data | Heike Klüver

PARTYPRESS

The PARTYPRESS dataset compiles more than 250,000 published press releases from 68 parties in 9 European countries. The dataset covers the press releases of the most relevant political parties in these countries from 2010 onward. It provides a supervised machine learning classification of press releases into 21 unique issue categories according to a general codebook. The PARTYPRESS dataset can be used to study parties’ issue agendas comparatively and over time. The Partypress dataset has been compiled with the generous support of the German Research Foundation (Grants KL 2692/1-1 and KL 2692/3-1).

data access

The dataset, accompanying codebooks and citation information are published on the Harvard Dataverse. You can download the data here.

related publications

2024

Extreme Weather Events Do Not Increase Political Parties’ Environmental Attention

Tim Wappenhans, António Valentim, Heike Klüver, and Lukas F. Stoetzer

Nature Climate Change, Jul 2024

abstract url data Bib

Exposure to extreme weather events can make people more aware of environmental changes; however, it remains unclear how such events influence politicians’ behaviour. Combining supervised learning algorithms on over 260,000 press releases by European parties with a difference-in-differences design, we find that apart from Green parties, extreme weather events do not increase attention towards environmental issues. This suggests the consequences of climate change might not directly increase political attention.

@article{wappenhans_extreme_2024,
  title = {Extreme {Weather} {Events} {Do} {Not} {Increase} {Political} {Parties}' {Environmental} {Attention}},
  volume = {14},
  issn = {1758-678X, 1758-6798},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02024-z},
  doi = {10.1038/s41558-024-02024-z},
  language = {en},
  number = {7},
  urldate = {2025-05-15},
  journal = {Nature Climate Change},
  author = {Wappenhans, Tim and Valentim, António and Klüver, Heike and Stoetzer, Lukas F.},
  month = jul,
  year = {2024},
  pages = {696--699},
  data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/E9ASJI},
  dataset = {partypress},
  project_climatechange = {true}
}

2023

The PARTYPRESS Database: A New Comparative Database of Parties’ Press Releases

Cornelius Erfort, Lukas F Stoetzer, and Heike Klüver

Research & Politics, Jul 2023

abstract url data Bib

We present the PARTYPRESS Database, which compiles more than 250,000 published press releases from 68 parties in 9 European countries. The database covers the press releases of the most relevant political parties in these countries from 2010 onward. It provides a supervised machine learning classification of press releases into 21 unique issue categories according to a general codebook. The PARTYPRESS Database can be used to study parties’ issue agendas comparatively and over time. We extend a recent analysis in Gessler and Hunger (2022) to illustrate the usefulness of the database in studying dynamic party competition, communication, and behavior.
@article{erfort_partypress_2023, title = {The {PARTYPRESS} {Database}: {A} {New} {Comparative} {Database} of {Parties}’ {Press} {Releases}}, volume = {10}, issn = {2053-1680, 2053-1680}, shorttitle = {The {PARTYPRESS} {Database}}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20531680231183512}, doi = {10.1177/20531680231183512}, language = {en}, number = {3}, urldate = {2025-05-09}, journal = {Research \& Politics}, author = {Erfort, Cornelius and Stoetzer, Lukas F and Klüver, Heike}, month = jul, year = {2023}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/OINX7Q}, dataset = {partypress}, project_risefarright = {true} }

COALITIONAGREE

The COALITIONAGREE dataset maps the content of 229 coalition agreements that have been negotiated by 189 parties between 1945 and 2015 in 24 West and East European countries. Our dataset is not only much more comprehensive than previous datasets, but most importantly, we also provide the first content analysis that allows for studying which policies are settled in coalition agreements. The dataset is based on a comprehensive content analysis of coalition treaties that draws on human coders to analyze the content of coalition agreements and can be easily linked to existing datasets on the content of election manifestos (e.g. Manifestos Project) and on parties, elections and cabinets (e.g. the ParlGov or ERDDA datasets). The COALITIONAGREE dataset has been compiled with the generous support of the German Research Foundation (Grants KL 2692/1-1 and KL 2692/3-1).

data access

The dataset, accompanying codebooks and citation information are published on the Harvard Dataverse. You can download the data here.

related publications

2024

Adopting Restriction: How Coalition Governments Respond to Radical Right Parties

Fabio Ellger and Heike Klüver

West European Politics, May 2024

abstract url data Bib

Radical right parties (RRPs) have gained representation in parliaments across Europe, but little is known about their impact on government policy. Even though RRPs tend to end up in opposition, they have considerable influence on policy making within coalition governments. One expectation is that coalition governments are tough on immigration to optimise voter support when being exposed to right-wing parties in parliament. Coalition negotiations temporarily reduce accountability and allow cabinets to adjust policy positions without bearing the costs associated with opportunistic behaviour. This argument is tested using novel data on pre-electoral policy positions and post-electoral immigration policies for coalition cabinets in 24 European democracies from 1980 to 2015. The findings reveal that governments shift to more restrictive immigration policies in face of RRPs. This article expands on prior research on the influence of the radical right by demonstrating its direct influence on coalition governments’ joint immigration policy plans.
@article{ellger_adopting_2024, title = {Adopting Restriction: How Coalition Governments Respond to Radical Right Parties}, url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01402382.2024.2341352}, doi = {10.1080/01402382.2024.2341352}, language = {en}, journal = {West European Politics}, author = {Ellger, Fabio and Klüver, Heike}, month = may, year = {2024}, pages = {1--33}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/SW0WEG}, dataset = {coalitionagree}, project_coalitiongovernments = {true}, project_risefarright = {true} }

2023

Coalition Agreements as Control Devices: Coalition Governance in Western and Eastern Europe

Heike Klüver, Hanna Bäck, and Svenja Krauss

May 2023

abstract url data Bib

Many coalition cabinets negotiate lengthy coalition contracts outlining the agenda for the time in office. Not only does negotiating these agreements take up time and resources, but compromises have to be made, which may result in cabinet conflicts and electoral costs. This book explores why political parties negotiate such agreements, and argues that coalition agreements are important control devices that allow coalition parties to keep their partners in line. The authors show that their use varies with the preference configuration in cabinet and the allocation of ministerial portfolios.
@book{kluver_coalition_2023, address = {Oxford}, series = {Comparative politics}, title = {Coalition {Agreements} as {Control} {Devices}: {Coalition} {Governance} in {Western} and {Eastern} {Europe}}, isbn = {978-0-19-289991-0}, shorttitle = {Coalition {Agreements} as {Control} {Devices}}, url = {https://academic.oup.com/book/45876}, language = {eng}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, author = {Klüver, Heike and Bäck, Hanna and Krauss, Svenja}, year = {2023}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/XM5A08}, dataset = {coalitionagree}, project_coalitiongovernments = {true} }

2019

Coalition Agreements, Issue Attention, and Cabinet Governance

Heike Klüver and Hanna Bäck

Comparative Political Studies, Nov 2019

abstract url data Bib

Why do coalition parties settle some policy issues in great detail, whereas other issues are hardly mentioned in coalition agreements? Coalition agreements are important policy platforms that determine policy making during the legislative term. However, we know remarkably little about their content. We shed light on why issue attention in coalition agreements varies so extensively. We argue that intra-cabinet conflict positively affects issue attention as parties have stronger incentives to negotiate a detailed policy agenda that constrains their coalition partners. However, we expect that this effect is conditioned by preference tangentiality and the salience of an issue among coalition partners. Our theoretical expectations are tested drawing on a new data set based on a comprehensive content analysis of 224 agreements negotiated by 181 parties between 1945 and 2015 in 24 West and East European countries. We find support for our hypotheses and conclude that parties draft agreements to limit “ministerial drift.”
@article{kluver_coalition_2019, title = {Coalition {Agreements}, {Issue} {Attention}, and {Cabinet} {Governance}}, volume = {52}, issn = {0010-4140, 1552-3829}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0010414019830726}, doi = {10.1177/0010414019830726}, language = {en}, number = {13-14}, urldate = {2025-05-15}, journal = {Comparative Political Studies}, author = {Klüver, Heike and Bäck, Hanna}, month = nov, year = {2019}, pages = {1995--2031}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/XM5A08}, dataset = {coalitionagree}, project_coalitiongovernments = {true} }

LOBBYLIST

The LOBBYLIST dataset contains all the interest groups that registered at the German Bundestag from 1974 until 2014. On 21 September 1972, the Bundestag adopted a law that obliges all interest groups that lobby the Bundestag to officially register. The first register was published in 1974 and the Bundestag has released annual lobbying registers ever since. All interest groups have to provide informStoetzeration about the interest they represent, their members, their leadership structure, their affiliated organizations and their contact details. Interest groups can only enter the Bundestag and participate in hearings or consultations if they are officially registered. The Bundestag lobbying register thus provides a worldwide unique data source to study interest group activity over time. In a research project generously funded by the British Academy (Grant SG111433) and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (Grant Az. 10.13.2.109) awarded to Heike Klüver, Heike Klüver and Elisabeth Zeidler have compiled a longitudinal dataset based on the yearly lobby lists. The dataset covers all registered interest groups, their members, their organizational structure, the policy areas and economic sections in which they are active coded based on the Policy Agendas Codebook and the ISIC Classification.

data access

The dataset, accompanying codebooks and citation information are published on the Harvard Dataverse. You can download the data here.

related publications

2020

The Survival of Interest Groups: Evidence from Germany

Heike Klüver

West European Politics, Nov 2020

abstract url data Bib

Interest groups are important intermediary organisations that function as a transmission belt between societal interests and political decision-makers. However, while some interest groups survive over decades, others only last a few years. This article argues that the survival of interest groups depends on their ability to mobilise resources which is crucially affected by interest group type and the public salience of an interest group’s policy domain. The theoretical expectations are tested based on a novel dataset mapping the survival of 1699 interest groups registered at the German Bundestag between 1974 and 2012. Using event history analysis, it is shown that interest group type and public salience indeed affect whether interest groups survive. Sectional groups last significantly longer than cause groups, and interest group survival increases with the public salience of their policy area. The results have major implications for our understanding of interest groups and political representation in contemporary democracies.
@article{kluver_survival_2020, title = {The {Survival} of {Interest} {Groups}: {Evidence} from {Germany}}, volume = {43}, issn = {0140-2382, 1743-9655}, shorttitle = {The {Survival} of {Interest} {Groups}}, url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402382.2019.1662634}, doi = {10.1080/01402382.2019.1662634}, language = {en}, number = {7}, urldate = {2025-05-15}, journal = {West European Politics}, author = {Klüver, Heike}, month = nov, year = {2020}, pages = {1436--1454}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/Q5GGCF}, dataset = {lobbylist}, project_lobbying = {true} }
Setting the Party Agenda: Interest Groups, Voters and Issue Attention

Heike Klüver

British Journal of Political Science, Jul 2020

abstract url data Bib

Do political parties respond to interest group mobilization? While party responsiveness to voters has received widespread attention, little is known about how interest groups affect parties’ policy agendas. I argue that political parties respond to interest groups as lobbyists offer valuable information, campaign contributions, electoral support and personal rewards, but that party responsiveness is conditioned by voter preferences. Based on a novel longitudinal analysis studying the responsiveness of German parties to interest groups across eleven issue areas and seven elections from 1987 until 2009, it is shown that parties adjust their policy agendas in response to interest group mobilization and that interest groups are more successful in shaping party policy when their priorities coincide with those of the electorate.
@article{kluver_setting_2020, title = {Setting the {Party} {Agenda}: {Interest} {Groups}, {Voters} and {Issue} {Attention}}, volume = {50}, copyright = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms}, issn = {0007-1234, 1469-2112}, shorttitle = {Setting the {Party} {Agenda}}, url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123418000078/type/journal_article}, doi = {10.1017/S0007123418000078}, language = {en}, number = {3}, urldate = {2025-05-15}, journal = {British Journal of Political Science}, author = {Klüver, Heike}, month = jul, year = {2020}, pages = {979--1000}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/VVDOUK}, dataset = {lobbylist}, project_lobbying = {true} }

2019

Explaining Interest Group Density Across Economic Sectors: Evidence from Germany

Heike Klüver and Elisabeth Zeidler

Political Studies, May 2019

abstract url data Bib

Why does the number of interest groups vary across economic sectors? Interest groups are an important channel through which companies can transmit their policy preferences to decision-makers. However, empirical research shows that the number of interest groups varies considerably across sectors. We argue that the size and the wealth of the potential constituency as well as government activity positively affect interest group density. We test our theoretical expectations based on an unprecedented longitudinal analysis of interest groups that registered at the German Bundestag from 1978 until 2013 and show that the number of firms, the wealth of an economic sector, and government activity positively influence interest group density. However, we also find that the relationship between interest groups and legislative activity is reciprocal as legislative activity positively impacts the number of interest groups in an economic sector, but at the same time interest group density also positively affects legislative activity.
@article{kluver_explaining_2019, title = {Explaining {Interest} {Group} {Density} {Across} {Economic} {Sectors}: {Evidence} from {Germany}}, volume = {67}, issn = {0032-3217, 1467-9248}, shorttitle = {Explaining {Interest} {Group} {Density} {Across} {Economic} {Sectors}}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0032321718774685}, doi = {10.1177/0032321718774685}, language = {en}, number = {2}, urldate = {2025-05-15}, journal = {Political Studies}, author = {Klüver, Heike and Zeidler, Elisabeth}, month = may, year = {2019}, pages = {459--478}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/Q5GGCF}, dataset = {lobbylist}, project_lobbying = {true} }

2015

Interest Groups in the German Bundestag: Exploring the Issue Linkage Between Citizens and Interest Groups

Heike Klüver

German Politics, Apr 2015

abstract url data Bib

Do interest groups adjust their activity in response to public opinion? While previous studies have primarily focused on the link between voters, political parties and governments, interest groups have largely been ignored. This article therefore examines how public opinion affects interest group activity. It is argued that interest group activity is a bottom–up process in which interest groups respond to the issue priorities of citizens. Bringing together panel data on citizen concerns with longitudinal data on interest group issue attention, this article examines the issue linkage between citizens and interest groups in Germany from 1984 until 2010 in two different policy domains. Based on a time-series cross-section analysis, it is shown that issue attention of citizens precedes the registration of interest groups in the Bundestag indicating that interest groups play an important role in issue evolution and political representation.
@article{kluver_interest_2015, title = {Interest {Groups} in the {German} {Bundestag}: {Exploring} the {Issue} {Linkage} {Between} {Citizens} and {Interest} {Groups}}, volume = {24}, issn = {0964-4008, 1743-8993}, shorttitle = {Interest {Groups} in the {German} {Bundestag}}, url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644008.2015.1024238}, doi = {10.1080/09644008.2015.1024238}, language = {en}, number = {2}, urldate = {2025-05-15}, journal = {German Politics}, author = {Klüver, Heike}, month = apr, year = {2015}, pages = {137--153}, data = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/Q5GGCF}, dataset = {lobbylist}, project_lobbying = {true} }