17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Policy accommodation versus electoral turnover: policy representation in Britain, 1945–2015

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Does public policy in the United Kingdom respond to changes in public preferences? If so, is this the result of the government changing its policy to reflect preferences (“policy accommodation”) or the result of governments that pursue unpopular policies being replaced at elections by governments more in line with the public (“electoral turnover”)? We explore these questions by estimating annual aggregate public preferences (“the policy mood”) using responses to 287 questions administered 2,087 times and annual policy using budgetary data (“nonmilitary government expenditure”) for the whole of the postwar period. We find that mood moves in the opposite direction to policy and variations in mood are associated with variations in annual vote intentions. Policy is responsive to party control but not directly responsive to mood. Shifts in mood eventually lead to a change in government and thus policy, but this process may be very slow if the public has doubts about the competence of the opposition.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Simple Theory of the Survey Response: Answering Questions versus Revealing Preferences

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rethinking Representation

            Along with the traditional “promissory” form of representation, empirical political scientists have recently analyzed several new forms, called here “anticipatory,” “gyroscopic,” and “surrogate” representation. None of these more recently recognized forms meets the criteria for democratic accountability developed for promissory representation, yet each generates a set of normative criteria by which it can be judged. These criteria are systemic, in contrast to the dyadic criteria appropriate for promissory representation. They are deliberative rather than aggregative. They are plural rather than singular.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Taking Time Seriously

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Public Policy
                J. Pub. Pol.
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                0143-814X
                1469-7815
                June 2019
                April 22 2018
                June 2019
                : 39
                : 2
                : 235-265
                Article
                10.1017/S0143814X18000090
                42a1fb0d-a430-4573-8d7d-588c973e7301
                © 2019

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log