Multi-level voting and party competition in vertically simultaneous elections: the case of Ukraine

Abstract

Vertically simultaneous elections to statewide and regional legislatures provide us with a naturally occurring experiment in which to examine regionalism and multi-level voting. We examine the 2006 vertically and horizontally simultaneous statewide and regional elections in Ukraine to determine how the internal dynamics of regionalism within a state account for the dissimilarity of voting behaviour across electoral levels. Drawing on the party competition literature we demonstrate that variations in both supply (parties) and demand (voters) produce considerable dissimilarity between regional and state results, with lower levels of consolidation and greater fractionalisation at the regional level. We show that political cleavages operate differently across levels, that regional distinctiveness rather than regional authority better predicts first order-ness in regional elections and that voters display varying tolerance for polarisation at the regional and state level (132 words

Towards a scholarship on regional elections

“…Evidence from voter surveys held in Scotland and Wales clearly reveal a pattern of multilevel or dual voting based on territorial interests and spurred by regionalist parties such as Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party (Scully, Jones, and Trystan 2004;Trystan, Scully, and Wyn Jones 2003;Wyn Jones and Scully 2006). Territorial cleavages also drive regional voting in autocratic regimes or new democracies as, for example, is shown in the case of Ukraine (Henderson and Romanova 2016).…”

Regional Elections in Ukraine in 2006 and 2010

“…The electoral losses of small parties that won the 2006 parliamentary elections -the socialists and the communists -at regional elections were less obvious. Moreover, there were more cases when they scored slightly better at regional elections than at parliamentary elections in the same regions (Henderson & Romanova, 2011).…”

The Principle of Cyclicality of the Second-Order Election Theory for Simultaneous Multi-Level Elections

“…Large-N research on turnout at simultaneous multi-level elections has not found much variation across electoral arenas (Schakel and Dandoy, 2010). An in-depth study on simultaneous parliamentary and regional elections in Ukraine in 2006 found that multi-level voting in an institutionally centralised country with severe regional diversity can be dissimilar, even in regions where regional parties do not win seats in regional assemblies (Henderson and Romanova, 2011).…”

“…Source: Tables 2-7 have been compiled by the author. Table 8 has been compiled from Henderson and Romanova (2011). Notes: Tables 2-8 present the difference between party vote shares at parliamentary and regional elections in the same regions.…”

“…Interestingly, turnout tends to be similar at simultaneous multi-level elections (Schakel and Dandoy, 2010). A case study of simultaneous multi-level elections in Ukraine in 2006 (Henderson and Romanova, 2011) explains why multi-level voting can be dissimilar in an institutionally centralised country with severe regional diversity.…”