Citizenship After the Nation State (CANS) The United Kingdom.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

The Citizen and Political Power in the UK

Advertisements

Definition Expression of attitudes concerning government and politics Many publics Influenced by political socialization and demography Public matters,

National and Regional Variations in Electoral Participation in Europe: Evidence from The European Social Survey Ed Fieldhouse and Mark Tranmer Cathie Marsh.

Demographic, Economic and Social Predictors of Psychological and Sociocultural Adaptation of Immigrant Youth Colleen Ward and Jaimee Stuart Centre for.

1 Patriotism, Xenophobia, and Support for Outgroups and Transnational Institutions In Europe Kathleen M. Dowley Department of Political Science & International.

Towards a regional citizenship?: the French case CANS meeting Brussels November Romain Pasquier CNRS/Sciences-Po Rennes.

Territorial Politics The Sub-State Arena Some Issues n Centralisation and decentralisation n National unity n Self-determination n Economic restructuring.

Electoral Participation of Immigrants in European Cities Amparo González-Ferrer CSIC-IEGD & Univ. Pompeu Fabra Localmultidem Project Brussels, 28th January.

CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION IN FINLAND

Gender: what is it? Chris Coulter, PhD

Adolescent Mothers: Intention to Continue in High School By Jeanette Koshar RN, NP, PhD and 101 amazing young mothers.

The National Politics Study (NPS): Ethnic Pluralism & Politics in the 21 st Century Study Overview.

1 Introducing Government in America

Research paper format Introduction Theory & Literature Review

The pros, the cons and a little background on the creation of the euro

Decentralisation in Healthcare Jeni Bremner Director European Health Management Association.

Assessing the Heritage Planning Process: the Views of Citizens Assessing the Heritage Planning Process: the Views of Citizens Dr. Michael MacMillan Department.

ICCS European Regional Report National Coordinators Meeting Madrid February 2010.

Citizenship of the Union and immigration issues. The notion of citizenship (national citizenship) D. Chalmers : « legally enforceable rights, loyalty,

Public Opinion.

WEEK 8 – IS THE UNITED KINGDOM BREAKING UP?. 2 THE CASE FOR DEVOLUTION … “The United Kingdom is a partnership enriched by distinct national identities.

Chapter 12 Public Policy and Government Performance Comparative Politics: Structures and Choices 2e By Lowell Barrington.

Overview Report 11 Cities: Antwerp, Amsterdam, Berlin, Copenhagen, Hamburg, Leicester, London, Marseille, Paris, Rotterdam, Stockholm 2199 interviews:

Political Participation You can be involved with Politics through any of the following:- Standing for election Joining a political party and attending.

Building Blocks of Research Process Chapter 2: Alan Monroe.

1 1 Gender perspectives in migration analysis  Migration statistics in Norway  Gender perspectives in the analysis of migration statistics Kristin Egge-Hoveid.

Effective Decision Making in Social Service Systems Shawn Boles, Ph.D. Center on Early Adolescence Oregon Research Institute Deschutes Research, Inc.

Political Ideology Chapter 7, Theme B. Pop Quiz 7 ► Check even item numbers on “How do we vote?” Sheet.

Lecture 6 Psyc 300A. Agenda Quiz 3 Homework discussion Review from last week Overview of tonight: Variables.

1)In Who Votes Now?, what do Leighley and Nagler argue are the most significant determinants of an individual’s voting or nonvoting? Income and education.

Community-led Regeneration Fiona Garven SCDC. Defining community led regeneration Why should we invest in a community led approach? Where are we now and.

CANS: Wales and Scotland Richard Wyn Jones Wales Governance Centre Cardiff University.

Why Wales Said Yes The 2011 Referendum Roger Scully Aberystwyth, 24 th June 2011.

The Cost of Foundational Public Health Services and Capabilities: Estimates, Variation, and Disparities Betty Bekemeier, Justin Marlowe, Linda Sharee Squires.

Germ Janmaat, Institute of Education, LLAKES Second International Conference London, October 2012 Educational Differentiation.

Part 3: Citizens, Society & the State Spring 2015.

Values, Experiences and Attitudes: A Cross-National Analysis of Opinions on Immigration in Europe David Card, Christian Dustmann and Ian Preston.

1 Introducing Government in America. IA_1/polisci/presidency/Edwards_Ch01_Introducing_Gover nment_in_America_Seg1_v2.html.

SUBNATIONAL POLITICS WEEK 12. Sovereignty: Unlimited power; unchallengeable right to rule Internal sovereignty: Supreme authority within the state External.

Research Examples and Topics Chapter 1: Janet Buttolph Johnson.

State University – Higher School of Economics Alexander Tatarko A Study of Perceived Social Capital in a Multicultural Society: the Case of Russia (Moscow,

Race and Ethnicity.

Citizenship after the Nation-State Brussels Meeting November 2009.

1 PROVINCE OF MILAN Presidency and Institutional Relations Communication and International Relations European Affairs Office “Being European”, Latvia -

Scotland’s Identity John Curtice Strathclyde University/NatCen.

What the People Think: the Welsh Life and Times Survey 2007 Richard Wyn Jones & Roger Scully Cardiff, 14 th November 2007.

Exam 1 Review GOVT 120. Review: Levels of Analysis Theory: Concept 1 is related to Concept 2 Hypothesis: Variable 1 (IV) is related to Variable 2 (DV)

Citizenship Naturalized vs Natural Born Citizen Natural Born Citizen Anyone born on U.S. soil, territory, protectorate, military base, or embassy grounds.

Public policies and accountability at regional level Authors: Braulio Gómez Fortes (University of Edinburgh) Laura Cabeza Perez (UNED) ‘Territorial Politics.

Patterns of community involvement: what are they and can they be changed? Kirby Swales, Survey Research Centre.

Voting as a measure of social inclusion for natives, immigrants and descendants in Sweden Pieter Bevelander International Migration & Ethnic Relations,

Sport statistics in france

Lecture 2: WHAT TO COMPARE? HOW TO COMPARE? A. Why do we compare? B. What do we compare in comparative politics? C. How do we compare? D. Structure Versus.

Decentralization reforms and local development Brussels April, 2015.

*Identity is ‘revealed by social practices as well as by political attitudes, shaped by social and geographical structures and national context. (Jeffrey.

Eligibility, registration, turnout and vote choice.

Date: January 19, 2016 Topic: Voting Patterns in the United States Aim: How are voting behaviors distributed in the United States? Do Now: Handouts. Handouts.

Educational contributions to building cohesion within Europe social and institutional life Erasmus Intensive Programme Eunice Macedo June, eunice.

Two-Way Between Groups ANOVA Chapter 14. Two-Way ANOVAs Are used to evaluate effects of more than one IV on a DV Can determine individual and combined.

Comes from the Greek word ethnos meaning “people” or “nation”

Building Blocks of Research Process

A Democratic Audit Framework

Basics of States.

The European Union 2.

The Scottish Parliament has many devolved powers

CANS AN INITIAL OVERVIEW

Voting Turnout and Behavior

Regeneration - Enquiry Question 2

IMPACT OF ADULT LEARNING ON WORK European Agenda for Adult Learning

By Group 1 Xiujuan Wang & Dairu He

Presentation transcript:

Citizenship After the Nation State (CANS) The United Kingdom

Context  The choice of regions Identity Identity Institutional asymmetry Institutional asymmetry Wealth Wealth  What a comparison of Scotland and Wales can tell us (and what it can’t)

Data  Fieldwork ICM, telephone ICM, telephone  Sample Scotland 914 Scotland 914 Wales 900 Wales 900

Operationalisation: DVs  Inter-regional solidarity Social solidarity (affinity) Social solidarity (affinity) Fiscal solidarity (state intervention, transfers) Fiscal solidarity (state intervention, transfers)  Political participation Perceived importance across levels Perceived importance across levels Actual turnout (region, state) Actual turnout (region, state)  Regional policy Regional policy control (5 areas) Regional policy control (5 areas) State-wide policy uniformity (4 areas) State-wide policy uniformity (4 areas)

Operationalisation: IVs  Identity Attachment, pride, Linz/Moreno Attachment, pride, Linz/Moreno  Regional institutional authority Perceived importance of decisions, regional influence (current and desired), who more concerned, independence scale Perceived importance of decisions, regional influence (current and desired), who more concerned, independence scale  Wealth Current, prospective assessments Current, prospective assessments

Hypotheses 1. Individuals with a greater sense of regional identity will feel a decreased sense of inter-regional solidarity (in terms of affinity and fiscal solidarity) 2. Individuals in regions with greater institutional autonomy will place greater emphasis on participation at the regional level, relative to the state level, and have greater tolerance for regional policy control and divergence 3. Individuals in wealthier regions will display decreased support for state-wide intervention and fiscal transfers to poorer regions, and likewise will be more tolerant of regional policy divergence

How unique are Scotland and Wales? Independent variables (% agree) ScotlandWales Region is nation 8370 Attachment to region 8069 Regional level most concerned 8182 Regional level should have most influence 8270 Want more powers/independence 5956

How unique are Scotland and Wales? Dependent variables (% agree) ScotlandWales Affinity to citizens in region 5046 State should intervene 7483 Importance of regional voting 6550 Voted last regional election 7866

Results  Territorial scale effects  Distinction among indicators Social not fiscal solidarity Social not fiscal solidarity Perceived importance of voting but not actual participation Perceived importance of voting but not actual participation  Devolution paradox  Relative importance of IVs

Scale effects: social solidarity I Affinity Neighbourhood Affinity Region Affinity State Affinity Europe Relative affinity AttachcitySc:.346** W:. 427**.208**.366**.122**.177**.118**.126** ** Attachlocal.312**.329**.261**.344**.168**.192**.170**.183** ** Attachregion.195**.261**.359**.448** * **.245**.278** Attachstate.184**.155**.101**.100**.365**.311**.148**.127** -.261** -.196** AtachEU.112** **.090**.271**.204**.443**.407** -.188** -.105** Relativeattach **.214** -.307** -.198** -.104** **.352**

Scale effects: social solidarity II Affinity Neighbourhood Affinity Region Affinity State Affinity Europe Relative affinity Importance local decisionsSc:.218** W:.197**.171**.258**.158**.116**.194**.161** ** Importance regional decisions.150**.141**.246**.254**.119**.082*.204**.160*.081**.133** Importance state decisions.068*.082*.106**.135**.272**.215**.231**.183** -.171** -.084* Importance EU decisions.077*.071* **.161**.171**.338**.321** -.121** -.077* Relative importance of decisions.075* **.117** -.158** -.124** **.207**

Scale effects: participation I Importance local vote Importance region vote Importance state vote Importance EU vote Relative importance AttachcitySc:.173** W:.277**.085**.206**.156**.185**.085**.138** -.083**.033 Attachlocal.231**.271**.154**.250**.176**.194**.103**.181** * Attachregion.170**.261**.158**.296**.098** ** ** Attachstate.134**.117** **.190**.084**.110** -.250** -.143** AttachEU.086**.094**.082*.168**.138**.197**.327**.431** -.066* Relativeattach ** ** -.183** -.112** **.285**

Scale effects: participation II Importance local vote Importance region vote Importance state vote Importance EU vote Relative importance Importance local decisions Sc:.547** W:.536**.456**.458**..354**.386**.364**.332**.108**.102** Importance regional decisions.466**.389**.623**.571**.366**.338**.402**.376**.278**.263** Importance state decisions.394**.303**.380**.262**.583**.543**.422**.363** -.234** -.242** Importance EU decisions.371**.294**.366**.343**.372**.364**.655**.599** Relative importance of decisions *.204**.304** -.231** -.194** **.486**

Devolution paradox ScotlandWales Region should have most control 7572 Regional policy control on: Education6755 Health5754 Crime4832 Unemployment3930 Environment3937

Devolution paradox Regional Policy control scale Policy uniformity scale Relative attachment.255**.211** -.155** -.182** Region should influence.343**.340** -.284** -.291** Region more concerned.267**.244** -.167** -.154** Independence scale.379**.341** -.376** -.380**

Regional policy variation EducationHealthUnemploymentCrimeEnvironment Scotland.300**.279**.223**.229**.189** Wales.273**.253**.266**.229**.189**

State-wide policy uniformity TuitionElderlyYoung offenders Unemp’t Scotland-.216**-.200**-.231**-.248** Wales-.252**-.221**-.190**-.240**

Comparing independent variables  Scale effects present with identity, institutional authority  Wealth less useful, even for understanding fiscal autonomy …

Fiscal solidarity State should intervene Transfer money to poorer regions Region better off now Sc: W: -.107** Region better off future -.085*

Multi-variate model  Impact of demographic variables Established impact on certain attitudes and behaviour Established impact on certain attitudes and behaviour Likely interaction with research question Likely interaction with research question  Independent impact of identity, institutions, wealth  Analysis on 6 DV indicators

Multi-variate results AffinityFiscal Attitudes re participation Participation Regional policy control Policyuniformity AgeGender Ethnic minority ReligionEducation Marital status Birth * ** **.131**.079** ** ** AttachmentPrideDecisions Region should influence Independence Perceived wealth Scotland.245**.130**.070**.095**.084** ** **-.062*.097** ** ** * **.098** * **.109** **.157**.177**.107** ** **-.264** ** Adj R

Multi-variate analysis 1. Impact of demographic variables 2. Place matters 3. Ranking of IVs 4. Conceptualisation of IVs and DVs 5. An incomplete model?