Contextual Determinants of Electoral System Choice - Ãbo Akademi

More documents

Recommendations

Info

León-Roesch, Marta and Daniel Samoilovich. 1993. “Argentinien”. In Dieter Nohlen (ed.),Handbuch der Wahldaten Lateinamerikas und der Karibik. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.Lewis, W. Arthur. 1965. Politics in West Africa. London: Allen & Unwin.Lijphart, Arend. 1971. “Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method”. American PoliticalScience Review 65: 682-693.Lijphart, Arend. 1977. Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven:Yale University Press.Lijphart, Arend. 1984. Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government inTwenty-One Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.Lijphart, Arend. 1985. Power Sharing in South Africa. Berkeley: Institute of InternationalStudies.Lijphart, Arend. 1991a. “Constitutional Choices for New Democracies”. Journal of Democracy2: 72-84.Lijphart, Arend. 1991b. “Double-Checking the Evidence”. Journal of Democracy 2: 42-48.Lijphart, Arend. 1992a. “Democratization and Constitutional Choices in Czecho-Slovakia,Hungary and Poland 1989-91”. Journal of Theoretical Politics 4: 207-223.Lijphart, Arend. 1992b. “Introduction”. In Arend Lijphart (ed.), Parliamentary VersusPresidential Government. Oxford: Oxford University press.Lijphart, Arend (ed.). 1992c. Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government. Oxford: OxfordUniversity press.Lijphart, Arend. 1994a. “Democracies: Forms, Performance and Constitutional Engineering”.European Journal of Political Research 25: 1-17.Lijphart, Arend. 1994b. Electoral systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-SevenDemocracies 1945-90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lijphart, Arend. 1995. “Electoral Systems”. In Seymour M. Lipset (ed.), The Encyclopedia ofDemocracy. Volume II. London: Routledge.Lijphart, Arend. 1997. “The Difficult Science of Electoral Systems: A Commentary on theCritique by Alberto Penadés”. Electoral Studies 16: 73-77.Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.274
Lijphart, Arend. 2002. “The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy”. In Andrew Reynolds (ed),The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management and Democracy.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lijphart, Arend and Bernard Grofman (eds). 1984a. Choosing an Electoral System: Issues andAlternatives. New York: Praeger.Lijphart, Arend and Bernard Grofman. 1984b. “Introduction: Choosing an Electoral System”. InArend Lijphart and Bernard Grofman (eds), Choosing an Electoral System: Issues andAlternatives. New York: Praeger.Lijphart, Arend, Rafael L. Pintor and Yasunori Sone. 1986. “Degrees of Proportionality ofProportional Representation Formulas”. In Bernhard Grofman and Arend Lijphart (eds),Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. New York: Agathon Press.Lijphart, Arend and Carlos H. Waisman (eds). 1996. Institutional Design in New Democracies:Eastern Europe and Latin America. Boulder: Westview Press.Lipset, Seymour M. 1992. “The Centrality of Political Culture”. In Arend Lijphart (ed.),Parliamentary Versus Presidential Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lipset, Seymour M. (ed.). 1995. The Encyclopedia of Democracy. Volume I and Volume II.London: Routledge.Lipset, Seymour M. and Stein Rokkan (eds). 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: The Free Press.Mackenzie, W. J. M. 1957. “The Export of Political Systems”. Political Studies Vol. V, No. 3:240-257.Mackie, Thomas and Richard Rose. 1974. The International Almanac of Electoral History.London: Macmillan.Mair, Peter. 1986. “Districting Choices Under the Single-Transferable Vote”. In BernhardGrofman and Arend Lijphart (eds), Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. NewYork: Agathon Press.Marsden, P. V. (ed.). 1995. Sociological Methodology. London: Tavistock.Massicotte, Louis and André Blais. 1999. “Mixed Electoral Systems: A Conceptual andEmpirical Survey”. Electoral Studies 18: 341-366.Mattes, Hanspeter. 1999. “Libya”. In Dieter Nohlen, Michael Krennerich and Bernhard Thibaut(eds), Elections in Africa: A Data Handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press.275
Page 1 and 2:
Krister LundellContextual Determina
Page 3:
CONTEXTUAL DETERMINANTS OF ELECTORA
Page 6 and 7:
CIP Cataloguing in PublicationLunde
Page 8 and 9:
at Åbo Akademi University, the Fac
Page 10 and 11:
3.2 Explanations of Electoral Syste
Page 12 and 13:
9. CONCLUSION 2239.1 The Rational P
Page 14 and 15:
politics. Both approaches bear rele
Page 16 and 17:
electoral system choice as an epoch
Page 18 and 19:
1.2 The Importance of Electoral Sys
Page 20 and 21:
Within the range of democratic inst
Page 22 and 23:
will depend on the specific cleavag
Page 24 and 25:
Before describing different voting
Page 26 and 27:
2.1.1 Ballot StructureThe ballot st
Page 28 and 29:
formula, and the variety of elector
Page 30 and 31:
ather be regarded as a characterist
Page 32 and 33:
2.2.1 Plurality Systems2.2.1.1 Sing
Page 34 and 35:
mixture of BV and PBV. In my classi
Page 36 and 37:
Weaver 1984: 198-199). CV implies t
Page 38 and 39:
total election, often pull out of t
Page 40 and 41:
disadvantage is that it presupposes
Page 42 and 43:
parties and minority groups. Furthe
Page 44 and 45:
simultaneously avoiding disproporti
Page 46 and 47:
and Blais. They also agree that the
Page 48 and 49:
Whether one formula applies or not
Page 50 and 51:
difficult. Even an independent comb
Page 52 and 53:
attention to all three main dimensi
Page 54 and 55:
(national, regional and local lists
Page 56 and 57:
The degree of proportionality also
Page 58 and 59:
variables: ethnic and cultural dive
Page 61 and 62:
smallest category, representing 15
Page 63 and 64:
democracies. 12 Nevertheless, the g
Page 65 and 66:
(Vanuatu) are represented by merely
Page 67 and 68:
3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKIn this cha
Page 69 and 70:
ecognition of opposing views in the
Page 71 and 72:
systems. If we reformulate the ques
Page 73 and 74:
the rules, the lack of knowledge is
Page 75 and 76:
not. Consequently, their analysis c
Page 77 and 78:
proportional electoral systems. He
Page 79 and 80:
groups as possible, to avoid attemp
Page 81 and 82:
associated with certain features an
Page 83 and 84:
also called electoral engineering.
Page 85 and 86:
(2002: 14). Public opinion, often e
Page 87 and 88:
Similar reform societies were estab
Page 89 and 90:
systematically favor or disfavor ce
Page 91 and 92:
interests based on ascriptive commu
Page 93 and 94:
argues, both majorities and minorit
Page 95 and 96:
A more popular form of recognizing
Page 97 and 98:
Among the three basic majoritarian
Page 99 and 100:
politics. When universal suffrage w
Page 101 and 102:
and no electoral threshold in order
Page 103 and 104:
threatened to change the current el
Page 105 and 106:
inadequate since electoral systems
Page 107 and 108:
electoral reform is likely to occur
Page 109 and 110:
main advocates of proportional repr
Page 111 and 112:
whereas majoritarian systems prevai
Page 113 and 114:
The rational learning model sees po
Page 115 and 116:
3.2.4.1 Colonial LegacyColonial leg
Page 117 and 118:
Different colonial powers administe
Page 119 and 120:
The Australian and American colonia
Page 121 and 122:
epresented the “wave of the democ
Page 123 and 124:
The second wave of democratization
Page 125 and 126:
parliamentary elections, particular
Page 127 and 128:
parliamentary or presidential gover
Page 129 and 130:
measure of ethnic and cultural dive
Page 131 and 132:
medium size. The other 40 per cent
Page 133 and 134:
size and electoral systems, two str
Page 135 and 136:
that have previously held general e
Page 137 and 138:
The association between party syste
Page 139 and 140:
democratization process. Neverthele
Page 141 and 142:
The occurrence of list PR in former
Page 143 and 144:
Third, an electoral system must exi
Page 145 and 146:
Three matters are of interest in co
Page 147 and 148:
according to Lijphart’s definitio
Page 149 and 150:
3.3.3.2 Territorial OrganizationA n
Page 151 and 152:
to the whole territory. Countries a
Page 153 and 154:
or non-existence of an ‘additiona
Page 155 and 156:
subset of the world’s countries,
Page 157 and 158:
Concerning data on party system fra
Page 159 and 160:
22). 30 Nevertheless, the coded yea
Page 161 and 162:
(1) free and fair elections of the
Page 163 and 164:
(e.g. 1984; 1990). The index is bas
Page 165 and 166:
standards and Mauritius was democra
Page 167 and 168:
Table 5.1. Ethnic and cultural frag
Page 169 and 170:
Table 5.4. Ethnic and cultural frag
Page 171 and 172:
values. Each integer of the logarit
Page 173 and 174:
is also quite large, and therefore
Page 175 and 176:
1966, and Cyprus 1981. Suriname ado
Page 177 and 178:
significant. 36 The large standard
Page 179 and 180:
small standard deviation values ind
Page 181 and 182:
samples with changes to mixed syste
Page 183 and 184:
a consequence of the party system t
Page 185 and 186:
eplace plurality systems with mixed
Page 187 and 188:
former British colonies did not inh
Page 189 and 190:
Table 6.2. Colonial legacy and elec
Page 191 and 192:
impact on the dependent variable wh
Page 193 and 194:
(1993). All these countries adopted
Page 195 and 196:
On the basis of figure 2.1 in secti
Page 197 and 198:
their electoral systems. Bulgaria a
Page 199 and 200:
as a general determinant of institu
Page 201 and 202:
The average population size among c
Page 203 and 204:
Only two federal states chose elect
Page 205 and 206:
any major role. Regional diffusion,
Page 207 and 208:
Plurality systems dominate the thir
Page 209 and 210:
inherit the plurality system but al
Page 211 and 212:
popular system between 1945 and 199
Page 213 and 214:
presidential countries. Only Lebano
Page 215 and 216:
legislative bodies are distinguishe
Page 217 and 218:
legislative relations should also t
Page 219 and 220:
etween independent and dependent va
Page 221 and 222:
least 90 cases. Notwithstanding, as
Page 223 and 224:
Table 8.1. Patterns of diffusion an
Page 225 and 226:
other systems returns little to exp
Page 227 and 228:
extent but the coefficient is small
Page 229 and 230:
territorial organization and chambe
Page 231 and 232:
there are only two (Gabon and Vanua
Page 233 and 234:
the rational perspective, since it
Page 235 and 236: 9. CONCLUSIONThis study is a contri
Page 237 and 238: shows that countries having adopted
Page 239 and 240: doubt that electoral systems affect
Page 241 and 242: The third variable within the cultu
Page 243 and 244: 9.4 Final RemarksThe impact of the
Page 245 and 246: APPENDIX IClassification of countri
Page 247 and 248: Sri Lanka - SMP 1948The Constitutio
Page 249 and 250: Laos - SMP-BV 1953Laos achieved ful
Page 251 and 252: Greece - List PR 1958After having a
Page 253 and 254: Madagascar - Super-mixed 1960The 19
Page 255 and 256: Iran - SMP-BV 1963In 1963, Iran ado
Page 257 and 258: Polyarchy dataset between 1960 and
Page 259 and 260: Morocco - SMP 1970The 1970 Constitu
Page 261 and 262: APPENDIX IICountry (year of elector
Page 263 and 264: Country Democracy Electoral system
Page 265 and 266: Country Democracy Electoral system
Page 267 and 268: APPENDIX IIICountry (year of electo
Page 269 and 270: Country Colonial Regional Form of T
Page 271 and 272: Country Colonial Regional Form of T
Page 273 and 274: APPENDIX IVParty system fragmentati
Page 275 and 276: Proportional systems - change from
Page 277 and 278: REFERENCESAhmed, Nizam. 2001. “Ba
Page 279 and 280: Blais, André and R. K. Carty. 1987
Page 281 and 282: Duverger, Maurice. 1984. “Which I
Page 283 and 284: Hartmann, Christof. 1999b. “Cote
Page 285: Koch, Christian. 2001. “Kuwait”
Page 289 and 290: Norris, Pippa. 1995. “Introductio
Page 291 and 292: Riker, William H. 1982. “The Two-
Page 293 and 294: Taagepera, Rein and Matthew S. Shug
Page 295: Why have countries in different par
show all

Contextual Determinants of Electoral System Choice - Ã bo Akademi

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?

Contextual Determinants of Electoral System Choice - Ãbo Akademi