A Postfunctionalist Theory of Regional Government

The structure of government―the number of tiers and the allocation of tasks over these tiers―has been a subject of political research since Althusius (1603) and Pufendorf (1672). More recently, the process of European integration revived the interest in the allocation of tasks across government tiers.1 One approach to this topic is the subsidiarity principle of the European Union which states that matters ought to be handled by the lowest feasible tier. However, the subsidiarity principle has also been used by the member states of the European Union as an argument to safeguard national autonomy (Van Kersbergen and Verbeek 1994). The precise allocation of tasks across government tiers remains a matter of fierce normative and empirical debate.federalism;decentralization;regional authority; fiscal indicators

Horizontal and vertical spill-over in multilevel electoral systems

A multilevel electoral system perspective reveals several ways in which electoral spill-over may occur. Vertical spill-over may be top-down from the national to the regional level or can be bottom-up from the regional to the national electoral arena. Horizontal spill-over happens when developments in one regional electoral arena impact electoral outcomes in another regional electoral arena. The literature on regional elections has mainly focused on vertical top-down spill-over. In this introduction, we discuss two main insights in relation to spill-over between electoral arenas that surface when considering the collection of articles and reports presented in this fourth annual review of regional elections. First, we discuss how horizontal spill-over can be identified and differentiated from diffusion of electoral developments driven by territorial cleavages. Second, we discuss several institutions that impact vertical spill-over. We conclude by considering a wider research agenda for the study of spill-over in multilevel electoral systems.publishedVersio

Does executive autonomy reduce second-order election effects?

The second-order election (SOE) model expects voters to punish parties in national government and reward opposition, small and new parties because there is ‘less at stake’ in an SOE. One key assumption that is rarely studied is whether SOE-effects depend on the extent to which voters can impact the selection of the executive in an SOE. This article argues that executive ­autonomy – i.e. the extent to which executives are independent from the parliament regarding their formation, termination and execution of their competences – increases the impact of authority. Executive autonomy reduces SOE-effects when authority is high but increases SOE-effects when authority is low. An empirical analysis of 41,603 vote share swings for 4733 parties competing in 2665 elections held in 282 regions in 14 European countries between 1945 and 2019 confirms the hypotheses. These results have important implications for electoral democracy and party competition at the regional, national and European level.publishedVersio

Regional assemblies and executives, regional authority, and the strategic manipulation of regional elections in electoral autocracies

In this introduction, we set out to analyse the relationship between regional elections and regional authority and the extent to which regional elections are held free and fair. We hypothesize that the incentives to interfere increase when regions exercise more authority but the possibilities to interfere decline when the regional executive is elected. A quantitative analysis confirms that directly elected and stronger regional bodies make them more attractive for central meddling, but the presence of elected executives makes central interference less likely. We zoom-in on nine electoral autocracies that have featured in the past five annual reviews of regional elections to explore how regional elections become less free and fair. We identify six strategies to manipulate regional elections which are applied in at least two electoral autocracies: simultaneity between regional and national elections, limiting party entry, gerrymandering, nationalizing regional election campaigns, party switching, and centralization of authority.publishedVersio

Moving beyond the second-order election model?: Three generations of regional election research

In this introduction to the sixth annual review of regional elections we identify three generations of regional election studies that have applied the second-order election (SOE) model. First-generation literature finds that regional authority, territorial cleavages, and election (non-)simultaneity explain territorial heterogeneity in SOE-effects because they affect ‘what is at stake’ in a regional election. A ‘stake-based’ approach also underlies a second-generation literature that finds that voters with strong regional identities and who find regional government important are more likely to make distinct party choices in the regional electoral arena. Third-generation research adopts a multilevel electoral system perspective and considers the impact of political-institutional variables on the extent of horizontal and vertical top-down and bottom-up spill-over between regional and national electoral arenas. Four election articles and four election reports make important contributions to the three generations of literature and thereby reveal that these generations of regional election scholarship remain highly relevant.publishedVersio

Unravelling the ‘devolution paradox’: Citizen preferences for self-rule and for shared rule

Recent survey research has revealed a ‘devolution paradox’: some citizens who favour stronger regional governments inconsistently desire policy uniformity across regions and state-wide intervention in policy provision. It is argued and empirically shown that preferences for regional authority can be broken down into preferences for self-rule – that is, for autonomy for the region – and for shared rule – that is, for collaboration between regional and national governments. Drawing upon the International Constitutional Values Survey, which includes 4,930 respondents from 142 regions in eight countries, it is also shown that preferences for self-rule and shared rule have different impacts. Preferences for self-rule translate into a preference for regional reform that strengthens regional autonomy, whereas preferences for shared rule drive preferences for fiscal transfers from richer to poorer regions. These results are important because they can explain why citizens who are in favour of more regional authority may support an apparently ‘paradoxical’ set of policy outcomes.publishedVersio

A Postfunctionalist Theory of Regional Government

The structure of government―the number of tiers and the allocation of tasks over these tiers―has been a subject of political research since Althusius (1603) and Pufendorf (1672). More recently, the process of European integration revived the interest in the allocation of tasks across government tiers.1 One approach to this topic is the subsidiarity principle of the European Union which states that matters ought to be handled by the lowest feasible tier. However, the subsidiarity principle has also been used by the member states of the European Union as an argument to safeguard national autonomy (Van Kersbergen and Verbeek 1994). The precise allocation of tasks across government tiers remains a matter of fierce normative and empirical debate

A Postfunctionalist Theory of Regional Government

The structure of government―the number of tiers and the allocation of tasks over these tiers―has been a subject of political research since Althusius (1603) and Pufendorf (1672). More recently, the process of European integration revived the interest in the allocation of tasks across government tiers.1 One approach to this topic is the subsidiarity principle of the European Union which states that matters ought to be handled by the lowest feasible tier. However, the subsidiarity principle has also been used by the member states of the European Union as an argument to safeguard national autonomy (Van Kersbergen and Verbeek 1994). The precise allocation of tasks across government tiers remains a matter of fierce normative and empirical debate

Dissecting Public Opinion on Regional Authority: Four Types of Regionalists Based on Citizens’ Preferences for Self-Rule and Shared Rule

Although regional governments play vital roles in most political systems, citizens’ perceptions regarding regional authority are only rarely studied. Relying on the International Constitutional Values Survey held among more than 6,000 respondents from 142 regions in eight countries, we develop measures to tap into citizens’ preferences for self-rule—i.e., for autonomy for their region—and citizens’ preferences for shared rule—i.e., for regional engagement in national decision-making. A majority of citizens prefer their regional governments to have some level of both self-rule and shared rule, but around a quarter of the citizens prefer their region to have more self-rule and less shared rule or vice versa. The analysis reveals these varying preferences are associated with a region’s actual authority and regional identity. These results are important because they indicate that most citizens do not presume increased self-rule to be the main or only path to a strong regional authority.publishedVersio

Internationalisation and study success: Class attendance and the delicate balance between collaborative learning and being lost in translation

The internationalisation of Higher Education is broadly seen as a positive development. It is a process that is said to contribute to intercultural skills acquisition, which is deemed crucial in today’s globalised society. Yet, research has shown that the benefits of being confronted with other ideas and viewpoints can get lost in translation due to different languages and academic cultures. We set out to explore the impact of the international classroom on study success and argue that there might be an optimum level of internationalisation. Based on a dataset that includes more than 2822 GPA scores for 836 students from four first-year cohorts of an international Bachelor in European Studies, we find strong empirical evidence that students’ study success is lower when there are few (below 3) or many (above 6) different nationalities in the classroom. We find the strongest effects of internationalisation for students who regularly attend class (i.e. 80–90%). Hence, we present strong evidence that internationalisation has a both a negative and a positive impact on students’ study success but students will only experience these beneficial and detrimental effects of learning in an international environment when they attend class.publishedVersio