The policy-opinion link and institutional change: the legislative agenda of the UK and Scottish Parliaments

Journal of European Public Policy

Volumn 18, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 1052-1068

  John, Peter ^a   Bevan, Shaun ^b   Jennings, Will ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agendas; devolution; legislation; opinion; policy; Scotland

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855830943     PISSN: 13501763     EISSN: 14664429     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2011.599982     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Anderson, C. 1995. Blaming the Government: Citizens and the Economy in Five European Democracies, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
2. Brambor, T., Clark, W. R. and Golder, M. 2006. Understanding interaction models: improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14(1): 63-82.
3. Bulpitt, J. 1983. Territory and Power in the United Kingdom, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
4. Cairney, P. 2006. The analysis of Scottish Parliament committee influence: beyond capacity and structure in comparing West European legislatures. European Journal of Political Research, 45(2): 181-208.
5. Cairney, P., Halpin, D. and Jordan, G. 2009. "New Scottish Parliament, same old interest group politics?". In The Scottish Parliament, 1999-2009: The First Decade, Edited by: Jeffrey, C. and Mitchell, J. 105-112. London: Hansard Society/Luath Press.
6. Cohen, J. 1997. Presidential Responsiveness and Public Policy-Making: The Publics and the Policies that Presidents Choose, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7. Curtice, J., McCrone, D. and Park, A. 2002. New Scotland, New Society? Are Social and Political Ties Fragmenting?, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
8. Dahl, R. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9. Erikson, R., Wright, G. and McIver, J. 1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Fiorina, M. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American Elections, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11. Hobolt, S. and Klemmensen, R. 2005. Responsive government? Public opinion and government policy preferences in Britain and Denmark. Political Studies, 53(2): 379-402.
12. Jeffery, C. 2006. "Devolution and divergence: public attitudes and institutional logics". In Devolution in Practice, Edited by: Adams, J. and Schumacher, K. 98-120. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
13. Jennings, W. and John, P. 2009. The dynamics of political attention: public opinion and the Queen's Speech in the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4): 838-54.
14. Jennings, W. and Wlezien, C. forthcoming. Distinguishing between most important problems and issues?. Public Opinion Quarterly,
15. Jones, B. and Baumgartner, F. 2004. Representation and agenda setting. Policy Studies Journal, 32(1): 1-24.
16. Jones, B., Larsen-Price, H. and Wilkerson, J. 2009. Representation and American governing institutions. The Journal of Politics, 71(1): 277-90.
17. Jordan, G. and Stevenson, L. 2000. "Redemocratizing Scotland. Towards the politics of disappointment?". In Scotland: The Challenge of Devolution, Edited by: Wright, A. 171-87. Aldershot: Ashgate.
18. Keating, M., Stevenson, L., Cairney, P. and Taylor, K. 2003. Does devolution make a difference? Legislative output and policy divergence in Scotland. Legislative Studies, 9(3): 110-39.
19. Lewis-Beck, M. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
20. Lijphart, A. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. McGarvey, N. and Cairney, P. 2008. Scottish Politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
22. Oates, W. 1972. Fiscal Federalism, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
23. Page, B. I. and Shapiro, R. Y. 1983. Effects of public opinion on policy. American Political Science Review, 77(1): 175-90.
24. Persson, T. and Tabellini, G. E. 2005. The Economic Effects of Constitutions, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Pitkin, H. 1967. The Concept of Representation, Berkeley: University of California Press.
26. Powell, G. and Whitten, G. 1993. A cross-national analysis of economic voting: taking account of the political context. American Journal of Political Science, 37(2): 391-414.
27. Rokkan, S. and Urwin, D. 1982. The Politics of Territorial Identity, London: Sage.
28. Soroka, S. and Wlezien, C. 2005. Opinion-policy dynamics: public preferences and public expenditure in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Political Science, 35(4): 665-89.
29. Soroka, S. and Wlezien, C. 2007. "The relationship between public opinion and policy". In Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, Edited by: Dalton, R. and Klingemann, H.-D. 799-817. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Soroka, S. and Wlezien, C. 2010. Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Stimson, J. A., MacKuen, M. B. and Erikson, R. S. 1995. Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review, 89(3): 543-65.
32. Tiebout, C. M. 1956. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64(5): 416-24.
33. Wlezien, C. 2005. On the salience of political issues: the problem with 'Most Important Problem. Electoral Studies, 24(4): 555-79.