Party system determinants of electoral reform in post-communist states

The article examines how the structure of party systems, that is, effective number of political actors, electoral volatility, and shares of dominant party votes and seats, affect the initiation and direction of electoral reform in post-communist democracies. Based on a dataset of electoral rule changes in post-communist democracies from 1992 to 2008, we analyze the frequency and direction of reforms over time. The findings reveal that the frequency of reforms declines with successive electoral cycles but not to the degree suggested by theories of institutional inertia. Countries with high levels of voter volatility are more likely to engage in reforms; however, the findings in this article demonstrate that politicians react to volatility by inconsistently choosing between permissive and restrictive responses.     

Political parties,party systems,and economic reforms: The Turkish case

Turkey’s experience with economic reforms and democratization since the early 1980s underscores the importance of the political parties and the party systems in the interactions between these two processes. The country’s experience with democratic politics and a multiparty system made a significant contribution to the resumption of electoral politics and redemocratization following three years of military rule in the early 1980s. However, the opening up of the political space and the reemergence of competitive party politics ultimately created problems for the successful completion of the economic reforms, as one-party dominance and majority-party governments gave way to fragmentation in the party system with weak coalition governments. The Turkish case is instructive of the difficulties facing countries that seek to simultaneously consolidate their democracies and liberalize their economies. Sabri Sayari is executive director of the Institute of Turkish Studies and research professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. He has written extensively on Turkey’s domestic politics and foreign policy, and on issues related to political development, parties and party systems, and democratization.     

The Nationalisation of Post-Communist Party Systems

Party nationalisation, defined as the homogeneity of party strength across a country, has recently become a major issue in research. Even though territory is a salient political question in the post-communist countries in Europe, party nationalisation in these countries has been neglected by the literature so far. This article presents data on party nationalisation for 20 countries over the period 1990–2007. It shows that the nationalisation of party systems in post-communist democracies is closely related to the territorial structure of social divisions, except for cases where the electoral systems provide for a high degree of nationalisation, or where super-presidentialism inhibits the creation of strong nationalised parties.     

Democracy,economic crisis and the problem of governance: The case of Bolivia

This article examines the political context within which the Bolivian government of Víctor Paz Estenssoro (1985–1989) launched, implemented, and sustained a draconian neoliberal economic stabilization program. The article argues that the key to the successful economic program was the political skill and leadership of President Paz, in particular, his ability to negotiate a political pact with the main opposition party. Finally, the article ponders the tensions and contradictions between neoliberal economic policies and the process of consolidating democracy in a context of extreme economic crisis. James M. Malloy is professor of political science and research professor, University Center for International Studies, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260. He is the author of a number of books and articles on Latin America politics, includingAuthoritarians and Democrats: Regime Transition in Latin America (University of Pittsburgh Press, 1987). He is presently working on issues of regime transition, economic adjustment, and the role of private sector interest groups in Latin America.     

Communist Legacies, Postcommunist Transformations, and the Fate of Organized Labor in Russia and China

This study aims to generate fresh hypotheses concerning emergent variations in labor politics across postcomunist settings. Although labor may be weak throughout the postcommunist world, a historical comparison of labor politics in Russia and China reveals consequential differences in the extent and sources of union weakness. Taking these differences seriously, the study asks why organized labor in Russia—in spite of a steeper decline in union membership, greater fragmentation, and a conspicuously low level of militancy—wasrelatively more effective in advancing working-class interests during economic liberalization than the growing, organizationally unified trade union apparatus in China. The comparisons suggest that some constraints on organized labor are more malleable than others, allowing for openins where labor can affect outcomes in ways that surprise, if not scare, state and business. Specifically, key differences in historical legacies and in the pace and ynamics of institutional transformation have conferred upon Russian unions key organizational, material, and symbolic resources that Chinese unions do not possess to the same degree. These differences reflect mechanisms capable of generating increasingly divergent prospects for organized labor mobilization over long-time horizons. Calvin Chen is Luce Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College. His research interests include the industrialization of the Chinese countryside, the political economy of East Asia, and labor politics in postsocialist countries. He is presently working on a book on the role of social ties and networks of trust in China’s township and village enterprises. Rudra Sil is associate professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania. His research interests include the political economy of development, comparative labor relations, postcommunist transitions, Russian and Asian studies, and the history and philosophy of social science. He is author ofManaging “Modernity”: Work, Community, and Authority in Late-Industrializing Japan and Russia (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002) and coeditor ofThe Politics of Labor in a Global Age (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). He is presently working on a book comparing the evolution of labor politics across postcommunist countries. We gratefully acknowledge helpful comments and suggestions offered by Hilary Appel, Harley Balzer, Ruth Collier, Eileen Doherty, Todor Enev, Tulia Falleti, David Ost, Lü Xiaobo, and three anonymous reviewers on drafts of this article.     

Presidential succession,economic crisis,and populist resurgence in Brazil

Latin American populism has been characterized as a time-bound phenomenon, part of the political revolution against the old agricultural oligarchy and accompanying import-substitution industrialization. It has been asserted that populism died with the “exhaustion” of the “easy phase” of import-substitution, and that bureaucratic authoritarian regimes were predicated on that demise. Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and Peru are regularly cited as evidence. This article examines these definitional premises in light of the apparent resurgence of populist politics in the democratic transition in Brazil. It is argued that populism is not a pre-1964 anachronism, but is predictably appealing in the 1980s. Distinctions among populistappeals, contention for power, andsuccessful populist order suggest that populism and its leaders offer a very limited alternative to the future of Brazilian politics. Gamaliel Perruci, Jr., a native Brazilian, is a doctoral student in political science at the University of Florida. He is currently conducting research on Brazilian industrial and trade policy. Steven E. Sanderson is professor of political science at the University of Florida. His most recent book isThe Transformation of Mexican Agriculture: International Structure and the Politics of Rural Change (Princeton University Press, 1986). He is currently completing a book entitledThe Politics of Trade in Latin American Development.     

Constructing courts after communism: Reevaluating the effect of electoral uncertainty

A prominent view in political science is that electoral uncertainty leads institutional designers to prefer independent and powerful courts. Yet few scholars have examined the design of constitutional courts systematically across Eastern Europe and those who have employed the results of elections held after constitutions were adopted to estimate the actors' perceptions of the balance of power prior to the court's design. This work reevaluates the effects of electoral uncertainty in post-communist Europe using more appropriate data and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to outline the different causal configurations linking electoral uncertainty to the initial judicial empowerment.     

What Accounts for Party System Stability? Comparing the Dimensions of Party Competition in Postcommunist Europe

Why do party systems stabilise quickly in some new democracies while others remain in extended flux? As a core variable of comparative politics, party system stability has led scholars to generate various theoretical explanations, but consensus is still lacking. Given its widely divergent party systems, postcommunist Europe presents an important opportunity to revisit stability's determinants. Applying hypotheses derived from theories about competition in multidimensional policy spaces, I find that they better explain variation in a 14-case sample than contending hypotheses about the electoral system, economic performance, constitutional design, political culture, or previous democratic experience.     

From race to citizenship: The indigenization debate in post-socialist Tanzania

Neoliberal economic reforms in post-socialist Tanzania heightened racial as well as anti-foreign hostilities, while liberal political reforms made possible the expression of these antagonisms in electoral politics. Newly formed opposition parties mobilized popular support by advocating anti-Asian indigenization of minority rights. This prompted the ruling party, which had initially denounced advocates of indigenization as racist, to alter its position. In doing so, ruling party leaders redefined the meaning of indigenization, shifting the focus of the debate away from racial issues and Asian control of the economy toward issues of free trade, foreign investment, and foreign economic domination. By implementing indigenization measures targeting non-citizens and featuring anti-liberal economic policies, including tariff barriers, local content laws, and restrictions on property ownership, the government faced the danger of losing international support from foreign donors and international financial institutions. The trajectory of the indigenization debate reveals the role of electoral competition and party formation in shaping race relations and national identity in post-socialist Tanzania. It suggests the need for event-centered studies of the way in which political identities are constructed in processes of conflict within the institutional arenas created by liberal political reforms. Ronald Aminzade is professor of sociology at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. His publications concerning the social and political consequences of capitalist development includeBallots and Barricade: Class Formation and Republican Politics in France, 1830–1871 (Princeton University Press, 1993) andClass, Politics, and Early Industrial Capitalism: A Study of Mid-Nineteenth Century Toulouse, France (State University of New York Press, 1981). He is also co-editor ofSilence and Voice in the Study of Contentious Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2001) andThe Social Worlds of Higher Education (Pine Forge Press, 1999). For making this research possible I would like to thank the University of Minnesota and the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, which provided support through National Science Foundation Grant #SBR-9601236. I am grateful to James Brennan, Susan Geiger, Erik Larson, Mary Jo Maynes, Marjorie Mbilinyi, Jamie Monson, Richa Nagar, Anne Pitcher, Eric Sheppard, Thomas Spear, Charles Tilly, Eric Weitz, Erik Olin Wright, and several anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier draft.     

Populism in Taiwan: The Rise of a Populist-Democratic Culture in a Democratising Society

Taiwan's democratic transition has emerged alongside a rise of populism. Based on an analysis of post-electoral survey data, it is shown that populist resentments – embodied in such emotion-laden campaign issues as ethnic identity, national identity and a party's image of interest representation and clean politics – have been the most efficient vote-getting appeals in Taiwan's post-authoritarian electoral competition between two major political parties, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the nationalist Kuomintang (KMT). In Taiwan's democratic transition, mass demands for the ‘indigenisation’ of politics and the people's worry about an ever-increasing military threat from Mainland China have also popularised as well as polarised these populist appeals. As empirical data show, due to its position as the first Taiwanese party with a lion's share of populist advantages, the DPP was able to win the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. In sum, Taiwan's electoral politics in the past decade have given rise to a kind of ‘populist-democratic culture’, which inclines Taiwanese politicians to bring up populist issues rather than the rational policy debates of an electoral democracy.     

Nation-state, nationalism, and the prospects for democratization in East Central Europe

Recent political developments in East Central Europe have resulted in contradictory and ambivalent tendencies towards the nation-state in post-communist democracies. The liberation from Soviet influence and the dissolution of the Soviet Empire have created political space for the reconstruction of sovereignty in former Soviet-dominated states. This liberation and the institutionalization of new constitutional structures has become a “national” issue. The reaffirmation and resurrection of national unity, national traditions, national culture, and national interest are current themes in post-communist politics.     

Local electoral systems in Western Europe

This article describes and classifies the wide range of local electoral systems in Western Europe. A classification based on three fundamental dimensions of electoral systems shows that there are many different local electoral systems used in Western Europe. The question is addressed whether local electoral systems matter. Two potential ways to answer this question are explored, but actual research along these lines appears to be very scarce. This means that the debate on the advantages and disadvantages of local electoral systems will probably continue without much guidance from empirical research. It is argued that careful experiments at the local level and reporting about these experiments might give both politicians and political scientists some insight into the consequences of changing the local electoral system.     

Democracy without democratic values: A rejoinder to Welzel and Inglehart

In reply to Welzel and Inglehart in this issue, we deploy three lines of criticism. First, we argue that their newly invented construct “effective democracy” is conceptually and empirically flawed. Second, we show that their results are highly sensitive to model specification. Regardless of the time period, their supportive evidence vanishes if a more pertinent measure of democracy is used instead of measures based on the absence of corruption, if a broader index of socioeconomic modernization is controlled for, and if their compound index of emancipative values is replaced by its core component; liberty aspirations. Third, we find that emancipative values are not a coherent syndrome at the individual level within countries, rendering the causal mechanism linking these values to democracy through collective action unintelligible. We conclude that democratic values are not a robust determinant of democratization. Jan Teorell is associate professor of political science at Lund University. He has published on intra-party politics, social capital and political participation, and, together with Axel Hadenius, is now involved in a project on the determinants of democratization. Axel Hadenius is professor of political science at Lund University. He is the author ofDemocracy and Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) andInstitutions and Democratic Citizenship (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).     

The Transformation of the Western State: The Growth of Democracy,Autocracy, and State Power Since 1800

This article uses POLITY II, a new dataset on the authority traits of 155 countries, to assess some general historical arguments about the dynamics of political change in Europe and Latin America from 1800 to 1986. The analysis, relying mainly on graphs, focuses first on the shifting balance between democratic and autocratic patterns in each world region and identifies some of the internal and international circumstances underlying the trends, and deviations from them. Trends in three indicators of state power also are examined in the two regions: the state's capacity to direct social and economic life, the coherence of political institutions, and military manpower. The state's capacity has increased steadily in both regions; coherence has increased in the European countries but not Latin America; while military power has fluctuated widley in both regions. The article is foundational to a series of more detailed longitudinal studies of the processes of state growth. Ted Robert Gurr is a professor of government and politics at the University of Maryland and Distinguished Scholar at the University's Center for International Development and Conflict Management (Mill Building, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742). Among his 14 books and monographs areWhy Men Rebel (awarded the Woodrow Wilson Prize as best book in political science of 1970).Patterns of Authority: A comparative Basis for Political Inquiry (with Harry Eckstein, 1975), andViolence in America, (3d edition. 1989). He is engaged in a long-term global study of minorities' involvement in conflict and its consequences and resolution. Keith Jaggers is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Colorado and research assistant in the Department's Center for Comparative Politics, Campus Box 333, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309. He is co-author with Will H. Moore of “Deprivation, Mobilization, and the State,” recently published in theJournal of Developing Societies, and is currently working on an empirical study of the impact of war on the growth of the state. Will H. Moore is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Colorado and research assistant in the Department's Center for Comparative Politics. He is also a co-author with Maro Ellena of a forthcoming article inWestern Political Quarterly on the cross-national determinants of political violence. His current research interests include the resolution of internal wars and the formation of coercive states.     

Limitations of rational-choice institutionalism for the study of Latin American politics

This article analyzes the analytical limitations of rational-choice institutionalism for the study of Latin American politics. Adherents of this approach have made important contributions by analyzing topics that Latin Americanists traditionally neglected, such as the political impact of electoral rules and the processes of legislative decision-making. But rational-choice institutionalism has difficulty explaining the complicated, variegated, and fluid patterns of Latin American politics. It overemphasizes the electoral and legislative arenas and—in general—the input side of politics; it overestimates the importance and causal impact of formal rules and institutions; it does not explain the origins of political change and often suggests a static image of political development; it offers an incomplete analysis of institutional creation by neglecting the importance of political beliefs; it cannot fully account for crisis politics; and it puts excessive, analytically arbitrary emphasis on “microfoundations.” The article questions whether these limitations can successfully be overcome, arguing that rational-choice institutionalism—while an important addition to the debate—is not inherently superior to other approaches applied in Latin American Studies. Kurt Weyland is associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of two books—Democracy without Equity: Failures of Reform in Brazil (Pittsburgh, 1996) andThe Politics of Market Reform in Fragile Democracies: Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Venezuela (Princeton, 2002)—and of numerous journal articles on democratization, market reform, social policy, and populism in Latin America. His current research focuses on the diffusion of policy innovations across countries. I would like to thank Barry Ames, James Booth, Ruth Collier, Marcelo Costa Ferriera, Wendy Hunter, Mark Jones, Fabrice Lehoucq, Scott Mainwaring, Gerardo Munck, Anthony Pereira, Tim Power, Ken Roberts, Charles Shipan, Richard Snyder, Donna van Cott, and two anonymous reviewers for excellent comments.     

Preparing for power: The German Greens and the challenge of party politics

This article argues that although there is no contradiction as such between radical commitment and practical politics, the demands of modern party and electoral politics present a challenge to radical parties. The case of the German Greens, Europe's most successful ecology party, is examined in this context, as they have faced this dilemma since their take-off into mainstream politics in the 1980s. This article assesses their response to the radicalism versus realism challenge over the past two decades, as well as considering its impact on the organizational structure of the party, its electoral strategy, ideology and policy agenda.     

Women’s empowerment and democratization: The effects of electoral systems,participation, and experience in Africa

This article investigates three hypotheses suggested in the literature on women’s political empowerment, operationalized here as increased legislative representation. These hypotheses are that (1) electoral systems manipulate women’s political empowernment; (2) increased popular participation empowers women in particular; and (3) accumulated experience gained over several electoral cycles facilitates increased political empowerment of women. In Africa, as well as in other parts of the world, majoritarian systems discriminate against women, while the effect of large parties in proportional representation systems is more ambiguous, and popular participation and repetitive electoral cycles are increasing women’s legislative representation. This article demonstrates the value of studying gender relations under democratization, even with a narrow institutionalist focus using an elitist perspective. Finally, it shows that institutions can travel over diverse contexts with constant effects. Staffan I. Lindberg is a Ph.D. candidate at Lund University. He has published on state building, democratization, and clientilism. From 1999 to 2001, he worked as an international consultant to Parliament in Ghana. His dissertation is on elections and the stabilization of polyarchy in sub-Saharan Africa. I would like to acknowledge the helpful comments from Goran Hyden, Andreas Schedler, Wynie Pankani, two anonymous reviewers, and the editors of the journal. The content, of course, is the author’s sole responsibility. This research has been made possible by Sida Grant No. SWE-1999-231.     

Debating demonization: in defence of politics,politicians and political science

In a previous edition of this journal, an argument concerning the demonization of politicians and the changing nature of democracy was raised. This, in turn, raised previously unconsidered questions about (inter alia): the discourse, language and symbolism surrounding politicians; the limits of democratic politics; the politics of public expectations; and whether political scientists have a professional duty to the public in terms of promoting the public understanding of politics. The aim of making this provocative argument – framed as it was around a reinterpretation of the MPs expenses scandal in the UK – was to provoke a debate about the existence of certain ‘self-evident’ truths, the fragility of democratic politics and the future of political science as an academic discipline. Phrased in these terms the initial article was successful as six respondents – Domonic Bearfield, Alastair Campbell, Martin Gainsborough, Peter Riddell, Klaus Segbers and Gerry Stoker – immediately entered the fray and sought to either finesse and develop my arguments or to offer a considered critique. This article discusses ‘debating demonization’ in the form of a reply to each respondent and a focus on (in turn): the politics of demonization; the politics of the media; the politics of social class; the politics of monitory mechanisms; the politics of performance; and the politics of political science.     

Presidential popularity in a context of economic crisis and political change: The case of Mexico

The study shows how presidential approval ratings in Mexico during an era of crisis have been shaped by citizen reactions to environmental conditions but also by the effects of the transition toward a more competitive electoral system. Regime transitions toward greater democracy in Latin America and elsewhere may hold important implications for the formation of public opinion and mass political behavior. Charles L. Davis is associate professor of political science at the University of Kentucky. His interests include comparative politics, political psychology, and Latin America. Ronald E. Langley has been affiliated with the department of political science at the University of Kentucky. His recent research interests are public opinion and presidential politics.     

Swords into plowshares: The organizational transformation of rebel groups into political parties

How do the features of a rebel group and the external political environment interact to affect the internal dynamics within a rebel group after it transforms into a political party? In this paper we combine literature on organizational change in parties in new democracies with the emerging literature on rebel group-to-party transformation, to develop a framework by which to understand these dynamics. Using the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) as a case study, we find that the legacies of the conflict, the organizational legacies of the rebel group, and the post civil war incentives for electoral gain, create political cleavages within parties that generate considerable organizational centripetal pressures, pressures that will need to be accommodated in new party organizational structures.