A Bark But No Bite: Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

The geography of deprivation in New Zealand by electorate

“…These are: older age, a higher level of education, having a higher income, and being from the majority ethnicity in the country (see for example: Almond and Verba 1963;Blais et al 2004;Matthews and Prothro 1966;Miller and Shanks 1996;Stoker and Jennings 1995;Verba and Nie 1972). Researchers have replicated these effects in NZ across Electoral Commission data, and data from large, national probability studies: the NZ Election Study (NZES) and the NZ Attitudes and Values Study (NZAVS; (Townrow 2015;Vowles 2015;Vowles et al 2017)). Indeed, younger people in NZ are less likely to vote than their older counterparts.…”

“…However, in analyses of the 2014 election, it seemed as though other generational differences were beginning to appear, with those in the 30-39 age group having lower than expected turnout rates (Vowles et al 2017). There was talk of a 'missing million' in voter turnout in the 2014 election despite the concerns 'millennials' had over housing, employment, and inequality (Nissen 2017;Vowles et al 2017) Income, assets, education and other factors associated with deprivation have been shown to predict voter turnout in NZ. A key result from Townrow's (2015) analysis of NZAVS data was that those who earned lower incomes were less likely to vote in the 2011 general election.…”

“…Ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples vote at lower rates than majority ethnic groups, even though they may be politically active through other means. Māori have actively participated in politics through vehicles such as hikoi and protest (Bargh 2013;Waitoa et al 2015;Greaves et al 2018) but those with Māori ethnicity (Townrow 2015) and ancestry (Townrow 2015;Vowles et al 2017) have had lower overall voter turnout rate. This lower turnout has been attributed to the continued effects of colonisation, distrust in colonial political institutions, and differences in education and income-all variables which predict lower turnout (Banducci et al 2004;Greaves et al 2018).…”

New Zealand Populism in the 2017 Election and Beyond

“…At various times over the course of Labour's time in opposition, while commentators had been keen to claim Labour was at electoral risk by associating itself too closely with 'identity politics', our analysis of voters' opinions suggests otherwise. The economy, housing, health and inequality were the issues that mattered in 2014 (Vowles, Coffé & Curtin, 2017) and these were again important in 2017.…”

An introduction to election commentaries: the responsibilities of social scientists around elections

“…There needs to be monitoring of why people vote and do not vote and which of alternative modes of voting people might find more user-friendly. Non-vote has been a concern that has often been addressed (see for example McVey and Vowles 2005;Iusitini & Crothers 2013;Vowles et al 2017). Mode of voting has also been examined (eg Crothers 2015) and the net of scholarly interest has also been extended to the experiences of parties, candidates and so on (although recent study of candidates seems unfortunately confined to local government: see Auckland Council 2017 cf.…”