Skip to main content

Dutch Voters and the Changing Party Space 1989–2006

Abstract

Elections in the Netherlands in the period 1989–2006 have shown major changes in the supply of political parties and at some points a very large volatility of results. We describe these developments against the background of theories of dealignment and realignment. Specifically, we focus on the alleged rise of a new ‘cultural’ dimension of political conflict in Dutch politics at the level of the electorate. We show that the electorate's position on political issues representing the traditional conflict dimensions (left–right, religion) has been relatively stable. Since the early 1990s, new political problems have become salient for the voters. Sympathy for political parties can be modelled by three dimensions (authoritarian–libertarian, left–right, religious) which are related to the voters’ positions on political issues. These positions on issues representing traditional and new political conflict dimensions also affect voting behaviour for traditional and for new political parties.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Notes

  1. 1.

    This programme of surveys among the Dutch electorate, a collaboration of all academic departments of political science in the country, started in 1971 (with studies conducted in 1956 and 1967 as forerunners). The elections that we will focus on are those in 1989, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2003 and 2006. All data analysed here are publicly available through the DANS data archive; refer to www.dans.knaw.nl. The original questionnaires are also available at the website of the Dutch Parliamentary Election Studies, www.dpes.nl.

  2. 2.

    ‘Practicing’ is here understood as: attending church services at least once per month. Religious denomination is recorded on the basis of self-reports. This also applies to social class: working class and upper working class have been collapsed, and so have middle class, upper middle class and upper class.

  3. 3.

    The unexpected increase in the percentage classified as ‘secular working class’ in 2006 is probably at least for some part due to sample properties of the 2002, 2003 and 2006 studies. After years of relatively low and decreasing response rates, the 2006 study had a very high response rate. It is likely that the fluctuations in response rates disproportionately affect the participation of secular working-class people in the survey.

  4. 4.

    Following international conventions, in 2006 the scales were changed to an 11-points format (0–10). For presentational purposes, the scales have all been transformed to the 0–10 range.

  5. 5.

    One exception is that in 1994 the newly formed parties for the elderly, AOV and Unie 55+, were not included in the relevant questions. For 1989, party evaluation scores are not available. For that year only, we have used the so-called probabilities of future vote-questions instead.

  6. 6.

    The correlation coefficients were computed using pairwise deletion of missing data in order to include information from as many survey respondents as possible.

  7. 7.

    The acronyms of the party names used are explained in the contribution of Krouwel and Lucardie to this issue.

References

  1. Aarts, K. and Semetko, H.A. (1999) ‘Representation and responsibility’, Acta Politica 34 (2/3): 111–129.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aarts, K., Van der Kolk, H. and Rosema, M. (eds.) (2007) Een Verdeeld Electoraat. De Tweede Kamerverkiezingen van 2006, Utrecht: Het Spectrum.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bartolini, D and Mair, P. (1990) Identity, Competition and Electoral Availability, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Caramani, D. (2004) The Nationalization of Politics: The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Dalton, R. (2002) Citizen Politics. Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, 3rd edn, New York: Chatham House Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dalton, R., Flanagan, S. and Beck, P. (eds.) (1984) Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies: Realignment or Dealignment?, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. De Nederlandse Kiezers in 1967 (1967) Amsterdam: Agon/Elsevier.

  8. Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Downs, A. (1972) ‘Up and down with ecology: the ‘issue attention cycle’, Public Interest 28: 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Evans, G. (ed.) (1999) The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Franklin, M., Mackie, T. and Valen, H. (eds.) (1992) Electoral Change. Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fuchs, D. and Klingemann, H.-D. (1995) ‘Citizens and the State: A Changing Relationship?’, in H.-D. Klingemann and D. Fuchs (eds.) Citizens and the State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Inglehart, R. (1977) The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Inglehart, R. and Welzel, C. (2005) Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy. The Human Development Sequence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Irwin, G. and Van Holsteyn, J. (1989a) ‘Decline of the structured model of electoral competition’, West European Politics 12 (1): 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Irwin, G. and Van Holsteyn, J. (1989b) ‘Towards a more open model of competition’, West European Politics 12 (1): 112–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaase, M. and Klingemann, H.-D. (1994) ‘Electoral research in the Federal Republic of Germany’, in J.J.A. Thomassen (ed.) The Intellectual History of Election Studies. Special Issue of the European Journal for Political Research, Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Key, V.O. (1966) The Responsible Electorate, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Kitschelt, H. (1994) The Transformation of European Social Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Kitschelt, H. (1995) The Radical Right in Western Europe — A Comparative Analysis, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Knutsen, O. (1995) ‘Left-Right Materialist Value Orientations’, in J. Van Deth and E. Scarbrough (eds.) The Impact of Values, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Knutsen, O. and Scarbrough, E. (1995) ‘Cleavage Politics’, in J. Van Deth and E. Scarbrough (eds.) The Impact of Values, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kornhauser, W. (1960) The Politics of Mass Society, London: Routledge and Kegan.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kriesi, H., Grande, H., Lachat, R., Dolezal, M., Bornschier, S. and Frey, T. (2006) ‘Globalization and the transformation of the national political space; six European countries compared’, European Journal of Political Research 45: 921–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lipset, S.M. and Rokkan, S. (1967) ‘Cleavage Structures, Party Systems and Voter Alignments: An Introduction’, in S.H. Lipset and S. Rokkan (eds.) Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross National Perspectives, New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Listhaug, O., Macdonald, S.E. and Rabinowitz, G. (1990) ‘A comparative spatial analysis of European party systems’, Scandinavian Political Studies 13 (3): 227–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mair, P. (2002) ‘De Eigenaardigheden van de Nederlanders. De Verkiezingen van 2002 in een Vergelijkend Perspectief’, Beleid en Maatschappij 29 (3): 160–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Marks, G. and Steenbergen, M.R. (eds.) (2004) European Integration and Political Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Oskarsson, M. (2005) ‘Social Structure and Party Choice’, in J. Thomassen (ed.) The European Voter. A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pellikaan, H., de Lange, S. and Van der Meer, T. (2007) ‘Fortuyn's legacy: party system change in the Netherlands’, Comparative European Politics 5: 282–302.

  31. Pellikaan, H., Van der Meer, T. and de Lange, S. (2003) ‘The road from a depoliticized to a centrifugal democracy’, Acta Politica 38: 23–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rabinowitz, G. (1978) ‘On the nature of political issues: insights from a spatial analysis’, American Journal of Political Science 22 (4): 793–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rose, R. and McAllister, I. (1986) Voters Begin to Choose. From Closed-Class to Open Elections in Britain, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sani, G. and Sartori, G. (1983) ‘Polarisation, Fragmentation and Competition in Western Democracies’, in H. Daalder and P. Mair (eds.) Western European Party Systems: Continuity and Change, Beverly Hills/London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thomassen, J.J.A. (1994) ‘Empirical Research into Political Representation: Failing Democracy or Failing Models’, in M.K. Jennings and T.E. Mann (eds.) Elections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren Miller, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Thomassen, J.J.A. (ed.) (2005) The European Voter, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  37. Van der Eijk, C. and Niemöller, B. (1983) Electoral Change in the Netherlands. Empirical Results and Methods of Measurement, Amsterdam: CT-Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Van der Eijk, C. and Niemöller, K. (1992) ‘Netherlands’, in M. Franklin, T. Mackie and H. Valen (eds.) Electoral Change. Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Van Holsteyn, J. and Irwin, G. (2004) ‘The Dutch parliamentary elections of 2003’, West European Politics 27 (1): 157–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Van Holsteyn, J., Irwin, G. and den Ridder, J. (2003) ‘In the eye of the beholder: the perception of the list Pim Fortuyn and the parliamentary elections of May 2002’, Acta Politica 38: 69–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aarts, K., Thomassen, J. Dutch Voters and the Changing Party Space 1989–2006. Acta Polit 43, 203–234 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2008.6

Download citation

Keywords

  • political parties
  • elections
  • voting
  • Dutch politics
  • political change in the Netherlands