You Get What You (don't) Pay for: The Impact of Volunteer Labour and Candidate Spending at the 2010 British General Election
You Get What You (don't) Pay for: The Impact of Volunteer Labour and Candidate Spending at the 2010 British General Election
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/pa/gst006
复制
发表时间：
2014-10-01
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
Fieldhouse, Edward
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fisher, Justin;Johnston, Ron;Fieldhouse, Edward
英国反复出现的证据表明，选区竞选活动对选举产生了积极的影响。然而，这种竞选活动的影响因选举背景和竞选管理的有效性而异。关于传统与更现代的竞选技术的相对影响，以及需要成本的竞选技术与自愿执行的竞选技术之间的争论也存在。这样的辩论不仅引起了学术界和政党的兴趣，也引起了监管机构在考虑是否为了选举平等而限制竞选支出时的兴趣。本文使用候选人支出数据和对2010年英国大选选举代理人的广泛调查的回应来评估竞选支出和免费志愿劳动对选举表现的影响。这表明两者都有一些独立的影响，但这种影响因党派而异。这些结果的含义在学术和监管方面都非常重要——竞选支出可以影响选举结果，但这些影响在一定程度上被自愿努力所抵消。
Repeated evidence in Britain demonstrates the positive electoral payoffs from constituency campaigning. However, the impact of such campaigning varies depending upon the electoral context and the effectiveness of campaign management. Debate also exists in respect of the relative impact of traditional versus more modern campaign techniques, as well as between campaign techniques that incur cost and those that are carried out voluntarily. Such debates are of interest not only to academics and political parties, but also to regulators when considering whether to restrict campaign spending in the interests of electoral parity. This article uses candidate spending data and responses to an extensive survey of election agents at the British General Election of 2010 to assess the impact of both campaign expenditure and free, voluntary labour on electoral performance. It suggests that both have some independent impact, but that impact varies by party. The implications of these results are highly significant in both academic and regulatory terms-campaign expenditure can affect electoral outcomes but these effects are offset to some extent by voluntary efforts.