Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Electoral Consequences of
Unemployment Experiences

Ithaca, April 6, 2009
Cornell Institute for European Studies

Thorsten...
Schlozman/Verba 1979: Injury to Insult
                                                                             1
Gene...
I     Unemployment Experiences


II    Perceptions of Economy


III   Attributions of Responsibility


IV    Electoral Con...
Unemployment Experiences
                                                                            3
                   ...
Unemployment Experiences: Being Unemployed
                                                                             4
...
Unemployment Experiences: Staying Unemployed
                                                                             ...
Unemployment Experiences: Fear of Unemployment
                                                                           ...
Unemployment Experiences: Household Perspective
                                                                          ...
Unemployment Experiences: Network Perspective
                                                                        8
  ...
Unemployment Experiences
                                                             9
• To fully understand the relevanc...
I     Unemployment Experiences


II    Perceptions of Economy


III   Attributions of Responsibility


IV    Electoral Con...
Perceptions of the Economy
                                                                              11
• ÊHow does th...
Perceptions of Individuals’ Situation (East G.)
                                                                         1...
Perceptions of Individuals’ Situation (West G.)
                                                                         1...
Perceptions of Prospective Situation (East G.)
                                                                         14...
Perceptions of Prospective Situation (East G.)
                                                                         15...
Perceptions of National Economic Situation
                                                                               ...
I     Unemployment Experiences


II    Perceptions of Economy


III   Attributions of Responsibility


IV    Electoral Con...
Attributions of Responsibility
                                                              18
• Are individuals willing ...
Determinants of Attributions of Responsibility
                                                            19
• ÊDefensive...
Data
                                                                20
• Rolling Cross-Section Survey covering the final ...
Data
                                                              21
• ÊDefensive attributions“          Perceived State ...
Development of Level of Attributed Responsibility
                                                                        ...
Determinants of Attributed Responsibility for …
                                                                          ...
Determinants of Attributed Responsibility for …
                                                    24
… Individual Econom...
Predicted Probabilities
                                                                         25
         1
         .8...
I     Unemployment Experiences


II    Perceptions of Economy


III   Attributions of Responsibility


IV    Electoral Con...
Consequences of Perceptions of Economic Situations
                                                                   27
•...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
198...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
unstand. regression coefficients
       -3   -2     -1       0      1        2   3

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

20...
But when including attributions of responsibility …
                                                                      ...
Conclusions
                                                                       53
•   Unemployment experiences can tak...
Thank you!
                                   54
• Contact:
  Thorsten Faas
  University of Mannheim
  A5, 6
  68131 Mannh...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Electoral Consequences of Unemployment Experiences

480

Published on

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
480
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Electoral Consequences of Unemployment Experiences"

  1. 1. Electoral Consequences of Unemployment Experiences Ithaca, April 6, 2009 Cornell Institute for European Studies Thorsten Faas University of Mannheim Email: Thorsten.Faas@uni-mannheim.de
  2. 2. Schlozman/Verba 1979: Injury to Insult 1 General Objective Subjective Politiciza- Policy Level and Model Condition Strain tion of the preferences direction of strain and political programs activity Specific Unemploy- Sense of Perception Preference Issue voting; Model ment and/or economic that for economic electoral low socio- dissatis- government policies activity economic faction and is respon- designed to status deprivation sible ease problem
  3. 3. I Unemployment Experiences II Perceptions of Economy III Attributions of Responsibility IV Electoral Consequences
  4. 4. Unemployment Experiences 3 Unemployment ... • … as a discrete characteristic • … as a characteristic of of individuals social/regional units • … ranging from short-term • … ranging from individuals‘ to long-term experiences household to network to regional contexts to the • ... also fear of national economy unemployment as a relevant experience • Concentric circles
  5. 5. Unemployment Experiences: Being Unemployed 4 1980 1982 1984 East G. West G. 1986 1988 1990 1991 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 Percent Unemployed at time of interview Unemployed anytime during last 10 years Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  6. 6. Unemployment Experiences: Staying Unemployed 5 1980 1982 1984 1986 East G. West G. 1988 1990 1991 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 260 208 156 104 52 0 52 104 156 208 260 Weeks Completed Length (currently employed) Completed Length (currently not employed) Present Length (currently unemloyed) Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+, who have been unemployed during the last 10 years only
  7. 7. Unemployment Experiences: Fear of Unemployment 6 1980 East G. West G. 1991 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2004 2006 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 Percent Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+, who are currently employed
  8. 8. Unemployment Experiences: Household Perspective 7 1983 1984 1985 1986 East G. West G. 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 Percent R unmployed (monthly basis) HH member unemployed (monthly basis) HH member unemloyed (yearly basis) Source: German Socioeconomic Panel (GSOEP), German citizens aged 18+ only
  9. 9. Unemployment Experiences: Network Perspective 8 1994 1995 1996 1997 East G. West G. 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 75 50 25 0 25 50 75 Percent Source: Politbarometer, German citizens aged 18+ only
  10. 10. Unemployment Experiences 9 • To fully understand the relevance of unemployment from a political science perspective, but also a political perspective, one should apply a differentiated view • Simply focusing on the number of people currently unemployed is too short-sighted
  11. 11. I Unemployment Experiences II Perceptions of Economy III Attributions of Responsibility IV Electoral Consequences
  12. 12. Perceptions of the Economy 11 • ÊHow does the electorate internalize the objective economy and transform it into a subjective economy?” (de Boef/Kellstedt 2004: 633) – and what is the role of unemployment experiences? • Concerning such perceptions, one should (in line with the literature) distinguish ... – by the time frame used (retrospective, present, prospective) – by the object that is being evaluated (individual, regional, national economy) • Unemployment experiences should have a strong impact on perceptions of the retrospective development and the present state of the economy (pertaining to an individual‘s situation, but also the national situation); fear of unemployment should have an impact on prospective ones
  13. 13. Perceptions of Individuals’ Situation (East G.) 12 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 Perceptions of current situation Unemployed Not employed Employed Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  14. 14. Perceptions of Individuals’ Situation (West G.) 13 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 Perceptions of current situation Unemployed Not employed Employed Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  15. 15. Perceptions of Prospective Situation (East G.) 14 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2004 2006 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 Perceptions of prospective situation Not worried Worried Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  16. 16. Perceptions of Prospective Situation (East G.) 15 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2004 2006 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 Perceptions of prospective situation Not worried Worried Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  17. 17. Perceptions of National Economic Situation 16 • In relation to national 1 1 unemployment Average Perception of current situation Inverse of unemployment rate .75 .5 • Multilevel model (using the temporal .5 0 context as level 2) .25 -.5 • Strong and significant effect of -1 0 national employment 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Jahr rate on perceptions Average Perceptions of the national Inverse of unemployment rate (right axis) economy Source: German General Social Survey (Allbus), German citizens aged 18+ only
  18. 18. I Unemployment Experiences II Perceptions of Economy III Attributions of Responsibility IV Electoral Consequences
  19. 19. Attributions of Responsibility 18 • Are individuals willing to and capable of linking perceptions of economic situations to governmental action • Do they attribute responsibility? • institutional as well as psychological contingency dilemmas • What are the determinants of attributed responsibility?
  20. 20. Determinants of Attributions of Responsibility 19 • ÊDefensive attributions“ • ÊMorselizing“ • ÊContextualization“ • Political sophistication, partisan rationalizations and cultural predispositions • Campaigns
  21. 21. Data 20 • Rolling Cross-Section Survey covering the final 41 days of the 2005 German Federal Election campaign (n=3,583) • Items: – “What do you think, to what extent is the ruling government responsible for the development of this economic situation: to a large extent, to some extent or not at all?” – Êthis economic situation“ refers to • Individual’s own economic situation • Situation of the national economy
  22. 22. Data 21 • ÊDefensive attributions“ Perceived State of own and national economic Situation • ÊMorselizing“ • ÊContextualization“ Interaction term • Political sophistication, partisan rationalizations and cultural predispositions Interest in Politics, Party Identification, • Campaigns Left-Right-Placement Time
  23. 23. Development of Level of Attributed Responsibility 22 1 Mean Level of Attribution .5 0 13.8. 20.8. 27.8. 3.9. 10.9. 17.9. date Individual's economic situation Nation's economic situation
  24. 24. Determinants of Attributed Responsibility for … 23 … Individual Economic Situation … National Economic Situation Ind. Econ. Ind. Econ. Nat. Econ. Nat. Econ. Interest Interest Left-Right Left-Right PI: SPD PI: SPD PI: Union PI: Union PI: other PI: other day day interaction interaction -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 logit coefficients logit coefficients
  25. 25. Determinants of Attributed Responsibility for … 24 … Individual Economic Situation Ind. Econ. Nat. Econ. Interest Left-Right PI: SPD PI: Union PI: other day interaction -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 logit coefficients
  26. 26. Predicted Probabilities 25 1 .8 probability .6 .4 .2 0 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Individual economic situation National economic situation ... ... very poor ... good ... poor ... very good ... average
  27. 27. I Unemployment Experiences II Perceptions of Economy III Attributions of Responsibility IV Electoral Consequences
  28. 28. Consequences of Perceptions of Economic Situations 27 • Kinder/Kiewiet (1979): sociotropic vs. pocketbook voting • Empirically, sociotropic voting prevails • Additionally: policy-oriented voting according to which certain parties “own” specific issues, e.g. left parties “own” unemployment issue, tend to be supported by people making unemployment experiences
  29. 29. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Government Approval: Individual Unemployment 2005 28
  30. 30. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Government Approval: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 29
  31. 31. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Government Approval: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 30
  32. 32. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Government Approval: Individual Unemployment 2005 31
  33. 33. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Government Approval: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 32
  34. 34. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Government Approval: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 33
  35. 35. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Social Democrats: Individual Unemployment 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 34
  36. 36. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Social Democrats: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 2003 2004 2005 35
  37. 37. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Social Democrats: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 2003 2004 2005 36
  38. 38. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Social Democrats: Individual Unemployment 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 37
  39. 39. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Social Democrats: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 2003 2004 2005 38
  40. 40. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Social Democrats: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 2003 2004 2005 39
  41. 41. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Christian Democrats: Individual Unemployment 2003 2004 2005 40
  42. 42. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Christian Democrats: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 2005 41
  43. 43. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Christian Democrats: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 2005 42
  44. 44. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Christian Democrats: Individual Unemployment 2003 2004 2005 43
  45. 45. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Christian Democrats: Perceptions of Ind. Economy 2005 44
  46. 46. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Christian Democrats: Perceptions of Nation. Econ. 2005 45
  47. 47. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party/PDS: Individual Unemployment (East G.) 46
  48. 48. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party: Perceptions of Ind. Economy (East G.) 47
  49. 49. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party: Perceptions of Nat. Economy (East G.) 48
  50. 50. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party: Individual Unemployment (West G.) 49
  51. 51. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party: Perceptions of Ind. Economy (West G.) 50
  52. 52. unstand. regression coefficients -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Leftist Party: Perceptions of Nat. Economy (West G.) 51
  53. 53. But when including attributions of responsibility … 52 ... feelings towards Social Democrats Nat. Econ. Nat. Econ. Nat. Econ. Ind. Econ. Ind. Econ. Ind. Econ. Resp. Nat. Econ. Resp. Nat. Econ. Resp. Nat. Econ. Resp. Ind. Econ. Resp. Ind. Econ. Resp. Ind. Econ. Ind. Econ. X Resp. Ind. Econ. X Resp. Ind. Econ. X Resp. -2 -1 0 1 2 -2 -1 0 1 2 -2 -1 0 1 2 unstand. regression coefficients unstand. regression coefficients unstand. regression coefficients
  54. 54. Conclusions 53 • Unemployment experiences can take on several forms and should be studied in a differentiated way • Unemployment experiences leave their imprint on perceptions of economic situations on different layers • Attributions of responsibility: • Should be studied as dependent variables to understand the mechanisms that lead to attributions of responsibility • Should be included in economic-voting models due to their nature as intervening variables • Policy-, but also incumbency-oriented effects of unemployment depending on party and political context
  55. 55. Thank you! 54 • Contact: Thorsten Faas University of Mannheim A5, 6 68131 Mannheim Germany Thorsten.Faas@uni-mannheim.de www.thorsten-faas.de
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×