Peer Reviewed

 

2015. “Ideas and the Study of Political Parties: The Added Value of the Discursive Institutionalist Approach.” Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Politica [Uruguayan Political Science Review] 24(2): 15-27

​

Abstract: There are four methods often used to study party locations along salient cleavages in party systems: expert surveys, content analysis of party manifestos, media analyses and broad opinion surveys of electorates. Most of the literature that explores the relationship between political parties and these cleavages has two shortcomings: (1) it treats parties as cohesive units, and (2) while the combination of policies adopted by a party is considered important, almost none consider how they are communicated to the voters. Both matter: if politicians within a party remain torn over an issue, parties will have a difficult time agreeing on what position to take and cannot effectively communicate their ideas to the public. That is why one should examine the coordinative and communicative discourses of parties. Coordinative discourse encompasses the process whereby political actors agree on a policy program, while communicative discourse is the process through which this program is framed. To provide evidence for this argument, communicative discourse in the Netherlands is discussed.

 

2014. “Semi-Structured Interviewing: Socio-Cultural Issues and Dutch Politicians.” SAGE Research Methods Cases. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305014534172

 

Abstract: From 2008 to 2012 I embarked on a dissertation project that sought to examine how the rise of socio-cultural issues was impacting party system change in the Netherlands. To date, most of the studies of party system change have employed one of the following methods: the content analysis of party manifestos, expert surveys, broad opinion surveys of the electorate, and media analyses. Much of this literature has two shortcomings: (1) parties are treated as cohesive units, and (2) while the combination of policies put forth by a party is considered important, almost none consider how they are communicated to the voters.  Both are important. I argued that in order to understand how socio-cultural issues are impacting party systems in Western Europe, one should not only be aware of how cohesive parties are vis-à-vis these issues, but also how effective they are at communicating their party’s views to the public. Accordingly, the more cohesive a party is, the more recognizable its positions will be to voters. To overcome these shortcomings and to try and get a read on how divided Dutch parties remained over these issues as of 2011 I decided to employ semi-structured interviews. This case study provides an account of how these semi-structured interviews were arranged and gives some useful tips on how to conduct them. It provides advice on how to interact with politicians, the challenges that might arise when trying to interview them and how to deal with some of the worries a first time researcher might have. It also discusses some tactics that might be beneficial when interviewing high-ranking officials.

 

​2012. “Discussing Immigrants, Identity, and Europe: Implications for the Dutch Party System.” Open Citizenship 3(1): 8-35

 

Abstract: To understand recent party system change in the Netherlands, one should consider not only the positioning of parties on the socio-cultural cleavage, but also how effective they are at communicating their views to the electorate. This cleavage – which encompasses nonmaterial issues such as immigration, immigrant integration and European integration – has become increasingly salient throughout Western Europe and revolves around issues associated with identity. At one end of this spectrum, parties argue that government policy should be based on a more multicultural conception of nation. On the other end, parties take the position that some imagined community should be protected from the “other”. Most of the literature exploring the relationship between political parties and this cleavage has two shortcomings. First, parties are treated as cohesive units. Secondly, while the combination of policies proposed by a party is considered important, almost none consider how they are communicated. Both matter: If politicians within a party remain torn over an issue, parties will have a difficult time agreeing on what position to take and cannot communicate their ideas effectively. Through interviews with politicians from nine political parties in the Netherlands, it was found that internal agreement within parties varies substantially regarding socio-cultural issues. There is more agreement among politicians on the “new” left and right than there is within traditional political parties. Accordingly, their coordinative discourse is fraught, which results in weaker communicative discourse. This has had important ramifications for how successful parties are in framing socio-cultural policies and for electoral outcomes.