Replication Data for: Government ideology and party priorities: the determinants of public spending changes in Italy

The literature developed by scholars dealing with policy agendas suggests that it is more important to look at changes in governments' priorities rather than in their ideology, and criticizes the partisan theory as inadequate. However, hypotheses based on conventional wisdom and normative theories, holding that the identity of the governing parties matters for the allocation of public expenditures, are still recurrent in the debate. And many empirical studies found mixed evidence on the importance of party ideology. Focusing on Italy (1948-2009), this article empirically tests whether shifts in governments' ideology and policy priorities are related to public spending changes in four policy sectors. The results indicate that shifts in governments' priorities are related with public spending changes in welfare and defence, while they are not relevant to explain changes in public order and education spending. Government ideology is relevant only when it comes to defence spending, but this influence can be hindered by veto players. We argue that these findings do not disprove the importance of partisan politics but warn us against relying too much on the distinction between left and right parties. At the same time, more research is needed to understand under which conditions partisan preferences translate into changing public policies

针对政策议程开展研究的学者所构建的学术文献指出，相较政府意识形态的变迁，关注政府施政优先级的转变更为关键，并批判党派理论存在局限性。然而，基于传统主流观点与规范理论所提出的假说——即执政党的身份属性会影响公共支出分配——在相关学术讨论中仍屡见不鲜。诸多实证研究针对政党意识形态的重要性得出了混杂不一的研究结论。本文以1948年至2009年的意大利为研究对象，通过实证检验探讨政府意识形态与政策优先级的转变是否与四大政策领域的公共支出变化存在关联。研究结果显示，政府施政优先级的转变与福利及国防领域的公共支出变化显著相关，但无法解释公共秩序与教育领域的公共支出变动。政府意识形态仅在国防支出领域具有相关性，但这一影响可能会受到否决参与者（veto players）的制约。本文认为，上述研究发现并未否定党派政治的重要性，而是提醒学界不应过度依赖左右两党的党派二分法。与此同时，仍需开展更多研究以厘清党派偏好转化为公共政策变动的具体情境条件。