The pork-barrel concept suggests a simple process-response model. It is extended here into a system with feedback and feedforward components. The feedback component suggests that voting at one election should reflect the spatial impact of policies implemented since the previous election. This is tested using unemployment as a consequence of government policy in Britain between the General Elections of 1979 and 1983.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherJ C, 1980, “Congressional-incumbent reelection success and federal-outlays distribution: A test of the electoral-connection hypothesis”Environment and Planning A12263–277
2.
ArcherJ C, 1983, “The geography of federal fiscal politics in the United States of America: An exploration”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy1377–400
3.
BBC/ITN, 1983The BBC/ITN Guide to the New Parliamentary ConstituenciesBritish Broadcasting Corporation/Independent Television News (Parliamentary Research Services, Chichester, Sussex)
4.
ButlerD EStokesD, 1974Political Change in Britainsecond edition (Macmillan, London)
5.
ConverseP E, 1966, “The concept of a normal vote” in Elections and the Political Order Eds CampbellAConverseP EMillerW EStokesD EJohn Wiley, New York) pp 9–39
6.
CreweI, 1983, “The disturbing truth behind Labour's rout”The Guardian 14 June, page 5
7.
DunleavyP J, 1979, “The urban basis of political alignment: Social class, domestic property ownership, and state intervention in consumption processes”British Journal of Political Science9409–443
8.
JohnstonR J, 1980The Geography of Federal Spending in the United States (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
9.
JohnstonR J, 1982, “The changing geography of voting in the United States”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers New Series 7187–204
10.
JohnstonR J, 1983a, “Class locations, consumption locations and the geography of voting in England”Social Science Research12215–235
11.
JohnstonR J, 1983b, “Environmental influences and ecological analyses: Examples from electoral geography”Bremer Beitrage zur Geographic und Raumplanung (Department of Geography, University of Bremen)
12.
JohnstonR J, 1983c, “The neighbourhood effect won't go away”Geoforum14161–168
13.
JohnstonR J, 1983d, “Spatial continuity and individual variability”Electoral Studies253–68
14.
MillerW C, 1977Electoral Change in Britain (Macmillan, London)
15.
RoseR, 1982, “From simple determinism to interactive models of voting”Comparative Political Studies15145–169
16.
RundquistB S, 1983, “Political benefits and public policy: Interpretation of recent US studies”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy1401–412
