Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T20:55:12.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asking territories: the constituency orientation of Italian and French members of the European Parliament

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Fabio Sozzi
Fabio Sozzi*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
*
*E-mail: fabio.sozzi@unige.it
Get access

Abstract

In this article, we explore how electoral systems influence attitudes and behavior of elected representatives. Focusing on constituency representation, we consider how variation in electoral systems may shape forms of political representation. An analysis of written parliamentary questions (PQs) is an important instrument to look at the role of parliamentarians even where, as in the European Parliament, political parties enforce discipline in roll-call voting. This kind of investigation offers the opportunity to partially resolve empirical and theoretical problems related to other methods of research. Unlike voting and speeches, PQs face fewer constrains from party leaders. This article analyses the constituency focus of members of European Parliament from France and Italy. These countries differ with regard to two main dimensions of electoral systems: ballot structure and district magnitude. The study is conducted through a content analysis of 5343 written PQs during the sixth term (2004–09). The results suggest that, despite the lack of strong electoral connection, electoral institutions shape the legislative behavior of the Italian and French parliamentarians providing incentives to cultivate personal reputation and constituency-orientation.

Keywords

ItalyFranceEuropean Parliamentconstituency orientationparliamentary questionselectoral systems
Type
Research Article
Information
Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica , Volume 46 , Special Issue 2: The 2014 European Parliament Elections: Representation, Euroscepticism, Populism and the Economic Crisis , July 2016 , pp. 199 - 217
Copyright
© Società Italiana di Scienza Politica 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, C. (2005), ‘Two-step hierarchical estimation: beyond regression analysis’, Political Analysis 13(4): 447–456.Google Scholar
Bailer, S. (2011), ‘People’s voice or information pool? The role of, and reasons for, parliamentary questions in the Swiss parliament’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 17(3): 302–314.Google Scholar
Blomgren, M. and Rozenberg, O. ed. (2012), ‘Legislative roles and legislative studies. The neo-institutionalist turning point?’, in M. Blomgren and O. Rozenberg (eds), Parliamentary Roles in Modern Legislatures, London: Routledge, pp. 8–36.Google Scholar
Bowler, S. and Farrell, D. (1993), ‘Legislator shirking and voter monitoring: impacts of European Parliament electoral systems upon legislator-voter relationship’, Journal of Common Market Studies 31: 45–69.Google Scholar
Brouard, S., Costa, O., Kerrouche, E. and Schnatterer, T. (2013), ‘Why do French MPs focus more on constituency work than on parliamentary work?’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 19(2): 141–159.Google Scholar
Budge, I., Klingemann, H.D., Volkens, A., Bara, J. and Tanenbaum, E. (2006), Mapping Policy Preferences II. Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments in Central and Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD, 1990-2003, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, A.C. and Trivedi, P.K. (2009), Microeconometrics Using Stata, College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
Carey, J. and Shugart, M. (1995), ‘Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: a rank ordering of electoral formulas’, Electoral Studies 14(4): 417–439.Google Scholar
Carey, J.M. (2009), Legislative Voting and Accountability, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Costa, O. (2002), ‘Who do MEPs represent? Socialization and territorial representation in the European Parliament’. Paper presented at ECPR Standing Group on the European Union, Bordeaux, 26–28 September.Google Scholar
Döring, H. and Manow, P. (2010), ‘Parliament and government composition database (ParlGov): an infrastructure for empirical information on parties, elections and government in modern democracies’. Retrieved 1 June 2015 from http://parlgov.org/.Google Scholar
Farrell, D. and Scully, R. (2010), ‘The European Parliament: one parliament, several modes of political representation on the ground?’, Journal of European Public Policy 17(1): 36–54.Google Scholar
Farrell, D.M. and Scully, R. (2007), Representing Europe’s Citizens? Electoral Institutions and the Failure of Parliamentary Representation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. (1978), Home Style: House Members in their Districts, Boston, MA: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Hix, S. (2004), ‘Electoral institutions and legislative behaviour: explaining voting-defection in the European parliament’, Word Politics 56: 194–223.Google Scholar
Hix, S., Noury, A. and Roland, G. (2007), Democratic Politics in the European Parliament, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, C.B., Proksch, S.O. and Slapin, J.B. (2013), ‘Parliamentary questions, oversight, and national opposition status in the European parliament’, Legislative Studies Quarterly 38(2): 259–282.Google Scholar
Katz, R. (1997), ‘Representational roles’, European Journal of Political Research 32: 211–226.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J. (2003), ‘Rethinking representation’, American Political Science Review 97: 515–528.Google Scholar
March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1989), Rediscovering Institutions, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Martin, S. (2011), ‘Using parliamentary questions to measure constituency focus: an application to the Irish case’, Political Studies 59(2): 472–488.Google Scholar
Martin, S. (2012), ‘Why electoral systems don’t always matter: the impact of “mega-seats” on legislative behaviour in Ireland’, Party Politics 20(3): 467–479.Google Scholar
Mayhew, D.R. (1974), Congress. The Electoral Connection, New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McCubbins, M. and Schwartz, T. (1984), ‘Congressional oversight overlooked: police patrols versus fire alarms’, American Journal of Political Science 28: 165–179.Google Scholar
Miller, W.E. and Stokes, D.E. (1963), ‘Constituency influence in Congress’, American Political Science 57(11): 45–56.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (1997), ‘The puzzle of constituency service’, The Journal of Legislative Studies. 3(2): 29–49.Google Scholar
Pilet, J.B., Freire, A. and Costa, O. (2012), ‘Ballot structure, district magnitude and constituency orientation of MPs in proportional representation and majority electoral systems’, Representation 48(4): 359–372.Google Scholar
Proksch, S.O. and Slapin, J.B. (2010), ‘Parliamentary questions and oversight in the European Union’, European Journal of Political Research 50: 53–79.Google Scholar
Rasch, B.E. (1994), ‘Question time in the Norwegian storting: theoretical and empirical considerations’, in M. Wiberg (ed.), Parliamentary Control in the Nordic Countries: Forms of Questioning and Behavioural Trends, Helsinki: The Finnish Political Science Associations, pp. 247–275.Google Scholar
Rasch, B.E. (2011), ‘Behavioural consequences of restrictions on plenary access: parliamentary questions in the Norwegian storting’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 17(3): 382–393.Google Scholar
Rehfeld, A. (2005), The Concept of Constituency: Political Representation, Democratic Legitimacy, and Institutional Design, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, R. and Borz, G. (2013), ‘Aggregation and representation in European Parliament party groups’, West European Politics 36(3): 474–497.Google Scholar
Russo, F. (2011), ‘The constituency as a focus of representation: studying the Italian case through the analysis of parliamentary questions’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 17(3): 290–301.Google Scholar
Searing, D. (1994), Westminster World: Understanding Political Roles, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Shugart, M. (2001), ‘Electoral ‘efficiency’ and the move to mixed-member systems’, Electoral Studies 20(2): 173–193.Google Scholar
Sozzi, F. (2016), ‘Electoral Foundations of Parliamentary Questions: Evidences from the European Parliament’, The Journal of Legislative Studies (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Strøm, K. (1997), ‘Rules, reasons and routines: legislative roles in parliamentary democracies’, in W.C., Müller and T., Saalfeld (eds), Members of Parliament in Western Europe, London: Frank Cass & Co Ltd, pp. 155–173.Google Scholar
Wahlke, J., Eulau, H., Buchanan, W. and Ferguson, L. (1962), The Legislative System: Explorations in Legislative Behaviour, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Warntjen, A., Hix, S. and Crombez, C. (2008), ‘The party political make-up of EU legislative institutions, 1979-2004’, Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 1243–1253.Google Scholar
Wessel, B. (1999), ‘Whom to represent? Role orientations of legislators in Europe’, in H. Schmitt and J. Thomassen (eds), Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–234.Google Scholar
Wiberg, M. (1995), ‘Parliamentary questioning. Control by communication’, in H. Döring (ed.), Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe, Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, pp. 179–222.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Sozzi Dataset

Dataset

https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XBXBMG
Link