Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
Title of dissertation
The value of values:
An exploration of the communication of
core political values within coalition governments
(Work-in-progress)
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen, MA, PhD-fellow
Aarhus University, School of Business and Social Sciences,
Department of Business Communication,
Centre for Corporate Communication
Email: slbj@bcom.au.dk
LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/sinne-louise-brandt-jakobsen/4/377/1
Profile-page AU: http://pure.au.dk/portal/en/persons/id(986fc756-9597-45fd-84f2-a255e390e27a).html
Paper to be presented at the Annual Meeting of the Danish Society for European Studies at Aarhus
University, Sept. 2014.
1
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
Abstract
This dissertation argues that the current crisis for democracy is in part due to contemporary political parties
communicating unclear political values and thus ideological identities. This problem seems particularly
prevalent when parties participate in coalition governments where they are required to communicate as part
of a united coalition with a common set of political values rather than as a single party. The central
assumption of the dissertation is that all coalition government parties face a value-based and communicative
cost-of governing as coalition government membership leads to the communication of inconsistent political
values and communicative fusion of values amongst the coalition government members. This assumption is
explored through a qualitative and longitudinal case study which identifies the political values expressed in
key value statements of the three parties in the former Danish coalition from 2011-2014 (The Socialist
People’s Party, The Social Democrats and The Social Liberal Party). The data set consists of party
programmes, party leader conference speeches made both before and after the parties’ entry into the
coalition (2008-) as well as the Coalition Agreement of 2011. All data is rhetorically analysed for political
values against a developed taxonomy of political values. By conducting a longitudinal study, it is possible to
detect any changes in the representation of values in the texts and thus to determine how entering into a
coalition government has in fact affected the parties’ communication of the party political values.
Introduction
The main assumption motivating this dissertation is that the significant decrease in party attachment across
western democracies said to contribute to the decrease of political engagement and participation in the
electorate (e.g. Dalton and Weldon, 2007) is not only caused by socio-political developments such as voter
dealignment and the decline of the traditional class system (see Evans and Tilley, 2011). Rather, another
reason for this so-called “crisis for democracy” (Whiteley et al. 2005) is communicative i.e. the lack of clear
party identities as political parties have converged ideologically (e.g. Kirchheimer, 1966; Lupo, 2012;
Mughan, 2009) and increasingly communicate unclear and inconsistent political values in their struggle to
gain electoral support in a sea of undecided and disloyal middle ground voters.
Thus, the dissertation argues that the communication of party political values lies at the very heart of the
communicative challenge faced by contemporary political parties. Defined as “overarching normative
principles and belief assumptions about government, citizenship and society” (McCann, 1997: 554), political
values represent a key feature of the political party’s ideological identity (Buckler and Dolowitz, 2009: 13),
constitute the party’s moral raison d’etre, define it and differentiate it from others (see Bonotti, 2011;
Buckler and Dolowitz, 2009, 2012; Panebianco, 1988). Although many aspects such as party leader image
and specific policy positions may contribute to the final decision of the voter (e.g. Dean and Croft, 2009;
Strömbäck et al. 2012), political values also represent a key link between party and voter and a significant
2
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
variable in a party’s electoral success as people tend to vote for the parties whose values best mirror their
own (e.g. Feldman, 1988; Goren, 2005; Kilburn, 2009; Schwartz et al. 2010).
In essence, parties are value-bound organisations that cannot simply move from one direction to another if
they wish to maintain the trust and support of the electorate (Walgrave and Nuytemans, 2009). Rather,
political parties must adhere to their ideology and values and offer stable – or consistent – choices to voters
who would otherwise be confused and not know who to vote for (2009: 202). One example of instability in
the political party offering is the British Labour Party who abandoned several parts of its core values in its
transformation into New Labour eventually leading to an unclear party identity and a loss of core voter
support (Evans and Tilley, 2011; Evans and Neuendorf, 2013; White and de Chernatony, 2002).
The challenge of communicating political values in the multi-party system
Although political parties operate in a complex environment and have to consider the demands from a
plethora of stakeholders (e.g. Panebianco, 1988; Strömbäck, 2011) the dissertation argues that – from a
communicative perspective – some level of message consistency defined as the “degree to which
organisations communicate consistent messages in all internal and external communication channels”
(Cornelissen, 2011: 65) is necessary if parties wish to attract and maintain the support of voters. Drawing on
Walgrave and Nuyteman’s (2009) notion of stability – or consistency – in the political party offering, the
dissertation views the political party as an organisation who – like any other – must attempt to communicate
a “consistent image of the organization across multiple audiences” (Christensen et al, 2008: vi) and do so
through its core political values as these constitute a central part of the party’s ideological identity.
In order to explore the communication of core political values in contemporary political parties, the
dissertation takes an outset in the specific context of a multi-party system. More specifically, it zooms in on
the aspect of coalition government participation as this represents particular challenges in terms of
communicating consistent party political values and ideological identities (see Martin and Vanberg, 2008).
Multi-party systems include a plethora of parties across the ideological scale ranging from extreme to more
middle-ground parties. As research suggests that in multi-party systems people tend to identify with more
than one party (e.g. Garry, 2007; Mughan, 2009), this indicates that parties in multi-party systems –
especially those located towards the middle of the ideological spectrum – are competing for the same votes
which would logically increase the need for unique and differentiated identities. Indeed, although parties in
multi-party systems are typically grouped together in “political families” – parties who traditionally enter
into coalitions and thus must expected to hold common “ideological tendencies” – (Mughan, 2009: 415),
parties still need to communicate their unique political values as these also serve an important internal
function i.e. maintaining internal member support and mobilisation (Buckler and Dolowitz, 2009, 2012).
However, communicating the party’s ideological identity through the party’s core political values becomes
3
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
particularly challenging when parties enter into coalition governments and have to communicate not only as
a single party, but as part of a united coalition with a common set of political values (see Martin and
Vanberg, 2008).
The aim of the dissertation
While several scholars (e.g. Strøm, 1990; van Spanje, 2011) have pointed out that all coalition government
parties face a so-called “cost of governing” as they have to compromise and seek common ground, there is
little – if any – research which explores the cost of governing from a value-based and communicative
perspective. This, however, is the aim of this dissertation.
The main assumption explored in the dissertation is that entering into a coalition government will have a
significant effect on member parties’ political value communication as they downplay references to their
party political values and even communicatively fuse their values with those of the united coalition
government. Thus, the cost of governing can be significant since unclear and inconsistent value
communication may lead to diluted and unclear party identities. In order to explore this assumption, the
dissertation enquires:
How is the communication of core political values rhetorically affected by parties’ entry into coalition
governments and do the ideological identities of the coalition government parties as expressed through
political values become communicatively diluted in the process of coalition government participation?
This question is explored via two sub-questions which ask:
1) What political values are communicated in party leaders’ conference speeches before and after the
party’s entry into the coalition government and how are these values consistent with the values
communicated in the party programme(s)?
2) Do the political values of expressed by coalition party leaders rhetorically fuse – not only in the
coalition agreement but also in the individual party leader speeches made within the context of the
coalition?
Research design
The dissertation applies a case study approach qualitatively exploring the communication of political values
in the former Danish coalition (September 2011 – January 2014) consisting of three Danish parties: the
Socialist People’s Party (SPP), The Social Democrats (SD), and the Social Liberal Party (SLP).
As a case country, Denmark is highly applicable as it represents a stable and democratic multi-party system.
Furthermore, recent developments in the Danish political sphere highlight some of the main challenges of
coalition government membership i.e. maintaining a consistent value communication and unique party
4
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
identity within the “confines” or context of a coalition government: Not only did 2014 see the collapse of the
Danish coalition government with SPP leaving the coalition, the coalition also experienced unprecedented
failure in political polls since its formation with the individual parties heavily criticised internally as well as
externally for abandoning their core political values in their search for power (Ib, 2012; Krasnik, 2012;
Rehling, 2013; Østergaard, 2012). This last point indeed represents one of the key challenges of coalition
government membership (Martin and Vanberg, 2008).
Method and data
In order to explore how entering into a coalition government actually affects the parties’ value
communication, a longitudinal study is necessary as this allows for a comparison over time i.e. before and
after the parties’ entry into the coalition government. By conducting a longitudinal study it is possible to
detect any changes in the representation of values in the parties’ core political value statements and thus to
determine how entering into a coalition government has affected the communication of the party political
values.
As the object of study is political values, the data set consists of texts which are value-based and thus
applicable for the identification of political values in discourse. Thus, the data set consists of three types of
key value statements of political parties, i.e. the party programme, party leader conference speeches and the
coalition agreement (see Finlayson and Martin, 2004; Hansen, 2008; Timmermans, 2006) all of which were
analysed rhetorically for the representation of political values. For each party, the political speeches
consisted of six party leader conference speeches made at the parties’ annual conferences both before the
party’s entry into the coalition (2008-2011), three for SD and four for SPP and SLP respectively, and
speeches made after the entry and until the collapse of the three-party coalition (2011-2013), three for SD
and two for SPP and SLP respectively.
An overview of the empirical data is seen in table 1 below:
Party programme (s)
The Socialist People’s
Party
Party programme 2003
Speech 1
Party programme 2012
11 April 2008
6 September 2008
20 September 2008
Speech 2
25 April 2009
25 September 2009
12 September 2009
Speech 3
23 April 2010
25 September 2010
11 September 2010
Speech 4
14 May 2011
5 November 2011
12 September 2011
Speech 5
13 April 2012
21 September 2012
15 September 2012
4 May 2013
28 September 2013
14 September 2013*
Text
Party
Speech 6
The Coalition Agreement
The Social Democrats
The Social Liberal Party
Party programme 2004
(foreword 2012)
Party programme 1997
The coalition
government
October 2011
Table 1: Overview of the data (* the dark background indicates that the speeches are made after the formation of the coalition government)
5
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
Operationalising the concept of political values
There is no general consensus amongst scholars as to the number and content of political values (Schwartz
et. al. 2010). Thus, to be able to identify the political values in the data, the concept of political values first of
all needed to be operationalised. This was done by developing a taxonomy of political values created
inductively on the basis of close and repeated readings of six Danish party programmes representing
different points the left-right ideological scale (i.e. the Red/Green Alliance (RGA), the Socialist People’s
Party (SPP), the Social Democrats (SD), The Social Liberal Party (SLP), Liberal Alliance (LA), and the
Danish People’s Party (DPP). The taxonomy was then cross-checked against the party programmes of The
Conservative Party (CP) and The Liberal Party (LP) to ensure that it covered the political values expressed
by parties across the entire Danish political spectrum.
Based on the inductive analysis of the party programmes, a total of 18 political values were identified in
Danish parties across the ideological scale:
Political values
1.Democracy*
2.Equality*
3.Freedom*
4.Peace and security
5.Environmental sustainability
6.Economic sustainability/responsibility*
7 .Strong state
8. Weak state
9. Welfare state*
10. Personal responsibility
11.Solidarity/Unity*
12.Sovereignity
13. International outlook*
14.National security/safety
15. Nationalism/Patriotism
16.Traditional values/morality
17. Justice/Law and order*
18. Enlightenment and development*
Table 2: List of political values (* indicates that the values are explicitly promoted in the party programmes of all parties across the
ideological scale although parties emphasise different sub-features of the values)
As noted by Bonotti (2011), most democratic parties share the same overall political values such as equality
and freedom while parties also promote more particularistic values which set them apart from others. Thus,
the ideological identity of a party is found both in the combination of political values emphasised by a party
6
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
as well as the party specific interpretations of the values as e.g. equality may mean something very different
to party X and party Y (see Bonotti, 2011).
Throughout the development of the taxonomy it became clear that parties across the ideological scale share a
great deal of political values such as democracy, equality and freedom which all parties explicitly promote.
This corresponds well with Bonotti’s (2011) argument of shared political values. Other values are explicitly
expressed by all parties save one (LA) e.g. peace and security and environmental sustainability while other
values are shared by smaller groups of parties e.g. strong state (RGA, SPP, SD), weak state (LA, CP, LP)
and sovereignty (RGA and DF). However, for all the political values, the party programmes reveal that
differences are found in the parties’ interpretation of the values and the features attributed to the values.
Thus, to accommodate for the different interpretations of the overall political values, the taxonomy lists the
different sub-features identified for each value which is exemplified below:
Political Values
1.Democracy
Sub-features of the values
1A) Extended democracy (workplace, industrial etc.); 1B) Active citizens taking part in society (e.g. via
elections, grass root and peoples’ movements); 1C) Direct democracy/Local autonomy/de-centralisation
in local government – closeness to the people; 1D) Enlightened and informed citizens with access to
information (e.g. via media); 1E) Transparency, debate and openness (e.g. in the political institutions and
the decision-making processes); 1F) Based on the (Danish) Constitution
2.Equality
2A) Equal opportunities; 2B) Equal distribution of wealth, goods, privileges and power (e.g. common
ownership); 2C) No or limited distance between rich and poor; 2D) Equal worth – social justice (No
discrimination/protection of minorities/ (gender etc.) equality; 2E) Openness and trust towards other
people and cultures; 2F) No titles or ranks
3.Freedom
3A) Basic democratic freedom rights (freedom of speech, of faith etc.); 3B) Freedom of choice
(opportunities for realising dreams and influencing own life and society): 3C) Freedom from oppression;
3D) Freedom of expression (free development/freedom to be who you are/diversity/mutual respect,
tolerance/broadmindedness); 3E) Individual, personal freedom (the ability to excel and reap laurels of
own aspirations/disposing over own resources (e.g. private ownership)
Table 3: Extract from the taxonomy of political values
By incorporating the sub-features of each political value into the taxonomy, the taxonomy offers a
comprehensive and detailed list of political values across the ideological scale – and also incorporates both
the “materialistic” and “post-materialistic” values present in today’s political sphere (see Inglehart, 2000;
2008). Thus, the taxonomy represents a valid theoretical framework to be applied in the analysis of the data
in order to categorise and identify the political values and the sub-features expressed in the texts.
Answering the two sub-questions
To answer sub-question 1, the data set for each party (party programme(s) and six party leader conference
speeches – 18 speeches in total) is analysed rhetorically against the framework of the taxonomy to identify
the political values and sub-features expressed in the texts. The overall aim is to determine whether it is
possible to detect any changes in the representation of values and sub-features in the speeches made before
7
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
and after the parties’ entry into the coalition government and to explore the consistency between the values
and sub-features expressed in the speeches and party programmes over time.
Building on the analysis of sub-question 1, sub-question 2 explores the values and sub-features
communicated by the party leaders within the specific context of the coalition government. The data set thus
includes party leader conference speeches made within the specific time frame of the coalition government
(seven speeches in total) as well as the introductory pages to the coalition agreement which are also analysed
against the framework of the taxonomy for political values and sub-features. Having already analysed the
party leader speeches as part of sub-question 1, these speeches are now compared to the coalition agreement
and the speeches of the other party leaders in terms of value and sub-feature representation. The aim is to
determine whether the party leaders within the coalition government communicate their unique party values
and sub-features, those of the coalition agreement or even those of its coalition government partners.
Finally, by synthesising the findings of each sub-question, the dissertation aims to provide an answer to the
overall research question of what happens to a political party’s value communication as the party enters into
a coalition government and whether coalition parties do indeed communicate their political values so
inconsistently that it communicatively dilutes their ideological identity.
Contribution(s)
As it explores the question of how a party’s political value communication is affected by coalition
government membership, the dissertation adds an important empirical contribution to the current discussion
of the communicative challenges of being part of a coalition government (e.g. Martin and Vanberg, 2008;
Paun, 2011; Quinn et al, 2011). Applying a value-based perspective on coalition government participation,
the dissertation should also add a new – and communicative – layer to the discussion of the “cost of
governing” faced by coalition government parties (e.g. van Spanje, 2011). Finally, the dissertation should
contribute empirically towards an understanding of how the communication of a party’s political values
helps shape its communicated ideological identity.
Theoretically, the dissertation contributes with the introduction of a political value taxonomy serving to
operationalise the concept of political values. So far, no “complete” taxonomy of political values across the
ideological scale has been developed (e.g. Schwartz et al. 2010) – one which includes both the overall value
labels as well as their content to be used for the identification of political values in political discourse. It is
important to note that since values are highly contextual and would be “differently conceptualised,
depending on socio-cultural and political embeddings” (Sowinska, 2013: 793), the taxonomy would naturally
need to be tested – and adapted – to the values of political parties in other political systems and national
contexts before being applied. However, the taxonomy represents a good starting point and overall
framework for future research on the representation of values in political discourse not least in comparative
8
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
studies where it might be applied in order to identify differences/similarities and changes in political values
and their interpretations over time and/or across borders.
Since the dissertation explores key communicative challenges for political parties in multi-party systems, the
aim is that – despite being a one-country case study – the findings will be relevant to political parties in other
multi-party systems with similar party structures across the ideological scale (cf. Hoppman et al. 2010).
Furthermore, as even a traditional two-party system such as the UK is currently seeing its first peacetime
coalition since the 1930s (Quinn et al. 2011), the findings may also be relevant to parties in this particular
context.
9
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
References
Bonotti, M. (2011): Conceptualising Political Parties: A Normative Framework. Politics, Vol. 31, pp. 19-26.
Buckler, S. and Dolowitz, D. (2009): Ideology, Party Identity and Renewal. Journal of Political Ideologies,
Vol. 14, pp. 11-30.
Buckler, S. and Dolowitz, D. (2012): Ideology Matters: Party Competition, Ideological Positioning and the
Case of the Conservative Party under David Cameron. The British Journal of Politics and International
Relations, Vol. 14, pp. 579-594.
Christensen, L. T. / Morsing, M. / Cheney, G. (2008): Corporate Communications:
Convention, Complexity, and Critique. Sage.
Cornelissen, J. (2011): Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory and Practice. Sage.
Dalton, R. and Weldon, S. (2007): Partisanship and party system institutionalization. Party Politics, Vol. 13,
pp. 179-196.
Dean, D. and Croft, R. (2009): Reason and choice: a conceptual study of consumer decision-making and
voting behaviour, Journal of Political Marketing, Vol 8, pp. 130-146.
Evans, G. and Neuendorf, A. (2013): Core Political Values and the Long-Term Shaping of Partisanship.
Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association annual meeting Chicago 11th-14th April 2013.
Evans, G. and Tilley, J. (2011): How Parties Shape Class Politics: Explaining the Decline of the Class Basis
of Party Support. British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 42, pp. 137-161.
Feldman, S. (1988): Structure and Consistency in Public Opinion: the Role of Core Beliefs and Values.
American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 32, pp. 416-440
Finlayson, A. and Martin, J. (2008): ‘It Ain’t What You Say’: British Political Studies and the Analysis of
Speech and Rhetoric. British Politics, Vol.3, pp.445-464.
Garry, J. (2007): Making ‘party identification’ more versatile: Operationalising the concept for the
multiparty setting. Electoral Studies, Vol. 26, pp. 346-358.
Goren, P. (2005): Party Identification and Core Political Values. American Journal of Political Science, Vol.
49, 2005, pp. 881-896.
Hansen, M. (2008): Back to the Archives? A Critique of the Danish Part of the Manifesto Dataset.
Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 3, pp. 201-216.
Hopmann, D. / Elmelund-Præstekær, C. / Vliegenthart, R. / de Vreese, C. / Albæk, E. (2010): Party media
agenda-setting: How parties influence election news coverage. Party Politics published online 16 December
2010.
Ib, H. (2012): En voldsom mavepuster til Søvndal. 13/10 2012. Børsen.
Inglehart, R. (1997): Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political
Change in 43 Countries: Princeton University Press.
10
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
Inglehart, R. (2008): Changing Values among Western Publics from 1970 to 2006. West European Politics,
Vol. 31, pp. 130-146.
Kilburn, H. (2008): Personal Values and Public Opinion. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 90, pp. 868-885.
Kirchheimer, O. (1966): The Transformation of Western European Party Systems, in LaPalombara, J. and
Weiner, M. (Eds.). Political Parties and Political Development. Princeton University Press.
Krasnik, B: (2012): Ny velfærdsmodel til debat på landsmøde. 21/9 2012. Kristeligt Dagblad.
Lupo, N. (2012): Party Brands and Partisanship: Theory with evidence from a survey experiment in
Argentina. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 57, pp. 49-64.
Martin, L. and Vanberg, G. (2008): Coalition Governments and Political Communication. Political
Research Quarterly, Vol. 61, pp. 502-516.
McCann, J. (1997): Electoral Choices and Core Value Change: The 1992 Presidential Campaign. American
Journal of Political Science, Vol. 41, pp. 564-583.
Mughan, A. (2009): Partisan Dealignment, Party Attachments and Leader Effects. Journal of Elections,
Public Opinion & Parties, Vol. 19, pp. 413-431.
Panebianco, A. (1988): Political Parties: Organisation and Power. Cambridge University Press.
Paun, A. (2011): United We Stand? Governance Challenges for the United Kingdom Coalition. The Political
Quarterly, Vol. 82, pp. 251-260.
Quinn , T. / Bara, J. / Bartle, J. (2011): The UK Coalition Agreement of 2010: Who Won? Journal of
Elections, Public Opinion & Parties, Vol. 21, pp. 295-312.
Rehling, D. (2013): Regeringen, der snublede i starten. 27/3 2013. Information.
Schwartz, S. / Caprara, G. / Vecchione, M. (2010): Basic Personal Values, Core Political Values, and
Voting: A Longitudinal Analysis. Political Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 421-452.
Sowinska, A. (2013): A critical discourse approach to the analysis of values in political discourse: The
example of freedom in President Bush's State of the Union addresses (2001-2008). Discourse Society, Vol.
24, pp. 792 – 809. Originally published online 10 June 2013
Strömbäck, J. (2011): Strategisk Politisk Kommunikation. In Falkheimer, J. and Heide, M. (Eds.). Strategisk
Kommunikation. Forskning och Praktik. Studentlitteratur.
Strömbäck, J. / Grandien, C. / Falasca, K. (2012): Do campaign strategies and tactics matter? Exploring party
elite perceptions of what matters when explaining election outcomes. Journal of Public Affairs. Published
online in 2012.
Strøm, K. (1990): Minority government and majority rule. Cambridge University Press.
Timmermans, A. (2006): Standing apart and sitting together: Enforcing coalition
agreements in multiparty systems. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 45, pp. 263-283.
11
Sinne Brandt Jakobsen
van Spanje, J. (2011): Keeping the rascals in: Anti-political-establishment parties and
their cost of governing in established democracies. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 50, pp.
609-635.
Walgrave, S. and Nuytemans, M. (2008): Friction and Party Manifesto Change in 25 Countries, 1945-98.
American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 53, pp. 190-206
White, J. and de Chernatony, L. (2002): New Labour: A Study of the Creation, Development and Demise of
a Political Brand. Journal of Political Marketing, Vol. 1, pp. 45-52.
Whiteley, P. / Stewart, M. / Sanders, D. / Clarke, H. (2005): The Issue Agenda and Voting in 2005.
Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 58, pp. 802-817.
Østergaard, M. (2012): SF er i sin alvorligste krise. 25/6 2012. Politiken.
12