Understanding Post-Devolution Elections in Scotland and Wales in Comparative Perspective

Abstract

In this article, we explore the electoral dynamics of multi-level political systems for the case of the United Kingdom (Scotland and Wales) through a comparison with multi-level voting behaviour in Germany, Spain and Canada. The analysis suggests that sub-state elections can be `second order' in relation to state-wide elections, but that this `second orderness' is reduced when more powers are decentralized to the sub-state level (and, thus, more is at stake in sub-state elections), and if sub-state identities and parties are stronger. Consequently, elections in Scotland and Wales are unlikely to be or become only `second order' to Westminster elections, and British state-wide parties will continue to face challenges and pressures to adapt their organizations and programmes to the devolution of the British state.

Nationalisation of regional elections in Central and Eastern Europe

“…This index subtracts vote shares of the same party participating in different elections, takes absolute values, sums them over parties and then divides the sum by two. Dissimilarity is calculated as follows (Jeffery and Hough 2009;Pallares and Keating 2003): where X iR is the percentage of the vote won by party i in the regional election, R, and X iN is the percentage of the vote won by party i in the previous national election N. The absolute values are summed and divided by two to avoid double counting (one party's loss is another party's gain). Scores may vary from complete congruence or similarity (0%) to complete incongruence or dissimilarity (100%).…”

Looking for the European Voter: Split-Ticket Voting in the Belgian Regional and European Elections of 2009 and 2014

“…In fact, the degree of importance that voters attach to regional elections has been shown to vary with the distribution of competences between the central state and the regions (Chhibber & Kollman, 2004). The more competences attributed to the regions, the more likely it is that re-gional elections will escape the logics of secondorderness (Jeffery & Hough, 2009). In federal or quasifederal states, where regions exert a real legislative power, voters tend to give more consideration to their regional elections.…”

“…In federal or quasifederal states, where regions exert a real legislative power, voters tend to give more consideration to their regional elections. These contests should be considered on a continuum as less of second-order or even more of 'first-order' nature (Cutler, 2008;Jeffery & Hough, 2009;Van der Eijk, Franklin, & Marsh, 1996). Belgium is precisely a highly decentralized federal state in which the regions (and communities) have been attributed extensive competences 1 .…”

Regional Elections in Ukraine in 2006 and 2010

“…The theory expects the electoral outcomes at both arenas to be the same if they are held simultaneously and according to the same electoral rules (Reif & Schmitt, 1980). Further investigations show that parties can disconnect from state-wide electoral arenas during sub-state elections in regions that elect powerful legislatures (Jeffery & Hough, 2009). Also, regional parties -parties that stand only for regional electionscontribute to the dissimilarity of multi-level elections.…”

“…8-9). According to the recent developments of this theoretical framework, voters and parties can disconnect from state-wide electoral arenas during sub-state elections, if sub-state legislatures have strong decision-making and tax-raising powers (Jeffery & Hough, 2009). Also, it is acknowledged that regional parties can contribute to the dissimilarity of multi-level electoral outcomes (Jeffery, 2010).…”