The Economic Crisis (2009–2013) and Electoral Support for the Radical Right in Western Europe—Some New and Unexpected Findings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives This article evaluates the influence of the economic crisis (2009–2013) on the vote share of the radical right in Western European regions. I ask two questions: (1) Has the radical right electorally benefited from the recession that has hit Western Europe in the aftermath of the U.S. and European stock market crisis in 2008/2009? (2) Has it performed particularly well in areas that have been very hard hit by the crisis? Methods I evaluate both questions in a longitudinal and multivariate framework through pooled time series analysis. The analysis, which controls for immigration, the education level of the region, and population density, covers more than 150 regions in 17 European countries from 1990 to 2013. Results First, I find that the 2009 to 2013 economic crisis has merely triggered a very moderate increase of 1 percentage point in the aggregate average regional vote share of the radical right. Second, and with the exception of regions in Greece and France, my results also indicate that the radical right has had the strongest electoral gains in regions and countries that have been relatively spared from the gust of the crisis. Conclusion This quantitative study highlights that an economic crisis is no panacea for the success of the radical right.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it