Diffusion in Referendum Campaigns: The Case of EU Constitutional Referendums

Abstract

The problem of cross-case influences is crucial in the analysis of social phenomena. Is a referendum held in a state entirely a ‘domestic’ event? No work has applied diffusion theories to the study of referendum campaigns. In this paper, I show diffusion effects among the 2005 Constitutional Treaty referendums. Spain, France, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg used the referendum method to ratify the European Constitution. Based on 85 interviews with campaigners in all four countries, I find that campaign arguments and strategies were not always homegrown. However, such diffusion is not automatic and depends on diffusion channels.

KEYWORDS:

• European Union
• diffusion
• referendums
• political campaigns
• transnational networks
• public opinion

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Juliet Johnson, George Ross, Denis Saint-Martin, Frédéric Merand, Adam Chalmers, and to two anonymous reviewers, whose helpful comments and advice greatly contributed to this research. Special thanks go to Émilie St-Pierre Langlois for her research assistance.

Notes

1. For polls, see: http://www.cis.es/cis/opencms/-Archivos/Marginales/2560_2579/2577/Es2577.pdf; http://www.csa.eu/data-set/data2004/opi20040915c.htm; (Eurobarometer, 2004); http://www.tns-ilres.com/cms/Home/Nos-secteurs/Politique---Opinion.

2. For further empirical evidence showing that French arguments appeared in the Luxembourgish campaign see (Dumont et al. 2007).

3. Interview, 22 October 2008.

4. Interview, 8 April 2008.

5. Interview, 13 September 2008.

6. Interview with Thomas Rupp, director of the ‘European No Campaign,’ 18 April 2008.

7. Interviews with Carlos Girbau Costa on 8 October 2008, Marc Giménez Villahoz on 15 October 2008, and Jaime Pastor on 8 October 2008.

8. Interview with Maxime Combes, 8 September 2008.

9. Interview, 13 September 2008.

10. Interview, 22 September 2008.

11. Interview, 8 April 2008.

12. Interview, 4 November 2008.

13. Interview, 12 November 2008.

14. Interview, 15 April 2008.

15. Interview, 15 April 2008.

16. Interview, 10 November 2008.

17. Interview, 15 April 2008.

18. Interview, 15 April 2008.

19. Interview, 17 April 2008.

20. Interview with Pierre Khalfa from ATTAC France, 22 September 2008.

21. Interview, 13 November 2008.

22. Interview, 14 November 2008.

23. Interview, 14 November 2008.

24. Interview, 17 November 2008.

25. Interview, 17 November 2008.

26. Interview, 15 April 2008.

27. Interview, 7 October 2008.

28. Interview, 8 October 2008.

29. Interview, 8 October 2008.

30. Interview, 8 April 2008.

31. Interview, 4 November 2008.

32. Interview, 22 October 2008.

33. Interview, 30 January 2009.

34. Interview, 22 September 2008.

35. Interview, 17 September 2008.

36. Interview, 15 April 2008.

37. Quoted in (Deloy 2005).

38. Interview, 17 November 2008.

39. Interview, 10 April 2008.

40. Interview, 12 November 2008.

41. Interview, 14 November 2008.

42. Interview, 17 April 2008.

43. Interview, 10 November 2008.

44. Interview, 14 November 2008.

45. Interviews with Dr. Philippe Poirier on 17 April 2008 and Charles Margue — Director of the TNS-ILRES — on 18 November 2008.

46. (Hausemer 2005). However, socioeconomic status could be an alternative explanation for this concentration.

47. Interview, 11 April 2008.

48. Interview with José Ignacio Torreblanca, 6 October 2008.

49. Interviews with Harry Van Bommel, 8 April 2008 and 31 October 2008; Christophe Beaudouin, 15 September 2008; Daniel Cirera, 10 September 2008; and Francine Bavay, 22 September 2008.