Party Groups and Policy Positions in the European Parliament



Party Positions in the EP -- p8

asked to locate each party on a scale measuring the importance of the policy dimension to the
party in question. In a significant extension of the Laver
and Hunt approach, we also asked
experts to locate all parties on a general left-right dimension. A full list of the question
wordings and dimensions is provided in Appendix A.

In addition to locating each politically significant party on each scale, the questionnaire
also asked respondents to indicate the relative importance of the issue to each party (also on a
1
-20 point scale). This provides a position-independent measure of the salience of the issue
for a particular party group, and may be used along with party group seat share to construct a
measure of the overall political salience of a particular policy dimension.

4. Results: Policy positioning in the EP

Left-Right Positioning

A full statistical summary of the results of the expert locations of the party groups on each
policy dimension is presented in Table 2. The first row shows the mean score, followed by the
standard error (SE), the standard deviation, and the number of respondents for each party on
each dimension. The party groups are presented from left to right according to their mean
values on the general left-right dimension, and are ranked following the left-right dimension
by descending order of overall salience (see Table 3 below).

[Table 2 about here]

At the far left of the political spectrum is the European United Left/Nordic Green Left
(GUE), with a mean value of 3.6 (SE .51), followed by the Greens (Verts) at 5.1 (SE .36). The
three largest party groups, the Party of European Socialists (PES), the European Liberal and
Democrat Reform Party (ELDR), and the European People’s Party (EPP) occupied positions
on the left-of-cent
re, centre, and right-of-centre respectively. The PES scored 7.4 (SE .30), the
ELDR 11.8 (SE .43) and the EPP 12.6 (SE .39). On the farther right appear the Union for a
Europe of Nations (UEN), scoring 16.5 (.58), and the Group for a Europe of Democracies and
Diversities (EDD) at 17.1 (SE .49).

In Figure 1 we illustrate these positions graphically. Each point represents a party’s left-
right mean judgment, and with the bars representing the 95% confidence interval. The left-



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. Delivering job search services in rural labour markets: the role of ICT
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Integration, Regional Specialization and Growth Differentials in EU Acceding Countries: Evidence from Hungary
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES
10. Human Resource Management Practices and Wage Dispersion in U.S. Establishments
11. LOCAL CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE
12. Benchmarking Regional Innovation: A Comparison of Bavaria, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
13. Orientation discrimination in WS 2
14. The name is absent
15. Two-Part Tax Controls for Forest Density and Rotation Time
16. The name is absent
17. Perfect Regular Equilibrium
18. A Brief Introduction to the Guidance Theory of Representation
19. On s-additive robust representation of convex risk measures for unbounded financial positions in the presence of uncertainty about the market model
20. Secondary stress in Brazilian Portuguese: the interplay between production and perception studies