing populist parties in Hungary / Edina Szoecsik -- A clash of myths : populism and ethno-nationalism in Serbia / Bojan Vranic -- Conclusion : bridging legacies in understanding party mobilization / Reinhard Heinisch, Emanuele Massetti and Oscar Mazzoleni.

This article investigates the impact of Brexit on the British political system. By critically engaging with the conceptualisation of the Westminster model proposed by Arend Lijphart, it analyses the strains of Brexit on three dimensions developed from from Lijphart's framework: elections and the party system, executive– legislative dynamics and the relationship between central and devolved administrations. Supplementing quantitative indicators with an in-depth qualitative analysis, the article shows that the process of Brexit has ultimately reaffirmed, with some important caveats, key features of the Westminster model: the resilience of the two-party system, executive dominance over Parliament and the unitary character of the political system. Inheriting a context marked by the progressive weakening of key majoritarian features of the political system, the Brexit process has brought back some of the traditional executive power-hoarding dynamics. Yet, this prevailing trend has created strains and resistances that keep the political process open to different developments.