Local candidate lists

Abstract

Using Sweden as an example, we propose the hypothesis that local candidate lists rest on a different rationale compared to national party lists, more specifically a rationality that has developed as a result of an altered relationship between the local and national levels and is expressed in terms of localism. The emergence of new local lists is most likely an effect of the challenges to the welfare state posed in the past 40 years. However, although local lists are essentially a recent phenomenon, our examples suggest that their existence can also be explained in terms of historical patterns of dissent from and resistance to state intervention at the local level.

Dutch municipal elections 1998-2018: what explains the electoral success of local parties?

“…Moreover, there is also a trend in the literature indicating spatial differentiation of the support for local parties. Åberg and Ahlberger (2015) show that this differentiation is obvious in the Netherlands and noticeable in Sweden. In addition, Ennser-Jedenastik and Hansen (2013) point out this spatial differentiation for Austria especially for cross-border regions with Switzerland.…”

“…To test for nonlinear effects, the squared number of inhabitants is included as well. In addition, by comparing Sweden and the Netherlands Åberg and Ahlberger (2015) note the spatial differentiation of voting for local lists in certain regions (the regional hypothesis). Ennser-Jedenastik and Hansen (2013) find indications for cross-regional variation in the size of local parties in Austria, especially in Tyrol and Vorarlberg.…”

“…Therefore, we expect a positive sign of the amalgamation variable. Åberg and Ahlberger (2015) indicate that in Sweden extensive welfare institutions are largely implemented by the municipalities and indicate that the rise of local lists is most likely related to the welfare state challenges of the past 40 years. In the Netherlands decentralisation and also the related cost-saving measures are of more recent date.…”

“…For instance, one of the main assumptions is that ILP can focus especially on local issues and, therefore, we investigate a welfare hypothesis as a large decentralisation of Dutch central social policy towards municipalities took place in 2007 and 2015. Åberg and Ahlberger (2015) explored such a hypothesis of a relation between the rise of local parties and a larger local welfare state in Sweden and they found some evidence for it. Otjes (2018Otjes ( , 2020a suggests a supply-side-based explanation for the increasing success of Dutch ILP.…”

Membership and participation in independent local parties: Patterns and explanations

“…In times of popular distrust in national parties (Dalton, 2014) and a decline in membership figures (Van Biezen and Poguntke, 2014), independent local parties profit from their status as anti-parties in the local electoral competition and set national parties under pressure (Angenendt, 2018; Jankowski et al, 2020; Otjes, 2020). However, despite their widespread presence and increasing electoral success in many European countries (Aberg and Ahlberger, 2015; Boogers and Voerman, 2010; Gendźwiłł and Żółtak, 2014; Reiser, 2008; Vampa, 2016), there is a lack of empirical evidence about their members. Therefore, this study raises three questions to reach new insights: Who are these members?…”