Turnout and Marginality in Local Elections

Newton, Kenneth

doi:10.1017/s0007123400008620

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rowley's results, "indicate that lower turnout is apparently associated with the safety of the seat", with marginal boroughs having higher turnout due to the potential importance of each vote. A divergent conclusion was reached by Newton (1972), who contended that local voting and participation were more likely to be influenced by happenings in national politics than by the spatial marginality of particular electoral districts.…”

Section: Accepted To Electoral Studies (7 Oct 2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Space matters: Geographic variability of electoral turnout determinants in the 2012 London mayoral election

Mansley

Demšar

2015

Electoral Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Electoral participation is an important measure of the health of a liberal democracy. The determinants of voter turnout have been examined across a range of elections, but geographical approaches are relatively rare and are mostly performed at large scale aggregations and for national elections. This paper addresses this gap by exploring geographic variability in relationships between the turnout at a local election and socio-demographic variables at a detailed spatial level. Specifically, we focus on the London mayoral election, an important element of the 21st century local government reform in Britain, which, until now, has seldom been analysed from a geographical perspective. By linking the turnout from the 2012 mayoral election to socio-demographic data from the 2011 Census and doing this at the level of London's 625 wards, for the first time a more detailed picture of the spatially uneven nature of turnout is evidenced than in previous studies which have focused on larger aggregations, typically constituencies. Analysis is approached through spatial analysis using geographically weighted regression (GWR), which enables the investigation of local variations in voting patterns. The results demonstrate that electoral processes do vary over geographic space and that some of the variables that are traditionally assumed to affect the turnout in a specific way, do not do so uniformly over space or even change the direction to the opposite of the traditionally assumed affect in certain locations. Our findings present a starting point for a more detailed investigation as to why this heterogeneity exists and which social processes it relates to.

show abstract

Section: Accepted To Electoral Studies (7 Oct 2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Space matters: Geographic variability of electoral turnout determinants in the 2012 London mayoral election

Mansley

Demšar

2015

Electoral Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But this position is also the politically advantageous one for Labour to hold, whether or not it is indeed an intentional strategy. The Labour Party does less well in getting voter support where it has the most strength, a finding that is confirmed by voting behavior studies (Davies and Newton, 1971;Newton, 1972). From 1949 to 1967, the correlation of turnout and Conservative strength on borough councils is slightly positive; for Labour, it is slightly negative.…”

Section: Voting In Local Electionsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Parti Es and Participation in British Local Government and Some American Parallels

Ashford

1975

Urban Affairs Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central feature of local politics and participation in the industrial democracies has been the growing nationalization of local authority. National party organizations and nationally designed policies have played an increasingly important role in the towns, cities, and other subunits of local government of most democracies. There are two prevailing views of this trend, each based on very different assumptions. The first is that local governments are basically the conduit for extending services and benefits to citizens (Sharpe, 1970). In general, this view holds that the jurisdictional confusion of local government is an obstacle to effective government, and that the political vitality of the local government unit in terms of its partisan links to the center, voter turnout and participation, and the like are of secondary importance. Thus, the first view places emphasis on nationalization through the control of local government finance, provision of standard services, and unification of local units to provide the &dquo;optimal&dquo; size local government. Nationalization through political channels is often viewed with suspicion, if not simply rejected as retrogressive and inefficient.The second position starts from more distinctly political premises, considering the vitality of democracy at the local level as an indicator of democratic vitality in the entire system. If local governments have active two-party systems, a high degree of voter interest and participation, and competitive local councils, so also will the local citizens benefit from more responsive government, communicate their preferences and needs more URBAN

show abstract

“…In addition, attempts to explain turnout relying on sociological factors such as social class cohesion, housing tenure, etc., often include marginality (Lutz, 1991;Whiteley et al, 2001); such tests produce results favourable to an independent association between marginality and turnout in British elections. In a similar vein, research on English local elections provides evidence for the hypothesized relationship between marginality and turnout (Newton, 1972;Pimlott, 1973;Rallings and Thraser, 1990). Generally, the more marginal an electoral contest, the higher the rate of turnout, but what about the Scottish Parliament? The relationship between the dependent variable, voter turnout, and the key independent variable, closeness of the race, depends in part on the methods through which each of these two variables is measured.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

Electing the First Parliament

Galatas

2004

Party Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theory regarding turnout in elections suggests that voters are more likely to vote when their vote could be decisive. The article provides a generalized test of the relationship between the likelihood of turning out and the closeness of elections. Data are single-member district (firstpast-the-post) and regional (party list) constituency-level results from the Scottish Parliament election of 1999. Scotland provides an excellent case because the 1999 Scottish Parliament was elected using a combination of single-member districts, plus an additional member, regional list alternative vote system. In addition, the Scottish Parliament election was characterized by regional, multiparty competition. Controlling for other factors, the article finds that closeness counts and relates to higher levels of voter participation in the Scottish Parliament elections. This finding holds for single-member district (first-past-the-post) constituencies and additional member regional lists.

show abstract

Turnout and Marginality in Local Elections

Cited by 12 publications

References 5 publications

Space matters: Geographic variability of electoral turnout determinants in the 2012 London mayoral election

Space matters: Geographic variability of electoral turnout determinants in the 2012 London mayoral election

Parti Es and Participation in British Local Government and Some American Parallels

Electing the First Parliament

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About