🧠What Was Tested
A nationwide reform that reduced access to public services in municipalities with fewer than 5,000 residents is linked to rising support for far‑right parties. The analysis asks whether cutting local services helps explain the geographic concentration of far‑right votes and probes the mechanisms behind that shift.
đź“Š How the Reform Was Used to Identify Effects
- Exploits a policy change that differentially affected municipalities below a 5,000‑resident threshold, creating a plausibly exogenous contrast between affected and unaffected places.
- Compares national election outcomes across municipalities exposed to the reform and those not exposed.
🔎 What Data Were Brought to Bear
- Geo‑coded individual‑level survey data that links residents’ attitudes and concerns to their local context.
- Party rhetoric data coded over time to measure how often parties tied public services to immigration.
🔑 Key Findings
- Municipalities hit by the reform experienced larger increases in far‑right support in national elections compared to unaffected municipalities.
- Individual‑level evidence indicates the reform intensified residents’ concerns about immigration.
- Party rhetoric shifted after the reform: far‑right parties more frequently framed public service scarcity as an immigration issue.
đź’ˇ Why This Matters
The results reveal how service deprivation can alter both demand and supply factors that fuel far‑right gains. On the demand side, cuts heighten immigration concerns among voters; on the supply side, parties respond by linking services and migration in their messaging. Together, these dynamics help explain persistent geographies of far‑right support following localized declines in public service access.
