Elisabeth Gidengil – författare

National-level elections receive more attention from scholars and the media than elections at other levels, even though in many European countries the importance of both regional and European levels of government has grown in recent years. The growing importance of multiple electoral arenas suggests that scholars should be cautious about examining single levels in isolation. Taking the multilevel structure of electoral politics seriously requires a re-examination ofhow the incentives created by electoral institutions affect the behaviour of voters and party elites.The standard approach to analysing multilevel elections is the second-order election (SOE) model, in which national elections are considered to be first-order elections while other elections are second order. However, this model does not provide micro mechanisms that determine how elections in one arena affect those in another, or explain variations in individual voting behaviour.The objective of this book is to explain how party and voter behaviour in a given election is affected by the existence of multiple electoral arenas. It provides original qualitative and quantitative data to examine European, national, and subnational elections in France, Germany, and Spain from 2011-2015. The volume examines party mobilization efforts across multiple electoral arenas, as well as decisions by individual voters with respect to turnout, strategic voting, and accountability. Thisbook provides the first systematic analysis of multilevel electoral politics at three different levels across multiple countries.Comparative Politics is a series for researchers, teachers, and students of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterised by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.ecprnet.eu.The series is edited by Emilie van Haute, Professor of Political Science, Université libre de Bruxelles; Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University; and Susan Scarrow, Chair of the Department of Political Science, University of Houston.

National-level elections receive more attention from scholars and the media than elections at other levels, even though in many European countries the importance of both regional and European levels of government has grown in recent years. The growing importance of multiple electoral arenas suggests that scholars should be cautious about examining single levels in isolation. Taking the multilevel structure of electoral politics seriously requires a re-examination ofhow the incentives created by electoral institutions affect the behaviour of voters and party elites.The standard approach to analysing multilevel elections is the second-order election (SOE) model, in which national elections are considered to be first-order elections while other elections are second order. However, this model does not provide micro mechanisms that determine how elections in one arena affect those in another, or explain variations in individual voting behaviour.The objective of this book is to explain how party and voter behaviour in a given election is affected by the existence of multiple electoral arenas. It provides original qualitative and quantitative data to examine European, national, and subnational elections in France, Germany, and Spain from 2011-2015. The volume examines party mobilization efforts across multiple electoral arenas, as well as decisions by individual voters with respect to turnout, strategic voting, and accountability. Thisbook provides the first systematic analysis of multilevel electoral politics at three different levels across multiple countries.Comparative Politics is a series for researchers, teachers, and students of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterised by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.ecprnet.eu.The series is edited by Emilie van Haute, Professor of Political Science, Université libre de Bruxelles; Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University; and Susan Scarrow, Chair of the Department of Political Science, University of Houston.

National-level elections receive more attention from scholars and the media than elections at other levels, even though in many European countries the importance of both regional and European levels of government has grown in recent years. The growing importance of multiple electoral arenas suggests that scholars should be cautious about examining single levels in isolation. Taking the multilevel structure of electoral politics seriously requires a re-examination of how the incentives created by electoral institutions affect the behaviour of voters and party elites. The standard approach to analysing multilevel elections is the second-order election (SOE) model, in which national elections are considered to be first-order elections while other elections are second order. However, this model does not provide micro mechanisms that determine how elections in one arena affect those in another, or explain variations in individual voting behaviour. The objective of this book is to explain how party and voter behaviour in a given election is affected by the existence of multiple electoral arenas. It provides original qualitative and quantitative data to examine European, national, and subnational elections in France, Germany, and Spain from 2011-2015. The volume examines party mobilization efforts across multiple electoral arenas, as well as decisions by individual voters with respect to turnout, strategic voting, and accountability. This book provides the first systematic analysis of multilevel electoral politics at three different levels across multiple countries.Comparative Politics is a series for researchers, teachers, and students of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterised by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.ecprnet.eu. The series is edited by Emilie van Haute, Professor of Political Science, Université libre de Bruxelles; Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University; and Susan Scarrow, Chair of the Department of Political Science, University of Houston.

Inspired by American studies of the impact of government programs on clients' political activity, Take a Number breaks new ground by investigating the lessons that people draw from their experiences with government bureaucracies, reaching very different conclusions about the effects of program participation in Canada. People's experiences with service providers matter. Far from being de-politicizing, negative experiences can be empowering, stimulating greater political interest and more political activity. In contrast to the findings of some American studies, there is no evidence that these encounters leave claimants in Canada with the sense that they are neither legitimate nor effective actors in the public sphere. Rather than discouraging participation in politics, being a recipient of means-tested benefits likewise seems to be politically mobilizing. Based on extensive survey data, Take a Number casts new light on the problem of non-take-up of social benefits. Elisabeth Gidengil reveals that those who are most likely to benefit are often unaware of government programs. The more demanding and intrusive the claiming process, the more likely claimants are to find it difficult to access the program. These experiences with government programs prove to have larger implications for users' confidence in institutions and their satisfaction with democracy. A wide-ranging study of the politicizing effects of social program participation, Take a Number introduces a compelling new dimension to our understanding of why some citizens are politically active while others remain quiescent.

Inspired by American studies of the impact of government programs on clients'' political activity, Take a Number breaks new ground by investigating the lessons that people draw from their experiences with government bureaucracies, reaching very different conclusions about the effects of program participation in Canada. People''s experiences with service providers matter. Far from being de-politicizing, negative experiences can be empowering, stimulating greater political interest and more political activity. In contrast to the findings of some American studies, there is no evidence that these encounters leave claimants in Canada with the sense that they are neither legitimate nor effective actors in the public sphere. Rather than discouraging participation in politics, being a recipient of means-tested benefits likewise seems to be politically mobilizing. Based on extensive survey data, Take a Number casts new light on the problem of non-take-up of social benefits. Elisabeth Gidengil reveals that those who are most likely to benefit are often unaware of government programs. The more demanding and intrusive the claiming process, the more likely claimants are to find it difficult to access the program. These experiences with government programs prove to have larger implications for users'' confidence in institutions and their satisfaction with democracy. A wide-ranging study of the politicizing effects of social program participation, Take a Number introduces a compelling new dimension to our understanding of why some citizens are politically active while others remain quiescent.

Inspired by American studies of the impact of government programs on clients'' political activity, Take a Number breaks new ground by investigating the lessons that people draw from their experiences with government bureaucracies, reaching very different conclusions about the effects of program participation in Canada. People''s experiences with service providers matter. Far from being de-politicizing, negative experiences can be empowering, stimulating greater political interest and more political activity. In contrast to the findings of some American studies, there is no evidence that these encounters leave claimants in Canada with the sense that they are neither legitimate nor effective actors in the public sphere. Rather than discouraging participation in politics, being a recipient of means-tested benefits likewise seems to be politically mobilizing. Based on extensive survey data, Take a Number casts new light on the problem of non-take-up of social benefits. Elisabeth Gidengil reveals that those who are most likely to benefit are often unaware of government programs. The more demanding and intrusive the claiming process, the more likely claimants are to find it difficult to access the program. These experiences with government programs prove to have larger implications for users'' confidence in institutions and their satisfaction with democracy. A wide-ranging study of the politicizing effects of social program participation, Take a Number introduces a compelling new dimension to our understanding of why some citizens are politically active while others remain quiescent.

The volume brings together a stellar group of contributors who examine the social capital thesis by means of four different approaches: theoretical, historical, comparative, and empirical. In the end, this book will serve to answer two fundamental questions which have hitherto been neglected: What can a gendered analysis tell us about social capital? And what can social capital tell us about women and politics?

In parliamentary systems like Canada, voters directly contribute to the election outcome only in their own riding. However, the focus of election campaigns is often national, emphasizing the leader rather than the local candidate, and national rather than regional polls. This suggests that elections are national contests, but election outcomes clearly demonstrate that support for parties varies strongly by province. Focusing on the 2015 Canadian election campaigns in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec, three large provinces with different subnational party systems, Provincial Battles, National Prize? evaluates whether we should understand elections in Canada as national wars or individual provincial clashes. The authors draw upon voter and candidate surveys, party campaign behaviour, and media coverage of the election to document how political parties vary their messages and strategies across provinces, how the media communicate and frame those messages, and how voters ultimately respond. The study shows that provincial variations in party support reflect differences in voters' political preferences rather than differences in party messages or media coverage. A novel and comprehensive study, Provincial Battles, National Prize? is the first and only thorough treatment of the party, media, and voter aspects of a federal election campaign through a subnational lens.

In parliamentary systems like Canada, voters directly contribute to the election outcome only in their own riding. However, the focus of election campaigns is often national, emphasizing the leader rather than the local candidate, and national rather than regional polls. This suggests that elections are national contests, but election outcomes clearly demonstrate that support for parties varies strongly by province. Focusing on the 2015 Canadian election campaigns in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec, three large provinces with different subnational party systems, Provincial Battles, National Prize? evaluates whether we should understand elections in Canada as national wars or individual provincial clashes. The authors draw upon voter and candidate surveys, party campaign behaviour, and media coverage of the election to document how political parties vary their messages and strategies across provinces, how the media communicate and frame those messages, and how voters ultimately respond. The study shows that provincial variations in party support reflect differences in voters'' political preferences rather than differences in party messages or media coverage. A novel and comprehensive study, Provincial Battles, National Prize? is the first and only thorough treatment of the party, media, and voter aspects of a federal election campaign through a subnational lens.

In parliamentary systems like Canada, voters directly contribute to the election outcome only in their own riding. However, the focus of election campaigns is often national, emphasizing the leader rather than the local candidate, and national rather than regional polls. This suggests that elections are national contests, but election outcomes clearly demonstrate that support for parties varies strongly by province. Focusing on the 2015 Canadian election campaigns in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec, three large provinces with different subnational party systems, Provincial Battles, National Prize? evaluates whether we should understand elections in Canada as national wars or individual provincial clashes. The authors draw upon voter and candidate surveys, party campaign behaviour, and media coverage of the election to document how political parties vary their messages and strategies across provinces, how the media communicate and frame those messages, and how voters ultimately respond. The study shows that provincial variations in party support reflect differences in voters'' political preferences rather than differences in party messages or media coverage. A novel and comprehensive study, Provincial Battles, National Prize? is the first and only thorough treatment of the party, media, and voter aspects of a federal election campaign through a subnational lens.

Citizens are central to any meaningful definition of democracy. What does it say about the health of Canadian democracy when fewer citizens than ever are exercising their right to vote and party membership rolls are shrinking? Are increasingly well-educated citizens turning away from traditional electoral politics in favour of other forms of democratic engagement or are they simply withdrawing from political participation altogether?The first comprehensive assessment of citizen engagement in Canada, this volume raises challenging questions about the interests and capabilities of Canadians as democratic citizens, as well as the performance of our democratic institutions. It is essential reading for politicians and policy-makers, students and scholars of Canadian politics, and all those who care about the quality of Canadian democracy.

Canada is often held up as an example of a healthy democracy. However, the Canadian public is less enthusiastic about the way our democracy works. Rather than focusing on institutional performance, this book approaches the "democratic deficit" from the perspective of the Canadian public and assesses the performance of political leaders and the media in light of Canadians' perceptions and expectations.In doing so, a number of chapters highlight the disjuncture between perceptions and performance. For example, governments do keep many of their election promises, and media coverage is not as negative as we are apt to believe. Similarly, the book provides new insights into political apathy by drawing on focus group discussions that represent the first attempt to ask politically marginalized Canadians why they have turned their backs on politics.By introducing the voice of everyday Canadians, this book adds a new perspective to political discussions in this country. Canadian Democracy from the Ground Up is essential for anyone who would like to learn how to build a better democracy – one that meets the expectations of the Canadian public.

The volume brings together a stellar group of contributors who examine the social capital thesis by means of four different approaches: theoretical, historical, comparative, and empirical. In the end, this book will serve to answer two fundamental questions which have hitherto been neglected: What can a gendered analysis tell us about social capital? And what can social capital tell us about women and politics?

The volume brings together a stellar group of contributors who examine the social capital thesis by means of four different approaches: theoretical, historical, comparative, and empirical. In the end, this book will serve to answer two fundamental questions which have hitherto been neglected: What can a gendered analysis tell us about social capital? And what can social capital tell us about women and politics?

Coming out of the 2000 Canadian federal election, the dominance of the Liberal Party seemed assured. By 2011 the situation had completely reversed: the Liberals suffered a crushing defeat, failing even to become the official opposition and recording their lowest ever share of the vote. Dominance and Decline provides a comprehensive, comparative account of Canadian election outcomes from 2000 through to 2008. The book explores the meaning of those outcomes within the context of the larger changes that have marked Canada's party system since 1988. It also shows how these trends were consistent with the outcome of the 2011 federal election. Throughout the book a variety of voting theories are revisited and reassessed in light of this analysis.

Coming out of the 2000 Canadian federal election, the dominance of the Liberal Party seemed assured. By 2011 the situation had completely reversed: the Liberals suffered a crushing defeat, failing even to become the official opposition and recording their lowest ever share of the vote. Dominance and Decline provides a comprehensive, comparative account of Canadian election outcomes from 2000 through to 2008. The book explores the meaning of those outcomes within the context of the larger changes that have marked Canada's party system since 1988. It also shows how these trends were consistent with the outcome of the 2011 federal election. Throughout the book a variety of voting theories are revisited and reassessed in light of this analysis.

Coming out of the 2000 Canadian federal election, the dominance of the Liberal Party seemed assured. By 2011 the situation had completely reversed: the Liberals suffered a crushing defeat, failing even to become the official opposition and recording their lowest ever share of the vote. Dominance and Decline provides a comprehensive, comparative account of Canadian election outcomes from 2000 through to 2008. The book explores the meaning of those outcomes within the context of the larger changes that have marked Canada's party system since 1988. It also shows how these trends were consistent with the outcome of the 2011 federal election. Throughout the book a variety of voting theories are revisited and reassessed in light of this analysis.

Anatomy of a Liberal Victory: Making Sense of the Vote in the 2000 Canadian Election provides a compressive account of the factors that led Canadians to vote the way they did in the Fall 2000 Canadian election, which resulted in a third consecutive Liberal majority government. The book explains the overall impact that these factors had on how well or poorly each of the parties did in the election. The authors address in particular the following questions: Why was turnout so low? What were Canadians’ perceptions of the economy and how much impact did these perceptions have on vote choice? What were voters'' opinions on the major issues of the day and did these opinions affect their decision on election day? What did voters think of the leaders and how much weight did these evaluations have on their choice?

The study is based on mass surveys, involving more than 3,000 respondents, conducted both during the campaign and after the election. It also draws on a detailed content analysis of the parties’ messages and nightly news broadcasts throughout the campaign and its aftermath.

Academics please note that this is a title classified as having a restricted allocation of complimentary copies; complimentary copies remain readily available to adopters and to academics very likely to adopt this title in the coming academic year. When adoption possibilities are less strong and/or further in the future, academics are requested to purchase the title at an academic discount, with the provison that University of Toronto Press will happily refund the purchase price (with or without a receipt) if the book is indeed adopted.