EU-sentiment predicts the 2016 Dutch referendum vote on the EU’s association with Ukraine better than concerns about Russia or national discontent

This article utilises large-N panel data to compare two theories of referendum voting behaviour in order to understand the ‘for’ or ‘against’ vote in the 2016 Dutch referendum on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. It studies the extent to which voting behaviour was predicted by Eurosceptic attitudes and fear of upsetting Russia (issue-based theory), versus dissatisfaction with the Dutch government and general political discontent (second-order theory). Our findings indicate that issue-based determinants predict the referendum vote better than second-order predictors. However, Eurosceptic at... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Abts, Koen
Etienne, Tom
Kutiyski, Yordan
Krouwel, André
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2023
Reihe/Periodikum: European Union Politics ; volume 24, issue 3, page 494-515 ; ISSN 1465-1165 1741-2757
Verlag/Hrsg.: SAGE Publications
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29447702
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14651165231157612

This article utilises large-N panel data to compare two theories of referendum voting behaviour in order to understand the ‘for’ or ‘against’ vote in the 2016 Dutch referendum on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. It studies the extent to which voting behaviour was predicted by Eurosceptic attitudes and fear of upsetting Russia (issue-based theory), versus dissatisfaction with the Dutch government and general political discontent (second-order theory). Our findings indicate that issue-based determinants predict the referendum vote better than second-order predictors. However, Eurosceptic attitudes and government satisfaction both outperform concerns about the relationship with Russia as a predictor. We thus provide evidence that the issue-based and second-order approaches to explain voting in EU referendums are complementary, but not equal in explanatory strength.