for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords

Publisher: Oxford University Press   (Total: 396 journals)

 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

        1 2 | Last   [Sort by number of followers]   [Restore default list]

Showing 1 - 200 of 396 Journals sorted alphabetically
ACS Symposium Series     Full-text available via subscription   (SJR: 0.189, CiteScore: 0)
Acta Biochimica et Biophysica Sinica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5, SJR: 0.79, CiteScore: 2)
Adaptation     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8, SJR: 0.143, CiteScore: 0)
Advances in Nutrition     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 44, SJR: 2.196, CiteScore: 5)
Aesthetic Surgery J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6, SJR: 1.434, CiteScore: 1)
African Affairs     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 63, SJR: 1.869, CiteScore: 2)
Age and Ageing     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 88, SJR: 1.989, CiteScore: 4)
Alcohol and Alcoholism     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18, SJR: 1.376, CiteScore: 3)
American Entomologist     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
American Historical Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 148, SJR: 0.467, CiteScore: 1)
American J. of Agricultural Economics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 40, SJR: 2.113, CiteScore: 3)
American J. of Clinical Nutrition     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 143, SJR: 3.438, CiteScore: 6)
American J. of Epidemiology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 167, SJR: 2.713, CiteScore: 3)
American J. of Hypertension     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25, SJR: 1.322, CiteScore: 3)
American J. of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18, SJR: 0.281, CiteScore: 1)
American J. of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8, SJR: 0.116, CiteScore: 0)
American Law and Economics Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27, SJR: 1.053, CiteScore: 1)
American Literary History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15, SJR: 0.391, CiteScore: 0)
Analysis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21, SJR: 1.038, CiteScore: 1)
Animal Frontiers     Hybrid Journal  
Annals of Behavioral Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 1.423, CiteScore: 3)
Annals of Botany     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35, SJR: 1.721, CiteScore: 4)
Annals of Oncology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 42, SJR: 5.599, CiteScore: 9)
Annals of the Entomological Society of America     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.722, CiteScore: 1)
Annals of Work Exposures and Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 33, SJR: 0.728, CiteScore: 2)
AoB Plants     Open Access   (Followers: 4, SJR: 1.28, CiteScore: 3)
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17, SJR: 0.858, CiteScore: 2)
Applied Linguistics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 56, SJR: 2.987, CiteScore: 3)
Applied Mathematics Research eXpress     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1, SJR: 1.241, CiteScore: 1)
Arbitration Intl.     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Arbitration Law Reports and Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30, SJR: 0.731, CiteScore: 2)
Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Arthropod Management Tests     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Astronomy & Geophysics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 42, SJR: 0.146, CiteScore: 0)
Behavioral Ecology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 52, SJR: 1.871, CiteScore: 3)
Bioinformatics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 296, SJR: 6.14, CiteScore: 8)
Biology Methods and Protocols     Hybrid Journal  
Biology of Reproduction     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10, SJR: 1.446, CiteScore: 3)
Biometrika     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20, SJR: 3.485, CiteScore: 2)
BioScience     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30, SJR: 2.754, CiteScore: 4)
Bioscience Horizons : The National Undergraduate Research J.     Open Access   (Followers: 1, SJR: 0.146, CiteScore: 0)
Biostatistics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17, SJR: 1.553, CiteScore: 2)
BJA : British J. of Anaesthesia     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 161, SJR: 2.115, CiteScore: 3)
BJA Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 64)
Brain     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 68, SJR: 5.858, CiteScore: 7)
Briefings in Bioinformatics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 47, SJR: 2.505, CiteScore: 5)
Briefings in Functional Genomics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3, SJR: 2.15, CiteScore: 3)
British J. for the Philosophy of Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 34, SJR: 2.161, CiteScore: 2)
British J. of Aesthetics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 26, SJR: 0.508, CiteScore: 1)
British J. of Criminology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 576, SJR: 1.828, CiteScore: 3)
British J. of Social Work     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 87, SJR: 1.019, CiteScore: 2)
British Medical Bulletin     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7, SJR: 1.355, CiteScore: 3)
British Yearbook of Intl. Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 31)
Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4, SJR: 1.376, CiteScore: 1)
Cambridge J. of Economics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 61, SJR: 0.764, CiteScore: 2)
Cambridge J. of Regions, Economy and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 2.438, CiteScore: 4)
Cambridge Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.104, CiteScore: 0)
Capital Markets Law J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 0.222, CiteScore: 0)
Carcinogenesis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 2.135, CiteScore: 5)
Cardiovascular Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 3.002, CiteScore: 5)
Cerebral Cortex     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 45, SJR: 3.892, CiteScore: 6)
CESifo Economic Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17, SJR: 0.483, CiteScore: 1)
Chemical Senses     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1, SJR: 1.42, CiteScore: 3)
Children and Schools     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5, SJR: 0.246, CiteScore: 0)
Chinese J. of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4, SJR: 0.412, CiteScore: 0)
Chinese J. of Intl. Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22, SJR: 0.329, CiteScore: 0)
Chinese J. of Intl. Politics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 1.392, CiteScore: 2)
Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 0.183, CiteScore: 0)
Classical Receptions J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25, SJR: 0.123, CiteScore: 0)
Clean Energy     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Clinical Infectious Diseases     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 64, SJR: 5.051, CiteScore: 5)
Clinical Kidney J.     Open Access   (Followers: 3, SJR: 1.163, CiteScore: 2)
Communication Theory     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21, SJR: 2.424, CiteScore: 3)
Communication, Culture & Critique     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 26, SJR: 0.222, CiteScore: 1)
Community Development J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27, SJR: 0.268, CiteScore: 1)
Computer J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.319, CiteScore: 1)
Conservation Physiology     Open Access   (Followers: 2, SJR: 1.818, CiteScore: 3)
Contemporary Women's Writing     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.121, CiteScore: 0)
Contributions to Political Economy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5, SJR: 0.906, CiteScore: 1)
Critical Values     Full-text available via subscription  
Current Developments in Nutrition     Open Access  
Current Legal Problems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Current Zoology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2, SJR: 1.164, CiteScore: 2)
Database : The J. of Biological Databases and Curation     Open Access   (Followers: 8, SJR: 1.791, CiteScore: 3)
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13, SJR: 0.259, CiteScore: 1)
Diplomatic History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20, SJR: 0.45, CiteScore: 1)
DNA Research     Open Access   (Followers: 5, SJR: 2.866, CiteScore: 6)
Dynamics and Statistics of the Climate System     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Early Music     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15, SJR: 0.139, CiteScore: 0)
Economic Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 39, SJR: 3.584, CiteScore: 3)
ELT J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24, SJR: 0.942, CiteScore: 1)
English Historical Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 51, SJR: 0.612, CiteScore: 1)
English: J. of the English Association     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 0.1, CiteScore: 0)
Environmental Entomology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11, SJR: 0.818, CiteScore: 2)
Environmental Epigenetics     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Environmental History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27, SJR: 0.408, CiteScore: 1)
EP-Europace     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 2.748, CiteScore: 4)
Epidemiologic Reviews     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 4.505, CiteScore: 8)
ESHRE Monographs     Hybrid Journal  
Essays in Criticism     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16, SJR: 0.113, CiteScore: 0)
European Heart J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 57, SJR: 9.315, CiteScore: 9)
European Heart J. - Cardiovascular Imaging     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 3.625, CiteScore: 3)
European Heart J. - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
European Heart J. - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes     Hybrid Journal  
European Heart J. : Case Reports     Open Access  
European Heart J. Supplements     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8, SJR: 0.223, CiteScore: 0)
European J. of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 1.681, CiteScore: 2)
European J. of Intl. Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 178, SJR: 0.694, CiteScore: 1)
European J. of Orthodontics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4, SJR: 1.279, CiteScore: 2)
European J. of Public Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20, SJR: 1.36, CiteScore: 2)
European Review of Agricultural Economics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 1.172, CiteScore: 2)
European Review of Economic History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28, SJR: 0.702, CiteScore: 1)
European Sociological Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 40, SJR: 2.728, CiteScore: 3)
Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Family Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 1.018, CiteScore: 2)
Fems Microbiology Ecology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11, SJR: 1.492, CiteScore: 4)
Fems Microbiology Letters     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23, SJR: 0.79, CiteScore: 2)
Fems Microbiology Reviews     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29, SJR: 7.063, CiteScore: 13)
Fems Yeast Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 1.308, CiteScore: 3)
Food Quality and Safety     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Foreign Policy Analysis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23, SJR: 1.425, CiteScore: 1)
Forest Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7, SJR: 0.89, CiteScore: 2)
Forestry: An Intl. J. of Forest Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16, SJR: 1.133, CiteScore: 3)
Forum for Modern Language Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6, SJR: 0.104, CiteScore: 0)
French History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 32, SJR: 0.118, CiteScore: 0)
French Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20, SJR: 0.148, CiteScore: 0)
French Studies Bulletin     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 0.152, CiteScore: 0)
Gastroenterology Report     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Genome Biology and Evolution     Open Access   (Followers: 12, SJR: 2.578, CiteScore: 4)
Geophysical J. Intl.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35, SJR: 1.506, CiteScore: 3)
German History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22, SJR: 0.161, CiteScore: 0)
GigaScience     Open Access   (Followers: 3, SJR: 5.022, CiteScore: 7)
Global Summitry     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Glycobiology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 1.493, CiteScore: 3)
Health and Social Work     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 56, SJR: 0.388, CiteScore: 1)
Health Education Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 0.854, CiteScore: 2)
Health Policy and Planning     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24, SJR: 1.512, CiteScore: 2)
Health Promotion Intl.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22, SJR: 0.812, CiteScore: 2)
History Workshop J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29, SJR: 1.278, CiteScore: 1)
Holocaust and Genocide Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 26, SJR: 0.105, CiteScore: 0)
Human Communication Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13, SJR: 2.146, CiteScore: 3)
Human Molecular Genetics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8, SJR: 3.555, CiteScore: 5)
Human Reproduction     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 71, SJR: 2.643, CiteScore: 5)
Human Reproduction Open     Open Access  
Human Reproduction Update     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20, SJR: 5.317, CiteScore: 10)
Human Rights Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 60, SJR: 0.756, CiteScore: 1)
ICES J. of Marine Science: J. du Conseil     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 50, SJR: 1.591, CiteScore: 3)
ICSID Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
ILAR J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 1.732, CiteScore: 4)
IMA J. of Applied Mathematics     Hybrid Journal   (SJR: 0.679, CiteScore: 1)
IMA J. of Management Mathematics     Hybrid Journal   (SJR: 0.538, CiteScore: 1)
IMA J. of Mathematical Control and Information     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 0.496, CiteScore: 1)
IMA J. of Numerical Analysis - advance access     Hybrid Journal   (SJR: 1.987, CiteScore: 2)
Industrial and Corporate Change     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 1.792, CiteScore: 2)
Industrial Law J.     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35, SJR: 0.249, CiteScore: 1)
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 43, SJR: 2.511, CiteScore: 4)
Information and Inference     Free  
Integrative and Comparative Biology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7, SJR: 1.319, CiteScore: 2)
Interacting with Computers     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11, SJR: 0.292, CiteScore: 1)
Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7, SJR: 0.762, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. Affairs     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 58, SJR: 1.505, CiteScore: 3)
Intl. Data Privacy Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 31)
Intl. Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5, SJR: 0.851, CiteScore: 2)
Intl. Immunology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3, SJR: 2.167, CiteScore: 4)
Intl. J. for Quality in Health Care     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 34, SJR: 1.348, CiteScore: 2)
Intl. J. of Constitutional Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 63, SJR: 0.601, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Epidemiology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 212, SJR: 3.969, CiteScore: 5)
Intl. J. of Law and Information Technology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5, SJR: 0.202, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Law, Policy and the Family     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 31, SJR: 0.223, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Lexicography     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10, SJR: 0.285, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Low-Carbon Technologies     Open Access   (Followers: 1, SJR: 0.403, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Neuropsychopharmacology     Open Access   (Followers: 3, SJR: 1.808, CiteScore: 4)
Intl. J. of Public Opinion Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 1.545, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Refugee Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35, SJR: 0.389, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. J. of Transitional Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12, SJR: 0.724, CiteScore: 2)
Intl. Mathematics Research Notices     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1, SJR: 2.168, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. Political Sociology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 36, SJR: 1.465, CiteScore: 3)
Intl. Relations of the Asia-Pacific     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23, SJR: 0.401, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. Studies Perspectives     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.983, CiteScore: 1)
Intl. Studies Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 44, SJR: 2.581, CiteScore: 2)
Intl. Studies Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21, SJR: 1.201, CiteScore: 1)
ISLE: Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1, SJR: 0.15, CiteScore: 0)
ITNOW     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1, SJR: 0.103, CiteScore: 0)
J. of African Economies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15, SJR: 0.533, CiteScore: 1)
J. of American History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 45, SJR: 0.297, CiteScore: 1)
J. of Analytical Toxicology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14, SJR: 1.065, CiteScore: 2)
J. of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15, SJR: 2.419, CiteScore: 4)
J. of Antitrust Enforcement     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
J. of Applied Poultry Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4, SJR: 0.585, CiteScore: 1)
J. of Biochemistry     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 42, SJR: 1.226, CiteScore: 2)
J. of Burn Care & Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9, SJR: 0.768, CiteScore: 2)
J. of Chromatographic Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18, SJR: 0.36, CiteScore: 1)
J. of Church and State     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11, SJR: 0.139, CiteScore: 0)
J. of Communication     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 50, SJR: 4.411, CiteScore: 5)
J. of Competition Law and Economics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35, SJR: 0.33, CiteScore: 0)
J. of Complex Networks     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2, SJR: 1.05, CiteScore: 4)
J. of Computer-Mediated Communication     Open Access   (Followers: 26, SJR: 2.961, CiteScore: 6)
J. of Conflict and Security Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12, SJR: 0.402, CiteScore: 0)
J. of Consumer Research     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 41, SJR: 5.856, CiteScore: 5)

        1 2 | Last   [Sort by number of followers]   [Restore default list]

Journal Cover
Parliamentary Affairs
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.896
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 17  
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 0031-2290 - ISSN (Online) 1460-2482
Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [396 journals]
  • Britain Votes Prelims
    • PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx070
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Introduction: The Mislaying of a Majority
    • Authors: Tonge J; Leston-Bandeira C, Wilks-Heeg S.
      Pages: 1 - 7
      Abstract: The 2017 General Election added considerably to the rich political drama evident in the UK in recent years. A contest supposed to be one of the most one-sided of all time confounded most predictions in yielding only the third hung parliament of the 20 post-war general elections in the UK. ‘May heads for election landslide’ trumpeted The Times on 19 April, the day after the election was called—and few demurred. Theresa May began her campaign in Bolton North East, where Labour had been in charge since 1997 and enjoyed an 8.4% lead over the Conservatives in 2015. The message from the Prime Minister was clear: this would be a rout in which the governing party would extend its majority and crush a left-wing Labour Party. The Conservatives assumed that many Labour voters would defect and that most of UKIP’s vote—which had fallen by 20% in the previous month’s council elections—would head their way.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx071
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The Results: How Britain Voted1
    • Authors: Denver D.
      Pages: 8 - 28
      Abstract: In 2011 the then Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government under David Cameron passed the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. This piece of constitutional tinkering was introduced for purely political reasons—it was part of the deal to get the Liberal Democrats to enter a coalition with the Conservatives—but the effect was to remove from the Prime Minister the power to call an election at any time of his or her choosing. Election dates were now fixed but could be altered if two-thirds of members of the House of Commons agreed to do so. On Tuesday 18 April 2017, in an announcement headlined by the Daily Telegraph next day as ‘May’s bolt from the blue’, the Prime Minister indicated that she would be asking the House of Commons to agree to hold an election on 8 June. The vote in Parliament was held next day and, by 522 to 13, MPs voted to go along with the Prime Minister’s wishes. According to taste, this either demonstrates that the Act worked effectively or that it was a piece of unnecessary, even foolish, meddling with the Constitution since no Opposition could ever be seen as being so cowardly as to vote down an electoral challenge proposed by the governing party.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx059
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • How the Electoral System Failed to Deliver–Again
    • Authors: Curtice J.
      Pages: 29 - 45
      Abstract: There has long been one principal defence of the use of the single member plurality electoral system in elections to the UK House of Commons. Because it usually gives the largest party a safe overall majority, it is said to facilitate a system of alternating single party majority government under which who governs is determined directly by voters and where responsibility for what government does and does not achieve rests unambiguously with the governing party (Bingham Powell, 2000; Norton 1997; Renwick, 2011). These attributes are claimed to be more important than having a parliament whose composition represents a microcosm of political opinion amongst the electorate at large, such as might be delivered by a system of proportional representation.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx060
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • ‘We Didn’t See it Coming’:1 The Conservatives
    • Authors: Bale T; Webb P.
      Pages: 46 - 58
      Abstract: Theresa May’s decision to call an early election was clearly a foolish one—but only in hindsight. After all, opinion polls had been showing the Conservatives way ahead of Labour for months and they had not long before chalked up the first by-election gain from the opposition by a governing party for thirty-five years. Moreover, on almost every leadership measure one cared to mention, Mrs May was beating Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn hands down. And if anyone had counselled her to wait for the results of local election results before deciding, they could easily have been accused of looking unduly cautious: in the event, in England and Wales the Conservatives gained nearly 400 seats, Labour lost nearly 250 and UKIP over 140, while the much-anticipated Liberal Democrat revival came to nothing; north of the border, Labour and the SNP both lost support, allowing the Conservatives to claim second place. Hardly surprising, then, that all the talk was not of whether May would win but by how many seats, and what would that mean both for Brexit and the future of the Labour Party.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx061
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • ‘Jez, We Can!’ Labour’s Campaign: Defeat with a Taste of
    • Authors: Goes E.
      Pages: 59 - 71
      Abstract: When on the BBC election-night programme David Dimbleby announced that the exit poll predicted a hung parliament, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn just smiled. He had reasons to be cautious. For months, the chatter in Westminster was about Labour’s fatal decline. A hung parliament did not feature in this scenario. But voters, a more imaginative bunch than pollsters and pundits, had a surprise in store. Instead of facing a crushing defeat Labour lost the election but by a much smaller margin than anticipated. The party increased its share of the vote from 2015 by almost 10% to 40%, its highest since 2005 and saw 262 MPs elected (30 more than in the previous election). It was the first time since 1997 that Labour increased its representation in the House of Commons. Considering the disastrous results obtained at the 2015 general election and at the local elections of May 2017, winning those extra 30 seats was a considerable achievement. Conservative safe seats like Kensington, Battersea, Canterbury, Portsmouth South and Stroud were not even on the list of the party’s top target seats, and yet Labour won them. Similarly, there were signs of a Labour recovery in Scotland. In 2015, the party lost all but one of its 41 seats, but two years later it retained Edinburgh South and won back East Lothian, Midlothian, Glasgow North East, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx062
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The Liberal Democrats: Green Shoots of Recovery or Still on Life
    • Authors: Cutts D; Russell A.
      Pages: 72 - 90
      Abstract: Responding to Theresa May’s decision to call a snap general election, Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron was in upbeat mood, proclaiming it ‘your chance to change the direction of your country … if you want to avoid a disastrous Hard Brexit … if you want to keep Britain in the Single Market … if you want a Britain that is open, tolerant and united, this is your chance’ (quoted in Osborne, 2017). The Liberal Democrats had some good reasons to feel positive. Two years previously the party had been utterly humiliated at the ballot box following five years in coalition government with the Conservatives. Driven out of natural heartlands and only 25,000 votes from total wipe out, the party was left with a rump of eight MPs, most with precarious majorities (Cutts and Russell, 2015).
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx063
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The Rug Pulled from Under Them: UKIP and the Greens
    • Authors: Dennison J.
      Pages: 91 - 108
      Abstract: The two parties that lost the most votes at the 2017 General Election were the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and the Greens. This contribution considers the causes of the decline of each party. I show that neither was able to find a clear role in the party system following the EU referendum and the election of Jeremy Corbyn, respectively. These two events robbed UKIP and the Greens of their primary appeal to voters, resulting in losses in membership, less media interest and, in the case of UKIP, internal disunity. In response, both parties attempted to strike an awkward balance between three campaigning approaches: advocating or emphasising new policies, retaining their claim as the original and bona fide voice of their key policy, and suggesting electoral cooperation with ideologically congruent elements of, respectively, the pro-Brexit Conservatives and Corbyn-led Labour Party. However, once the election was called, neither party was in a position either to campaign effectively against or negotiate with their rivals for votes, leading to a second sudden decline for both, as both the right and left of the British electorate reunified around the Conservatives and Labour respectively.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx064
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Referendums as Critical Junctures' Scottish Voting in British
    • Authors: Henderson A; Mitchell J.
      Pages: 109 - 124
      Abstract: It has been a turbulent time in Scottish politics. Voters have been to the polls seven times since May 2014, twice in constitutional referendums that offered seismic change. While Scots voted to Remain in the UK in 2014 and voted to stay in Europe in 2016, the prospect of a second independence referendum remains and it appears that Scotland will leave the EU with the rest of the UK. The change a majority rejected in 2014 might yet occur, and the change only a minority wanted in 2016 appears guaranteed. The 2015 Westminster election saw a dramatic increase in Scottish National Party (SNP) support, marking the end of Labour dominance among Scottish MPs, with the SNP finally replicating its status in Scottish electoral politics evident in Holyrood elections since 2007. This chapter explores the impact of the Scottish and Brexit referendum votes upon the 2017 Westminster election in Scotland. It considers the literature on elections in multi-level polities and assesses the respective importance of parties, leaders, and critical junctures to explain the 2017 UK General Election result in Scotland. Using data from the 2014-2015 Scottish Referendum Study and the 2016-2017 Scottish Election Study, we evaluate the claim that the two referendums have served as critical junctures in Scottish electoral politics.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx065
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The Election in Wales: Campaign and Party Performance
    • Authors: Bradbury J.
      Pages: 125 - 138
      Abstract: Theresa May’s decision to call a general election was apparently taken while on a North Wales walking holiday at Easter 2017. The problems of having a small parliamentary majority were mounting and the polls looked strong enough to conclude that winning a larger majority was likely if an election was held. Looking across Wales she would have known that there were prospects for gains even in this Labour stronghold. Labour still held 25 of Wales’ 40 seats, but the 2010 and 2015 elections had given them vote shares of 36.2% and 36.9% respectively, their two worst results in Wales since 1918. Meanwhile the Conservative vote share had risen to 27.2% by 2015, and, after taking four seats from Labour in 2010 and a further two in 2015, they held 11 seats (Bradbury, 2015). Given Jeremy Corbyn’s apparent unpopularity with many traditional Labour voters it seemed a particularly propitious time for the Conservatives to go for further gains.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx066
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Northern Ireland: Double Triumph for the Democratic Unionist Party
    • Authors: Tonge J; Evans J.
      Pages: 139 - 154
      Abstract: The General Election result in Northern Ireland impacted across the UK. The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) enjoyed a double victory. It extended dominance of the unionist community and collected a bigger prize as its ten MPs (a record tally) held a pivotal position at Westminster. In holding the balance of power in the House of Commons, the DUP was not shy in articulating its price for supporting the otherwise friendless Conservative government in key votes, extracting £1 billion of new funding for Northern Ireland. The DUP’s hegemonic position within its unionist constituency was matched by Sinn Féin’s obliteration of its Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) rival within the nationalist community, but without any obvious reward for republicans. At a time of considerable instability, with Northern Ireland’s political institutions undergoing one of their episodic crises, unionist and nationalist voters overwhelmingly backed the dominant representative forces within their respective ethno-national blocs. This analysis of the election draws upon data from the 2017 Economic and Social Research Council’s Northern Ireland General Election study to examine why the DUP and Sinn Féin dominated the contest and looks at the implications of the outcome in Northern Ireland and at Westminster.11
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx067
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The Brexit Context
    • Authors: Hagemann S.
      Pages: 155 - 170
      Abstract: After the vote for Brexit in the United Kingdom referendum in 2016 and the victory of Donald Trump in the United States, the European Union (EU) faced a make-it-or-break-it moment as it embarked on a year of national elections in key member states: the electorate in the Netherlands voted in March 2017; France went to the ballot box for the presidential and legislative elections in April/May and June; the British also cast their vote in June; Germany held elections in September and the Czech Republic their legislative election in October (Figure 10.1). In each of these elections, the EU was a crucial issue for the candidates and parties. Indeed, in today’s Europe, governments and opposition parties are—at least partly—judged by their electorates based on their stance on EU membership and policies. There is some variation in how this is played out across countries (Hobolt, 2016), but after this year’s round of elections there is no doubt that national governments’ attitudes towards the European Union play an important role at election time.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx054
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Party Finance
    • Authors: Fisher J.
      Pages: 171 - 188
      Abstract: With an election having taken place only two years beforehand, there may have been an expectation that little would change in terms of party finance. Yet the period between the 2015 and the 2017 elections demonstrated a surprising amount of change. There were new laws and policies related to party finance and much uncertainty about the legitimacy of some election spending. Moreover, as other chapters also show, the two main opposition parties were fundamentally changed—not only in terms of leading personnel—but also in respect of financial prowess, largely due to an influx of new members and supporters. But despite change, there was also continuity. The national campaign continued to be subsumed into playing a supporting role for the battles in the constituencies, and the growth of digital campaigning continued, though it was still far from the dominant mode of campaigning, especially in terms of expenditure. And, by polling day, ‘normal service’ was resumed in terms of party income and expenditure, with the Conservatives able to raise significant sums once the election was called. But all of this should also be contextualised by the sudden calling of the election. As this chapter shows, its unexpected nature impacted significantly on parties’ spending decisions and their ability to use their money effectively.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx055
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Digital Campaigning: The Rise of Facebook and Satellite Campaigns
    • Authors: Dommett K; Temple L.
      Pages: 189 - 202
      Abstract: Studies of digital campaigning have revealed substantial change in the nature of political campaigns. Tracing the rise of email, party websites, social media, online videos and gamification, scholars have shown how, since the 1990s, parties have become heavily dependent on digital technology (Gibson, 2015). In this chapter we focus on two elements of the 2017 digital campaign: Facebook advertising and what we term ‘satellite campaigns’. Whilst resisting claims of revolution and transformational change (Kreiss, 2010, Williamson, Miller and Fallon, 2010) we nevertheless argue that these digital practices have important implications for parties’ organisational structures, practices and behaviour, as well as for public expectations of campaigning. Through this analysis we contend that the 2017 general election provides further evidence that ‘digital media are reconfiguring party-related engagement’ (Vaccari and Valeriani, 2016, p. 295), and agree with Gibson (2015, p. 191) that by ‘chaf[ing] against embedded organisational routines and norms’ these developments challenge established understandings of parties’ campaign strategies.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx056
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Out with the Old, In with the New' The Media Campaign
    • Authors: Ward S; Wring D.
      Pages: 203 - 221
      Abstract: The 2017 General Election will likely be remembered as the campaign where the once dominant forms of TV and print journalism were challenged by digital platforms. This chapter analyses this development while also acknowledging that social media networks do not operate in isolation from their more traditional counterparts and content is often shared between them. That said, digital networks did provide Labour Party supporters with significant opportunities to challenge and rebut claims made by the Conservative-dominated press during this campaign. A significant amount of this material focused on the merits (or not) of the two major rival parties and most especially their leaders. In comparison, other politicians received considerably less attention than in 2015.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx057
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • The (Anti-)Politics of the General Election: Funnelling Frustration in a
           Divided Democracy
    • Authors: Flinders M.
      Pages: 222 - 236
      Abstract: ‘All general elections are interesting; some are surprising; only a few can be described as astonishing,’ David Denver notes in his contribution to this volume, ‘The latter certainly applies to 2017.’ This is certainly true but what also made the election remarkable was the emergence of anti-political sentiment as a key resource for a mainstream party, channelled through a particular blend of hybrid populism. To develop this argument and dissect what might be termed the (anti-) politics of the General Election this chapter is divided into three sections. The first section seeks to place the General Election within its broader historical and comparative context and places particular emphasis on the post-Brexit collapse of UKIP and how this changed the political landscape in ways that Labour would later exploit. The second section develops this argument by arguing that ‘the Corbyn effect’ was essentially synonymous with the adoption of a populist strategy that sought to re-frame the Labour Party as a fresh, new, anti-political, anti-establishment ‘outsider’ party. This re-positioning of the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn represents arguably the most ‘astonishing’ element of the 2017 General Election and helps explain how the party exceeded expectations to secure ‘a glorious defeat’. The final section reflects on the long-terms risks of this strategy in terms of the perils of playing with populism.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx058
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • More Stable than Strong: Women’s Representation, Voters and Issues
    • Authors: Harmer E; Southern R.
      Pages: 237 - 254
      Abstract: Theresa May’s unexpected accession to the Tory leadership after the historic EU Referendum meant that for the first time since 1987, the General Election was called and contested by a female Prime Minister. The election was notable therefore for an abundance of leading female figures, more so than any previous election. May and Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish National Party (SNP) leader, dominated the post-Brexit narrative for some months (their meeting on the subject leading to the controversial ‘Legs-it’ front page in the Daily Mail) whilst female leaders such as Leanne Wood (Plaid Cymru), Arlene Foster (Democratic Unionist Party) and Caroline Lucas (co-leader of The Green Party) also formed part of the campaign. Despite repeated assurances to the contrary, May called the election after formally triggering Article 50 and just eight weeks prior to the opening of negotiations to establish a deal to leave the EU. May sought to present herself as a strong and competent leader who would make use of her reputation as a ‘bloody difficult woman’ to negotiate the best deal possible. Our analysis assesses the importance placed on women during the campaign by firstly discussing how women were portrayed. We then go on to discuss the parties’ attempts to appeal to women voters through an analysis of their manifesto offerings, before discussing how women actually voted. Finally, we analyse the extent to which the representation of women in parliament was altered as a result of the election.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx072
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Young Voters
    • Authors: Harrison S.
      Pages: 255 - 266
      Abstract: The non-participatory and participatory aspects of the electoral behaviour of young British people have attracted considerable attention. The discussion of young citizens in elections has mostly focused on their chronically low levels of mobilisation. However, in the context of the General Election 2017, young people were under the spotlight for different reasons, including the party preference gap between young and other voters. Differences in youth voting compared to older voters were also evident in the 2016 Brexit Referendum. The Scottish Independence Referendum of 2014 brought new salience to the debate on giving 16 year olds the right to vote—they were allowed to in the UK for the first time —as most exercised their newly-awarded franchise in that campaign and many appeared to be politically engaged. The estimated turnout of 75% for 16 and 17 year olds compared to 54% of 18-24 year olds. It was unsurprising that, in the weeks leading up to the unanticipated General Election of 2017, the intentions and expected turnout of young people were closely scrutinised. Indeed, discrepancies between pollsters’ forecasts were even largely attributed to the question of whether young people would vote in as high numbers as they were promising.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx068
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
  • Conclusion: An Election that Satisfied Few and Solved Little
    • Authors: Tonge J; Leston-Bandeira C, Wilks-Heeg S.
      Pages: 267 - 276
      Abstract: Rarely can a partial election victory have felt so akin to a defeat for a party. As the Conservatives scrambled in the aftermath to clinch an expensive deal with their only friends at Westminster, the Democratic Unionist Party, they ruefully reflected on how their majority had been mislaid. A Prime Minister who had called an unnecessary election had witnessed her Party’s apparently unassailable position at the outset of the contest eroded. The Conservatives’ lead over Labour diminished almost daily; ditto her lead over Jeremy Corbyn. An election without reason, an awful campaign and an uninspiring manifesto combined to provide the hollowest of partial victories.
      PubDate: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx069
      Issue No: Vol. 71, No. suppl_1 (2018)
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Your IP address:
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-