Preferences and agreement in legislative parties: testing the causal chain

This research note focuses on two specific dimensions of legislative cohesion: the homogeneity of preferences within a party and party agreement. Although these two dimensions have often been considered as synonyms, it is argued that these two concepts refer to different realities. The authors therefore develop distinct measurements for these two concepts. The authors then examine their statistical relationship, putting to the test the widespread assumption that heterogeneous preferences increase the probability of disagreement. The authors do so by testing the effect of different measures of a member of parliament’s ideological distance to her/his party on her/his self-reported frequency of disagreement with her/his party. It is demonstrated that the causal chain linking both concepts is only verified in the case of a conscious ideological distance. The results have crucial theoretical and methodological implications for future research on party cohesion and party unity.     

Environmental Movements and the Emergence of Civil Society in Greece

The generally acknowledged weakness of civil society in Greece has obstructed the solution of many urgent environmental problems. Since the 1970s these weaknesses have begun to be overcome by various environmental movements. Community protests have checked many state-backed construction projects and have been helped by increasingly self-assertive forces consisting of elected local authorities, private radio stations, courts of law, and voluntary environmental associations. The last have been staffed by the growing class of professionals, especially in schools and universities. These bodies have also shown growing readiness to cooperate in positive environmental initiatives. In response, governments have shown greater sensitivity to public opinion on environmental issues, and increasing readiness to consult outside bodies.     

Politics and Constitutional Reform in Canada: A Study in Political Opposition

Political opposition in a federal system is particularly richand complex, involving not only political parties and pressuregroups, but constitutionally sovereign governments as well.This article examines political opposition in a federation througha case study of the mobilization of opposition to the CanadianConstitution Act. Introduced by the federal government in 1980,the Act proposed a series of important changes in the powersof Canada's ten provinces. The resistance offered by a numberof provinces, the two opposition parties holding seats in Parliament,and a handful of interest groups were sufficient to secure significantchanges in the Act. The analysis presented here demonstratesthe key role of provincial governments—and especiallyof provincial premiers—as oppositional actors, while indicatingthe importance of the courts and intergovernmental conferencesas sites where political opposition expresses itself in a federation.