Search

Regions with a strong sense of identity, especially culturally distinct regions within a country, typically wish for more autonomy. But regions with strong economic grievances against the centre also tend to resist centralisation. While both types of regionalism suggest widely different mechanisms with respect to support for decentralisation, we argue that this is not the case. Indeed, both types of grievances may lead regions to foster a strong sense of regional identity. In turn, regions with a strong identity tend to wish for more decentralisation. Canada is one such case where different regional dynamics co-exist within the same country. To test this hypothesis, we use the 2015 Canadian Election Study to compare regional attitudes towards decentralisation. We observe that identity has a similar role in shaping support for decentralisation in citizens from both the Prairies and Quebec, even though the nature of their identity is based on different grounds.

In societies divided along ethnocultural lines, intergroup cooperation can often be a challenging task. This process can be even more complex if political parties and voters are divided along those...

The Canadian Agendas Project includes a variety of datasets that highlight how the country’s political system shapes policymaking. It started originally as way to study legislative outputs, but the project has grown well beyond its initial objects and goals to embrace a wide set of other research questions and directions. The combination of British parliamentarism with federalism, which concentrates powers in the hands of the executives, is studied through Speeches from the Throne and intergovernmental meetings data. The responsiveness of the legislative branch to public opinion is analyzed through oral questions, legislative bills, and most important question data. Finally, the project also looks at the judiciary and Supreme Court decisions and leaves for appeal.

The 2011 Canadian federal election results changed the face of federal politics in Quebec. In a sudden and spectacular reversal of electoral fortunes, BQ support crumbled while that of the NDP surged. While most commentators focused exclusively on the 2011 election itself to explain what had happened, we offer an interpretation that takes a longitudinal approach. Using data from the Canadian Election Study and political party manifestos from 2006 to 2011, we propose a three-dimensional proximity model of voter/party congruence to explore the evolution of the ideological stances of Quebec voters and parties. Empirical results suggest these ideological distances between the NDP and Quebec voters decreased over time, whereas the BQ has distanced itself from voters. Furthermore, ideological distances between party and voters are a significant predictor of vote.

Politics in regions or countries with a salient ethno-regionalist cleavage take on a unique dynamic. In addition to ideological positioning on economic and social stances, centre-periphery issues add a third ideological dimension that needs to be acknowledged. Yet, electoral research has rarely given appropriate attention to these three ideological dimensions independently. This paper takes up this challenge by presenting a three-dimensional ideological model of vote choice. The three dimensions are each theoretically portrayed as having a determining and independent influence on voting. Using survey data from the Making Electoral Democracy Work project, we explore determinants of vote choice in recent sub-national elections in Catalonia and Quebec. The results show that all three ideological dimensions are significant determinants of vote choice in both regions.

How do individuals assess the credibility of experts in various policy domains? Under what conditions does the public interpret particular scientific knowledge claims as being trustworthy and credible? Using data collected from an online survey experiment, administered to 1,507 adult residents of Quebec, this paper seeks answers to these questions. Specifically, we examine variation in the way members of the public perceive the credibility of scientific experts in the areas of climate change, shale gas extraction, cell phones, and wind farms. Our results contribute to the existing literatures on public perceptions of policy experts, framing, and cultural theory. We find that individuals evaluate expert credibility based on the way in which experts frame issues, and on the congruity/dissonance between these expert communication frames and one's underlying worldview. However, we also identify limits to these framing effects. Our findings shed light on the interaction of framing and political worldviews in shaping public perceptions of expert credibility in various policymaking contexts.