Beyond the second-order national elections model: Incumbency effects in regional elections in the Czech Republic

References

• Atkeson, Lonna Rae, and Randall W. Partin. 1995. “Economic and Referendum Voting: A Comparison of Gubernatorial and Senatorial Elections.” American Political Science Review 89 (1): 99–107. doi:10.2307/2083077.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäck, Hanna, Marc Debus, Jochen Müller, and Henry Bäck. 2013. “Regional Government Formation in Varying Multilevel Contexts: A Comparison of Eight European Countries.” Regional Studies 47 (3): 368–387. doi:10.1080/00343404.2012.733072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechtel, Michael M. 2012. “Not Always Second Order: Subnational Elections, National-Level Vote Intentions, and Volatility Spillovers in a Multi-Level Electoral System.” Electoral Studies 31 (1): 170–183. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2011.10.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, Josef, and Jiří Šafr. 2016. “Incumbency in Multi-Level Political Systems and Recruitment Advantage: The Case of the Czech Regional Assemblies.” Czech Sociological Review 52 (3): 267–292. doi:10.13060/00380288.2016.52.3.259.
   Google Scholar
• Dandoy, Régis, and Arjan H. Schakel, eds. 2013. Regional and National Elections in Western Europe: Territoriality of the Vote in Thirteen Countries. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Debus, Marc, Jochen Müller, and Peter Obert. 2011. “Europeanization and Government Formation in Multi-Level Systems: Evidence from the Czech Republic.” European Union Politics 12 (3): 381–403. doi:10.1177/1465116511409961.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emanuele, Vincenzo, and Allan Sikk. 2021. “Party Crashers? Modeling Genuinely New Party Development Paths in Western Europe.” Party Politics 27 (5): 883–895. doi:10.1177/1354068820911355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erikson, Robert S. 2017. “The Congressional Incumbency Advantage Over Sixty Years: Measurement, Trends, and Implications.” In Governing in a Polarized Age, edited by Alan S. Gerber, and Eric Schickler, 65–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316154977.004.
   Google Scholar
• Erikson, Robert S., and Rocío Titiunik. 2015. “Using Regression Discontinuity to Uncover the Personal Incumbency Advantage.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (1): 101–119. doi:10.1561/100.00013137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowler, Anthony, and Andrew B. Hall. 2014. “Disentangling the Personal and Partisan Incumbency Advantages: Evidence from Close Elections and Term Limits.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 9 (4): 501–531. doi:10.1561/100.00014013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golden, Miriam A., and Lucio Picci. 2015. “Incumbency Effects Under Proportional Representation: Leaders and Backbenchers in the Postwar Italian Chamber of Deputies: Incumbency Effects.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 40 (4): 509–538. doi:10.1111/lsq.12087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golder, Sona Nadenichek, Ignacio Lago, André Blais, Elisabeth Gidengil, and Thomas Gschwend. 2017. Multi-Level Electoral Politics: Beyond the Second-Order Election Model. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hix, Simon, and Michael Marsh. 2007. “Punishment or Protest? Understanding European Parliament Elections.” The Journal of Politics 69 (2): 495–510. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00546.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooghe, Liesbet, Arjan H. Schakel, Gary Marks, Sara Niedzwiecki, Sandra Chapman Osterkatz, and Sarah Shair-Rosenfield. 2016. Measuring Regional Authority: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance. Volume I. First Edition. Transformations in Governance. Oxford, UK; New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jeffery, Charlie, and Dan Hough. 2009. “Understanding Post-Devolution Elections in Scotland and Wales in Comparative Perspective.” Party Politics 15 (2): 219–240. doi:10.1177/1354068808099982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffery, Charlie, and Daniel Wincott. 2010. “The Challenge of Territorial Politics: Beyond Methodological Nationalism.” In New Directions in Political Science, edited by Colin Hay, 167–188. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• King, James D. 2001. “Incumbent Popularity and Vote Choice in Gubernatorial Elections.” The Journal of Politics 63 (2): 585–597. doi:10.1111/0022-3816.00080.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kousser, T. 2004. “Retrospective Voting and Strategic Behavior in European Parliament Elections.” Electoral Studies 23 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1016/S0261-3794(02)00030-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, David S. 2008. “Randomized Experiments from Non-Random Selection in U.S. House Elections.” Journal of Econometrics 142 (2): 675–697. doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• León, Sandra. 2014. “How Does Decentralization Affect Electoral Competition of State-Wide Parties? Evidence from Spain.” Party Politics 20 (3): 391–402. doi:10.1177/1354068811436044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang, Che-Yuan. 2013. “Is There an Incumbency Advantage or Cost of Ruling in Proportional Election Systems?” Public Choice 154 (3–4): 259–284. doi:10.1007/s11127-011-9817-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pink, Michal. 2017. “Czech Republic: Regional Elections Without Regional Politics.” In Regional and National Elections in Eastern Europe, edited by Arjan H. Schakel, 83–104. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-51787-6_4.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, Michal, and Otto Eibl. 2018. “The 2016 Czech Regional Elections: Without Real Regional Parties or Voters’ Interest.” Regional & Federal Studies 28 (3): 353–365. doi:10.1080/13597566.2018.1450746.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redmond, Paul, and John Regan. 2015. “Incumbency Advantage in a Proportional Electoral System: A Regression Discontinuity Analysis of Irish Elections.” European Journal of Political Economy 38 (June): 244–256. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.03.002.
   Google Scholar
• Remmer, Karen L., and FranÇois Gélineau. 2003. “Subnational Electoral Choice: Economic and Referendum Voting in Argentina, 1983-1999.” Comparative Political Studies 36 (7): 801–821. doi:10.1177/0010414003255105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryšavý, Dan, Daniel Čermák, Michal Illner, Josef Bernard, and Petr Vašát. 2015. Na/O kraji: kraje a jejich představitelé 2000-2013. Vydání první. Ediční Řada Studie, 117. svazek. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství (SLON).
   Google Scholar
• Šaradín, Pavel. 2008. Teorie voleb druhého řádu a možnosti jejich aplikace v České republice. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.
   Google Scholar
• Schakel, Arjan H. 2015. “How to Analyze Second-Order Election Effects? A Refined Second-Order Election Model.” Comparative European Politics 13 (6): 636–655. doi:10.1057/cep.2014.16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schakel, Arjan H., ed. 2017. Regional and National Elections in Eastern Europe: Territoriality of the Vote in Ten Countries. Comparative Territorial Politics. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Schakel, Arjan H., and Charlie Jeffery. 2013. “Are Regional Elections Really ‘Second-Order’ Elections?” Regional Studies 47 (3): 323–341. doi:10.1080/00343404.2012.690069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, Hermann, and Eftichia Teperoglou. 2017. “The Study of Less Important Elections.” In The SAGE Handbook of Electoral Behaviour, edited by Kai Arzheimer, Jocelyn Evans, and Michael S. Lewis-Beck, 56–79. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:10.4135/9781473957978.
   Google Scholar
• Suárez-Cao, Julieta. 2021. “Squaring the Circle: The Consolidation of Incumbency Advantage in the Argentine Provincial Elections of 2019.” Regional & Federal Studies 31 (3): 313–335. doi:10.1080/13597566.2021.1919873.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorlakson, Lori. 2007. “An Institutional Explanation of Party System Congruence: Evidence from Six Federations.” European Journal of Political Research 46 (1): 69–95. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00647.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar