# Publications

2017

The point of departure for this thesis is the inconsistency between national goals to conserve farmland, and the local management of this natural resource, which prevents Norway from complying with its national goals. The research question is: What role do party politics play in the management of Norwegian land resources? The state wants a high level of food security, and therefore needs land to be conserved for food production purposes. On the other hand many municipalities are experiencing growth and have needs for houses, industries, public buildings and infrastructure. According to theory on multi-level democracy the state will apply hard governmental tools when there is a conflict between national and local goals. Even though such a conflict exists in this case, I find that local politicians have a relatively large room for manoeuvre in the management of farmland. I expect the parties’ agricultural ideology and municipal ideology to play out in how local politicians manage farmland. By content analysis of the party programs I place the parties along these two cleavages and find that the political parties do differ considerably on how strongly agricultural property should be regulated, and how much power should be decentralised on issues concerning land use. Through a survey question on land use in the seventh round of the Norwegian Citizen Panel I further find that respondents differ in the same way as the parties they would vote for along the cleavage of agricultural ideology. Still, regression analysis on farmland conversion in Norwegian municipalities shows that none of the cleavages have a statistically significant effect on the local management of farmland. To find out why this is not the case, I execute a comparative case study of the two municipalities of Spydeberg and Hobøl. They are chosen through a Most Similar Systems Design as they are equal in every geographic and demographic respect, but they converted a very different amount of farmland in the four-year-period before and after 2011. Both also experienced a change in party leadership in 2011, and therefore reflect the apparent lacking party effect on local management of farmland. By interviewing politicians and others working with farmland conversion, I find that most of them consider party politics to be very important locally, even though it is not reflected in how much farmland that is actually converted. The main finding of the thesis is that conservation of farmland is weighted in a local context, not in a party political one.

Runa Falck Langaas. 2017. “New Policies, Old Attitudes? - Discrimination against Roma in Norway.” University of Bergen, Department of Comparative Politics. Download from UiB Abstract
Norway has a long history of discrimination against a group of Roma, namely the Tater/Romani people. In 1998, the Norwegian authorities officially apologised for the way in which the Tater/Romani people had been treated. A few years later, another group of Roma started coming to Norway from Eastern Europe to make a living through begging. By the time these individuals came to Norway laws against discrimination were in place, but we have seen many examples of hateful speech or acts directed against Roma people. The research question of this thesis is: To what extent do Norwegian citizens’ attitudes towards Roma reflect the ideals embedded in the laws against discrimination? To answer this question, I use secondary literature to examine the history of Roma and antiziganism in Norway. I also document the political efforts that have been made to limit discrimination in Norway. I then discuss theories on why one would think the ideals of the anti-discrimination laws have been met. I use survey experiments to examine attitudes towards immigrant Roma and find that despite the tremendous political change described in the first part of the thesis, there is not equal treatment of the Roma minority in Norway today.

Dag Arne Christensen and Jacob Aars. 2017. “Nordmenns holdninger til telefonavlytting: Resultater fra et surveyeksperiment.” Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 58, 2, Pp. 191-209. Read here Abstract

One of the basic functions of the state is to provide security for its citizens, with mitigating fear an important element of counter-terrorist policies. Policies like this may in turn reflect citizens' psychological reactions to terrorist events. Terrorism often leads to increased intolerance towards groups perceived as «different». Here, we ask whether people’s perceptions of the use of wiretapping differ depending on who the target of these measures is. For example, do citizens differ clearly between radical Muslims and Muslims in general, or has fear of terror contributed to a general distrust of Norwegian Muslims? We also ask why some are ready to give the police leeway in using secret methods, while others are reluctant. In order to answer these questions, we conducted a survey experiment and found that the population's support is highly dependent on the target group of the portended wiretap. However, although the respondents’ attitudes are sensitive to exposure to target groups, our study rejects the assumption that fear of terrorism has led to low tolerance towards Muslims in general. Finally, citizens' willingness to allow wiretapping is dependent on the characteristics of the inhabitants themselves.

Keywords: Terrorism, surveillance, privacy, group thinking, survey experiment

Staten har en oppgave i å skape trygghet for innbyggerne. Det å avdempe frykt er et viktig element i antiterrorpolitikken, og denne politikken kan i sin tur reflektere innbyggernes psykologiske reaksjoner på terrorhendelser. Forskning, spesielt fra USA, viser at terrorfrykt er assosiert med økt intoleranse og sterke fordommer overfor grupper som oppfattes som «annerledes». Med dette som utgangspunkt spør vi om nordmenn setter grensen for bruk av telefonavlytting forskjellig, avhengig av hvem som er målgruppen for slik avlytting. For eksempel, skiller innbyggerne tydelig mellom radikale muslimer og muslimer generelt, eller har terrorfrykten bidratt til en generell mistro mot norske muslimer? Vi spør også hvorfor noen er tilbøyelige til å gi Politiets Sikkerhetstjeneste (PST) et stort handlingsrom, mens andre er motstandere. Disse spørsmålene besvares med bakgrunn i et surveyeksperiment gjennomført høsten 2015. Vi finner at hvilke grupper PST ønsker å bruke telefonavlytting overfor, har stor betydning for befolkningens støtte til slik avlytting. Våre resultater tyder derimot ikke på at terrorfrykt gir lavere toleranse overfor muslimer som gruppe. Innbyggernes villighet til å gi PST det PST ønsker er også i høy grad betinget av kjennetegn ved innbyggerne selv.

Nøkkelord: Terrorisme, overvåking, personvern, gruppekategorisering, surveyeksperiment

Lars Erik Berntzen, Lise Bjånesøy, and Elisabeth Ivarsflaten. 2017. “Patterns of Legitimacy on the Far Right”.
Erik Knudsen, Mikael P Johannesson, and Sveinung Arnesen. 2017. “Selective exposure to news cues: Towards a generic approach to selective exposure research.”. Abstract

This study argues for a generic approach to selective exposure research. Empirically, we dismantle the relative importance of three different forms of selective exposure to like-minded political news that has dominated the communication literature: message cues, party cues and source cues. In a uniquely designed conjoint experiment, a large probability-based panel of Norwegian citizens was faced with news headline choices, randomly varying several different factors simultaneously. We not only show that the effects are in line with previous research but also, more importantly, that these effects are additive and distinct effects that prevail when three known countervailing forces are accounted for. We conclude that scholars should move towards a more generic and less country specific approach to selective exposure research.

Jan Fredrik Hovden and Hallvard Moe. 2017. “A sociocultural approach to study public connection across and beyond media: The example of Norway.” Convergence, 23, 4, Pp. 391-408. Download article here
Linn Magritt Haugen Skotnes Venås. 2017. “Tillit til systemet. Muligheten til å ekskludere uærlige aktører i et marked. En eksperimentell undersøkelse..” University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
Little is known about the measurement quality of questions in web surveys, even if, this information is crucial to design better questionnaires and to correct for measurement errors in substantive analyses. This paper aims to cover this gap by answering the following four objectives.
The first objective, is to evaluate the measurement quality of a set of survey questions from two Multitrait-Multimethod (MTMM) experiments implemented in the 5th wave of the Norwegian Citizen Panel ; one of the few probability-based online panels existing at this day. Each experiment is designed to evaluate three different formulations of the response scale for the topics: political satisfaction and trust in the institutions. The second objective is to predict the measurement quality of these questions by its design characteristics, using the software Survey Quality Predictor (SQP). The third, is to compare the quality of the different formulations of the response scale used. The fourth, is to compare both the MTMM and the SQP approaches to assess whether both can lead to similar results when evaluating web survey questions.
Overall, measurements’ quality is quite high (between 0.60 and 0.89), and similar between the estimates obtained from the MTMM experiments and the SQP predictions. On the one hand, we conclude that when comparing the different scales, the horizontal 11-point scale with 2 fixed reference points and ordered from negative to positive, usually, provides the highest quality. On the other hand, we conclude that SQP can provide as accurate quality predictions as MTMM can estimate the quality for web survey questions. Given that each approach has its advantages and limitations, when possible we recommend using both to correct for measurement errors, as kind of sensitivity analysis.

Sveinung Arnesen, Troy Saghaug Broderstad, Mikael P Johannesson, and Jonas Linde. 2017. “The Wiggle Room of Legitimacy in Democratic Decisions: The Case of Referendums.”.
2016
Eelco Harteveld. 2016. “Daring to vote right.” Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR). Download from University of Amsterdam Abstract

By now, research has painted a coherent picture of the characteristics and motivations of the citizens supporting Radical Right parties. Nevertheless, one of the most consistent and universal characteristics of the Radical Right electorate has remained puzzling: the considerable overrepresentation of men among these parties’ voters in virtually all countries and at all elections. This ‘gender gap’ – which can substantially constrain parties’ electoral success – could only be partially explained by typical models of Radical Right voting. This suggests that conventional accounts do not fully grasp all aspects of electoral behavior.
This dissertation systematically investigates the causes of the overrepresentation of men in the Radical Right electorate, in a range of European countries, from the point of view of various models of voting behavior. It shows that men’s and women’s differing socio-economic conditions play a role in shaping the gap, but mainly so among socio-economically more left-wing Radical Right parties. No evidence was found that suggests that men are more likely to agree with the Radical Right’s ideology. New data collection does show, however, that men are less likely than women to be deterred by both the social stigma and the ongoing association with prejudice that surround many Radical Right parties. Indeed, the last chapter shows that men are systematically more likely to vote for extreme or stigmatized parties of any political color.
This dissertation proposes we can better comprehend gendered voting patterns and further increase our understanding of the Radical Right electorate by combining socio-structural, attitudinal and socio-psychological models.

Verena Weissenbacher. 2016. “Fairness in Prioritization Processes.” University of Oslo, Department of Health Management and Health Economics. Download here
Kjersti Fløttum and Endre Tvinnereim. 2016. “Folk vil bidra til klimakutt.” Energi og Klima. Read here Abstract

Folk ønsker å bidra til klimakutt, men krever at myndighetene legger forholdene til rette.

Endre Tvinnereim and Stein Ivar Steinshamn. 2016. “Folkelig aksept for klima- og energitiltak i Norge.” Samfunnsøkonomen 130 (2), Pp. 77-85 .
Endre Tvinnereim and Elisabeth Ivarsflaten. 2016. “Fossil fuels, employment, and support for climate policies.” Energy Policy , 96, Pp. 364–371. Publisher's Version Abstract

We know that the costs of implementing various climate change mitigation policies are not uniformly distributed across individuals in society, but we do not know to what extent this unequal cost distribution influences public support for these various policies. This study shows that cost distribution is an important explanation for variations in public support for various climate policies. Using individual-level data on industry of employment and support for a range of climate policies, we find that those employed in the fossil fuel industry are less likely to support climate policies that are particularly costly to their industry, but are as likely as everybody else to support policies with lower costs to the industry. This finding challenges the traditional bifurcation between climate change "skeptics" and "acceptors." Furthermore, we find that opposition to renewable energy by large fossil fuel producers and consumers, identified in the political economy literature, is not uniformly found among these companies’ employees. The most important implication of this study for policy makers is that support for climate policies is sensitive to the compensation of exposed groups and stimulation of alternative avenues for employment.

Endre Tvinnereim and Elisabeth Ivarsflaten. 2016. “Fossil fuels, employment, and support for climate policies.” Energy Policy, 96, Pp. 364-371. Find at journal Abstract

We know that the costs of implementing various climate change mitigation policies are not uniformly distributed across individuals in society, but we do not know to what extent this unequal cost distribution influences public support for these various policies. This study shows that cost distribution is an important explanation for variations in public support for various climate policies. Using individual-level data on industry of employment and support for a range of climate policies, we find that those employed in the fossil fuel industry are less likely to support climate policies that are particularly costly to their industry, but are as likely as everybody else to support policies with lower costs to the industry. This finding challenges the traditional bifurcation between climate change "skeptics" and "acceptors." Furthermore, we find that opposition to renewable energy by large fossil fuel producers and consumers, identified in the political economy literature, is not uniformly found among these companies’ employees. The most important implication of this study for policy makers is that support for climate policies is sensitive to the compensation of exposed groups and stimulation of alternative avenues for employment.

Two mechanisms that have been shown to facilitate cooperation are partner choice and punishment, but can partner choice be employed as an informal punishment mechanism? To examine this question I conduct two experiments. The first experiment studies a two-person repeated Prisoners Dilemma game. Each individual is allowed to choose one person from a fixed group of five subjects they wish to be paired with. The individual who fails to find a partner is excluded from the group. Moreover, and most importantly, I elicit individual cooperative dispositions prior to the two-person repeated Prisoners Dilemma game and examine how different types of individuals perform when allowed to choose a partner. Results show that partner choice does not increase the overall efficiency. However, there appear to be interesting differences in the performance of individuals who exhibit heterogeneous cooperative dispositions. Cooperative individuals outperform non-cooperators when allowed to choose a partner.

The second experiment is conducted in the Norwegian Citizen panel and attempts to distinguish between the social and the monetary cost associated with exclusion. I study a one-shot continuous Prisoner`s Dilemma game where exclusion is the consequence of being the lowest contributor in a group of three individuals. The monetary outside option is varied to examine which cost of exclusion individuals value the most. The results of the survey experiment show that the social cost of exclusion increases cooperation significantly, regardless of the size of the monetary cost linked to exclusion.

The lab experiment is computerized with the experimental program z-Tree 3.3.8 (Fischbacher, 2007). Results of both experiments are analysed with the statistical software STATA/IC 14.1 and Microsoft Excel 2016.

Erik Knudsen. 2016. “Journalistikkens fremstillingsmakt: Nyhetsrammer, meningsdanning og medialisering.” Department of Information Science and Media Studies. Download from UiB
Kjersti Fløttum and Øyvind Gjerstad. 2016. “Narratives in climate change discource.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. Download article here Abstract

‘Stories’ used to communicate climate change knowledge shape opinions and preferences, and analyzing such narratives can help explain how they are constructed and how they influence us on personal and societal scales. The narrative perspective makes it possible to identify the presence or absence of typical components in a ‘story,’ such as initial situation, complication, reaction(s), resolution, and final situation, and to identify different actors or narrative characters (heroes, villains, victims). This article reviews the notions of narratives and frames, describes narrative analysis generally and more specifically how a text linguistic perspective can benefit from and contribute to the Narrative Policy Framework in narrative analysis. It illustrates how different approaches can be applied as analytical tools to explore the effects of conflicting narratives (frames) on public opinion of and attitudes towards climate change. Applied to various text genres, the analysis identifies different components of the ‘stories,’ at overarching levels of the text as a whole and at microlevels such as sentences. This may have rhetorical implications, as controversial points of view can be hidden from critical assessment through the condensation of narrative components into short expressions. When exposed to conflicting ‘stories,’ people get a diverse picture of climate change, a diversity which may, however, also lead to confusion about how to react. Concerning the narrative characters, recent research indicates that a clear hero role has a large persuasive impact. More experiments testing how people interpret various narratives should be undertaken in an interdisciplinary perspective, combining social science, and linguistic approaches. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e429. doi: 10.1002/wcc.429