Shale Horowitz and Eric C.
Browne, "Sources of Post-Communist Party System
Consolidation: Ideology Versus Institutions," Party
Politics, 11 (November, 2005), 689-706.
First Paragraph:
Particularly in new democracies, the number and relative
strength of parties represented in the legislature is
commonly viewed as a highly significant measure of political
development. It is often argued, for example, that a large
number of weak parties reflects political immaturity and, in
any case, that it inhibits policy change and coherent policy
outcomes. On the other hand, some argue that systems
dominated by a single party, or even by two large parties,
may do a poor job of representing the electorate, and in
some cases verge on being undemocratic.1 Given such strong
interests in the consequences of party system consolidation,
we focus in this article on the prior question of causes -
of what explains variation in party system
consolidation.
Figures and Tables:
Figure 1. Ideological classification scheme for parties
contesting elections in postcommunist democracies
Table 1. OLS models of party system consolidation (vote
share concentration indices)
First Paragraph in Conclusion:
Models 1A and 3B examine the relative importance of
ideological and institutional factors in the consolidation
of party systems, while also controlling for population
size. The models show that ideological consolidation appears
to be a far more important influence on party system
consolidation than institutional factors.
|