Search results

Ethnic settlement patterns and other forms of everyday interethnic social contact have the potential to influence voter preferences for ethnic tribune parties who position themselves as the most strident protectors of, and flagbearers for, their respective ethnic groups. Previous studies on this topic have come to rival conclusions, with some finding that increased intergroup contact and residential mixing produce a corresponding increase in support for tribune parties and others finding the opposite. This study uses a combination of data from elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly from 1998 to 2017 and survey data from 2016 to evaluate these rival arguments and assess the extent to which the broader institutional and demographic context in which political competition takes place condition responses to intergroup contact. Our findings indicate that voters in both declining and ascending demographic groups respond similarly to intergroup contact, expressing less support for tribune parties in contexts where residential patterns and social networks provide more opportunities for intergroup contact. These results highlight the conditional nature of the effectiveness of consensus-based institutions in divided societies: they can create incentives for moderation, but those incentives are most likely to be realized in contexts where rival groups experience a high level of integration.

How do varying levels of inter-group contact affect voter preferences in connection with ethnically radical political candidates and parties? Two competing hypotheses have emerged in the last 60 years: the first, known as the group threat hypothesis, argues that voters from an ethnic or religious group in more ethnically or racially heterogeneous districts will exhibit stronger preferences for ethnically radical political candidates. The contact hypothesis argues that groups living in mixed localities are actually less likely to support ethnic radicals. Both perspectives have found empirical support, but no previous study has offered a theoretical explanation for two seemingly contradictory conclusions. We specify just such a theory, arguing that the effect of district level integration is conditioned by the direction of a group's share of the national population. We test this theory quantitatively using electoral data from Northern Ireland between 1983 and 2010.

Over the past decade the partisan divide over environmental issues has widened significantly. Although attitudes toward climate change and other environmental policy issues have become highly polarized, it is possible that personal geography may moderate partisan attitudes. This study considers whether residing in coastal Virginia influences attitudes on environmental issues among Virginians. To test this question, we survey Virginia registered voters on a range of coastal environmental issues and consider whether place of residence has an effect on these attitudes when accounting for other factors including partisanship. We find a significant relationship between place of residence and a wide range of environmental issue attitudes, though the impact of partisanship is moderated in only limited cases. This research builds on the policy process literature concerning individual proximity to policy problems, place-attachment, and the relationship between partisanship and state environmental policy attitudes.