Issue saliency,policy distances and coalition bargaining

This article addresses the problem of policy as a constraint for coalition bargaining. Two questions are posed: How fruitful are uni‐dimensional models for the analysis of coalition bargaining in multiparty systems? And how much do we gain by using a multidimensional approach? The questions are examined empirically by applying various sets of ten‐point issue scales. The Norwegian system is used as a case. The analysis indicates that a uni‐dimensional approach contributes notably to the understanding of coalition bargaining in the system. However, as the parties are divided along several traditional cleavages, considerable sophistication can be gained by adding more dimensions to the model.     

Are Party Activists the Party Extremists? The Structure of Opinion in Political Parties

In re-examining May's law of curvilinear disparity, this article analyzes the structure of opinion of political parties. May suggests that voters, party leaders and party activists have different incentives to participate in politics, and therefore voters and leaders have more moderate positions on issues than party activists. This article is based on the extensions of May's law made by Kitschelt, who argues that curvilinear disparities, although not general phenomena, are bound to occur in specific circumstances. We have focused on the level of cleavage conflict in the system, the variable that Kitschelt himself found to be critical for explaining party radicalism among sub-leaders. Using the Norwegian multiparty system as a test case, we propose that radicalism among party activists is conditioned by the relative saliency of different policy dimensions. The empirical analysis, which is based on surveys of MPs, party members and voters in connection with the general election of 1993, gives very little support to our proposition.     

Stalking experiences reported by Norwegian members of Parliament compared to a population sample

Background: This study investigates experiences of stalking among members of the Norwegian Parliament and compared them to findings of a Norwegian population sample. Material and methods: In autumn 2012, all 169 members of Parliament (MPs) got a questionnaire with a general section ending with screening for stalking experiences. In case of positive screening, the MPs should give more details on their experiences. The population sample responded to a more extensive version of the same questionnaire. Results: The response rate was 59%, but only 95 MPs delivered valid questionnaires. The MPs reported higher prevalence rates of current stalking than the population sample. Previous stalking rates were higher among population. The MPs had less direct contact with stalkers and used more non-contact coping styles compared to the population. Conclusion: MPs experienced more current stalking than the population sample; otherwise, the picture of stalking of MPs was more nuanced than previously reported.     

Norway

European Journal of Political Research -     

Norway

European Journal of Political Research -     

Norway: Madisonianism Reborn

This article discusses citizen control in Norwegian parliamentary democracy, and specifically the changes that have recently taken place. Around 1960 Norway had reached a constitutional form that, apart from the consequences of proportional representation, looked much like a Westminster system. From that point on, however, Norwegian democracy has generally moved away from this model. A series of minority governments has given rise to parliamentary reassertion. The Norwegian party system has fragmented, and the individual parties have atrophied as mass membership organizations. A wave of corporatism and later a heightened assertiveness on the part of the judiciary have helped to contain parliamentary power. Two critical European Union membership referendums in 1972 and 1994 have firmly established the role of direct democracy in critical political decisions. And despite the results of these two popular consultations, international constraints have become ever more significant. Compared with most others in Europe, however, Norway is a relatively unconstrained polity. There are few important ways in which the citizenry is partitioned into multiple democratic principals, and the country is a reasonable fit to the parliamentary ideal type of an unfettered hierarchy controlled by the median voter. At the same time, the trend is unmistakably one towards greater policy‐making complexity and increasing constraints on policy makers. Norway's reluctant but seemingly inevitable incorporation into a larger Europe is the greatest and most decisive of these constraints, but it is not the only one. Judicial institutions are likely to play an increasingly important political role, and direct democracy perhaps likewise. And although central bank independence has met with greater scepticism than in most other European countries, it is not likely to be reversed. All in all, it seems that Norwegian parliamentary governance is becoming at least a little more Madisonian and a little less Westminsterian.