Regional elections in Italy (2012–15): Low turnout, tri-polar competition and Democratic Party’s (multi-level) dominance

17Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Between October 2012 and May 2015, all Italian regions went to the polls to renew their assemblies and executives. In contrast to previous election rounds, only seven out of fifteen ordinary regions held their elections in (horizontal) simultaneity. For the first time, some ordinary regions held their elections in (vertical) simultaneity with the national or European election. The election results were somehow exceptional in three ways. First, they were affected by an extremely low level of turnout vis-à-vis previous regional elections and, in line with the second-order election model, vis-a-vis the 2013 general election. Turnout was, however, comparatively higher in the special status regions governed by dominant ethno-regionalist parties (Aosta Valley and South Tyrol); and in the regions that voted in vertical simultaneity with the national and (to a lesser extent) European elections. Secondly, in contrast to previous regional elections, competition for regional executives was (at least) tri-polar, following the pattern that emerged in the 2013 general election. Thirdly, in contrast to the predictions of the second-order election model, this round of regional elections did not punish the national incumbent. Indeed, the Democratic Party won fifteen out of twenty-one regional presidencies, taking nine of them from the centre-right. Finally, it is worth stressing that the combination of low turnout and tri-polar competition, in conjunction with presidential executives and majoritarian voting systems, raises serious issues of democratic legitimacy, as most regional presidents are voted in office by between a fifth and a quarter of registered voters.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Massetti, E. (2018). Regional elections in Italy (2012–15): Low turnout, tri-polar competition and Democratic Party’s (multi-level) dominance. Regional and Federal Studies, 28(3), 325–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2018.1428568

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free