Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic has challenged nearly every aspect of life and superseded issues at the core of populist radical right (PRR) parties' ideology, dispossessing them of one of their main narratives. This also challenged the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a relatively young but strong PRR party in opposition. We explore how the party has adjusted its policy supply to this unprecedented situation and how this has affected its popularity among German voters, building our analysis on press releases issued by the AfD between January 2020 and March 2021, vote intention data and recent election results. Initially, the party's reaction was inconsistent, but from autumn 2020 the AfD focused on fuelling discontent with the government's lockdown measures, acting as a supporter of the anti-coronavirus demonstrations. It framed its response as elite critique. So far, its siding with the lockdown protesters, however, has not had any positive effect on support for the party.

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged nearly every aspect of life and superseded issues at the core of populist radical right (PRR) parties' ideology, dispossessing them of one of their main narratives. This also challenged the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a relatively young but strong PRR party in opposition. We explore how the party has adjusted its policy supply to this unprecedented situation and how this has affected its popularity among German voters, building our analysis on press releases issued by the AfD between January 2020 and March 2021, vote intention data and recent election results. Initially, the party's reaction was inconsistent, but from autumn 2020 the AfD focused on fuelling discontent with the government's lockdown measures, acting as a supporter of the anti-coronavirus demonstrations. It framed its response as elite critique. So far, its siding with the lockdown protesters, however, has not had any positive effect on support for the party.

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged nearly every aspect of life and superseded issues at the core of populist radical right (PRR) parties' ideology, dispossessing them of one of their main narratives. This also challenged the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a relatively young but strong PRR party in opposition. We explore how the party has adjusted its policy supply to this unprecedented situation and how this has affected its popularity among German voters, building our analysis on press releases issued by the AfD between January 2020 and March 2021, vote intention data and recent election results. Initially, the party's reaction was inconsistent, but from autumn 2020 the AfD focused on fuelling discontent with the government's lockdown measures, acting as a supporter of the anti-coronavirus demonstrations. It framed its response as elite critique. So far, its siding with the lockdown protesters, however, has not had any positive effect on support for the party.

AbstractImmigration is one of the most widely debated issues today. It has, therefore, also become an important issue in party competition, and radical right parties are trying to exploit the issue. This opens up many pressing questions for researchers. To answer these questions, data on the self‐ascribed and unified party positions on immigration and immigrant integration issues is needed. So far, researchers have relied on expert survey data, media analysis data and 'proxy' categories from the Manifesto Project Dataset. However, the former two only give the mediated party position, and the latter relies on proxies that do not specifically measure immigration. The new dataset presented in this article provides researchers with party positions and saliency estimates on two issue dimensions – immigration and immigrant integration – in 14 countries and 43 elections. Deriving the data from manifestos enables the provision of parties' unified and unfiltered immigration positions for countries and time points not covered in expert surveys and media studies, making it possible to link immigration and immigrant integration positions and saliency scores to other issue areas covered in the Manifesto Project Dataset. Well‐established criteria are used to distinguish between statements on (1) immigration control and (2) immigrant integration. This allows for a more fine‐grained analysis along these two dimensions. Furthermore, the dataset has been generated using the new method of crowd coding, which allows a relatively fast manual coding of political texts. Some of the advantages of crowd coding are that it is easily replicated and expanded, and, as such, presents the research community with the opportunity to amend and expand upon this coding scheme.

Immigration is one of the most widely debated issues today. It has, therefore, also become an important issue in party competition, and radical right parties are trying to exploit the issue. This opens up many pressing questions for researchers. To answer these questions, data on the self-ascribed and unified party positions on immigration and immigrant integration issues is needed. So far, researchers have relied on expert survey data, media analysis data and 'proxy' categories from the Manifesto Project Dataset. However, the former two only give the mediated party position, and the latter relies on proxies that do not specifically measure immigration. The new dataset presented in this article provides researchers with party positions and saliency estimates on two issue dimensions – immigration and immigrant integration – in 14 countries and 43 elections. Deriving the data from manifestos enables the provision of parties' unified and unfiltered immigration positions for countries and time points not covered in expert surveys and media studies, making it possible to link immigration and immigrant integration positions and saliency scores to other issue areas covered in the Manifesto Project Dataset. Well-established criteria are used to distinguish between statements on (1) immigration control and (2) immigrant integration. This allows for a more fine-grained analysis along these two dimensions. Furthermore, the dataset has been generated using the new method of crowd coding, which allows a relatively fast manual coding of political texts. Some of the advantages of crowd coding are that it is easily replicated and expanded, and, as such, presents the research community with the opportunity to amend and expand upon this coding scheme.

Nach der Bundestagswahl 2021 kam es in Deutschland zum ersten Mal seit den 1950er-Jahren zu einer Drei-Parteien-Koalition. Was bedeutet das für die politische Repräsentation der Wähler*innen? Und wie wurden die Wahlversprechen in das Regierungsprogramm übersetzt? Die Autor*innen gehen diesen Fragen sowohl allgemein als auch für vier zentrale Politikfelder (Verkehrswende, Bildungsgerechtigkeit, Familie und Beruf, Digitalisierung in der Gesundheitspolitik) nach. Sie untersuchen, was vor den Wahlen versprochen wurde, wie dies Eingang in die Sondierungsgespräche fand und unter welchen Reibungsverlusten es schließlich im Koalitionsvertrag steht.

Nach der Bundestagswahl 2021 kam es in Deutschland zum ersten Mal seit den 1950er-Jahren zu einer Drei-Parteien-Koalition. Was bedeutet das für die politische Repräsentation der Wähler*innen? Und wie wurden die Wahlversprechen in das Regierungsprogramm übersetzt? Die Autor*innen gehen diesen Fragen sowohl allgemein als auch für vier zentrale Politikfelder (Verkehrswende, Bildungsgerechtigkeit, Familie und Beruf, Digitalisierung in der Gesundheitspolitik) nach. Sie untersuchen, was vor den Wahlen versprochen wurde, wie dies Eingang in die Sondierungsgespräche fand und unter welchen Reibungsverlusten es schließlich im Koalitionsvertrag steht.

Nach der Bundestagswahl 2021 kam es in Deutschland zum ersten Mal seit den 1950er-Jahren zu einer Drei-Parteien-Koalition. Was bedeutet das für die politische Repräsentation der Wähler*innen? Und wie wurden die Wahlversprechen in das Regierungsprogramm übersetzt? Die Autor*innen gehen diesen Fragen sowohl allgemein als auch für vier zentrale Politikfelder (Verkehrswende, Bildungsgerechtigkeit, Familie und Beruf, Digitalisierung in der Gesundheitspolitik) nach. Sie untersuchen, was vor den Wahlen versprochen wurde, wie dies Eingang in die Sondierungsgespräche fand und unter welchen Reibungsverlusten es schließlich im Koalitionsvertrag steht. ; Die freie Verfügbarkeit der E-Book-Ausgabe dieser Publikation wurde ermöglicht durch POLLUX – Informationsdienst Politikwissenschaft und die Open Library Community Politik 2022 – einem Netzwerk wissenschaftlicher Bibliotheken zur Förderung von Open Access in den Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften. Für die finanzielle Unterstützung der Publikation der Druckversion dieses Bandes danken die Autor:innen dem Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).

Die Repräsentationsbeziehung zwischen Wählern und Parteien ist entscheidend für das Funktionieren repräsentativer Demokratien. Der Grad der gefühlten Repräsentation hat Einfluss auf den Delegationsmechanismus und die Demokratiezufriedenheit. Daher untersucht dieser Artikel das Repräsentationsgefühl. Mithilfe räumlicher Modelle wird für 25 Wahlen in 23 Demokratien gezeigt, dass die von Wählern wahrgenommene Distanz zu Parteien das Repräsentationsgefühl besser erklärt als die Wahlentscheidung. Dies gilt nicht nur hinsichtlich ideologischer Links-Rechts-Unterschiede im internationalen Vergleich, sondern bestätigt sich für die Bundestagswahl 2009 ebenfalls für Sachfragendistanzen. Räumliche Modelle, die üblicher Weise zur Erforschung des Wahlverhaltens genutzt werden, eignen sich demnach noch besser dazu, Repräsentationsgefühle zu erklären. ; Akzeptierte Manuskriptfassung (postprint) / Accepted version (postprint) ; The representational relationship between voters and parties is crucial in order for modern democracies to function. The degree to which voters feel represented has an impact on their satisfaction with democracy and the mechanism of delegation. Accordingly, this article examines voters' perceived sense of representation. Spatial models show that in 25 elections in 23 democracies voters' perceived proximity to different parties better explains the feeling of being represented than their voting decision. Not only does this finding apply to ideological left-right differences in comparative perspective, it also holds with regard to issue proximity in an analysis of the German federal elections in 2009. Hence, spatial models that are commonly used for explaining voting behaviour are even better suitable to explain perceived representation.

The Parties' Immigration and Integration Positions Data Set (PImPo) includes data on parties' immigration and integration positions and saliency in 14 countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, USA) between 1998 and 2013 based on crowd coding of parties' election manifestos. The data set entails variables on immigration and integration positions and saliency for each party in one election.
PImPo also gives data on the quasi-sentence level. Variables here include information on the topic of the quasi-sentence (immigration, integration, or none of both), the direction (supportive, sceptical, neutral), as well as information on agreement levels between crowd coders for each quasi-sentence. To make full use of this quasi-sentence level data, the original verbatim of each sentence can be added through a simple merge with the Manifesto Corpus (Lehmann, Pola / Matthieß, Theres / Merz, Nicolas / Regel, Sven / Werner, Annika (2015): Manifesto Corpus. Version: 20150708174629. Berlin: WZB Berlin Social Science Center.).
For detailed information on the dataset and its generation, please see Pola Lehmann, Malisa Zobel (2018): Positions and Saliency of Immigration in Party Manifestos. A Novel Data Set using Crowd Coding. European Journal for Political Research. Online First

The Manifesto Project Dataset provides the scientific community with parties' policy positions derived from a content analysis of parties' electoral manifestos. It covers over 1.000 parties from 1945 until today in over 50 countries on five continents.
The content analysis aims to discover party and presidential stances by quantifying their statements and messages to their electorate. A unified classification scheme with an accompanying set of rules was developed to make such statements comparable. Analysing manifestos allows for measurement of party and presidents' policy positions across countries and elections within a common framework. Manifestos are understood to be parties' only and presidential candidates' main authoritative policy statements and, therefore, as indicators of the parties' policy preferences at a given point in time.
The Manifesto Project Data Collection was originally created by the Manifesto Research Group (MRG) in the late 1970s and the 1980s. The work was continued under the name Comparative Manifestos Project (CMP) at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center in the 1990s and 2000s. Since 2009 the Manifesto Research on Political Representation (MARPOR) project updates and extends the dataset. It is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and is still located at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center.