Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Public Choice 1-2/2015

01.01.2015

Explaining party ideological stances

verfasst von: Luigi Curini

Erschienen in: Public Choice | Ausgabe 1-2/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

We apply the iterative algorithm by Merrill and Adams (Political Analysis 9:347–361, 2001) to compute the optimal positions of vote-maximizing parties along a one-dimensional space for a large number of elections. This allows us to systematically evaluate factors that push parties toward more centrifugal locations in equilibrium. Our findings largely corroborate expectations suggested by the theoretical literature, albeit with one notable exception: the relative size of a partisan constituency reduces, rather than enhances, the likelihood of a party having an extreme optimal position. We then compare derived equilibrium positions with actual party positions, with the aim of understanding the nature of electoral incentives and offering insights about party-system competition. In particular, we show that the age of a party, the party family to which it belongs, post-election expectations, and internal rules for candidate and leader selection, are all factors that increase the probability of a party approaching the position predicted by pure vote-maximizing considerations.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
A third approach to investigating party positioning determines the most promising strategy that a party can adopt to improve its vote-share across elections (Budge 1994; Laver and Sergenti 2012).
 
2
Assuming that electors employ a proximity criterion when choosing among parties is not the only way to represent electors’ choices in a spatial framework. Possible alternatives include assuming that voters discount parties’ policy positions (Kedar 2002; Merrill and Grofman 1999), that they vote in a directional way (Rabinowitz and Macdonald 1989) and that they anticipate the impact of electoral rules (Calvo and Hellwig 2011).
 
3
Parties should converge toward the mean of the distribution of voters assuming a stochastic model, as in our case (Lin et al. 1999).
 
4
This assumes no abstention. If abstention is permitted, parties may seek extreme positions to induce extreme, alienated citizens to vote if they are likely to vote for the party (e.g., Chapter 8 in Adams et al. 2005).
 
5
Data and documentation can be downloaded from http://​www.​cses.​org.
 
6
CL has been criticized for imposing the independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) property on voter choice (Alvarez and Nagler 1998). Dow and Endersby (2004) show that for most applications, the IIA assumption is not as restrictive as it might appear at first. We also estimated a generalized extreme value model for each country that relaxes the IIA assumption. Our findings are not affected by this choice.
 
7
The Merrill-Adams algorithm always converges to a unique equilibrium for each election survey in the CSES dataset that we analyze. This result is not surprising given that a unique equilibrium typically exists for versions of the voting model depicted in (1) that include a party identification term. See Adams et al. (2005, Appendix 4.1) for a proof of the conditions that guarantee the existence and uniqueness of Nash equilibria for each party k.
 
8
Replicating our analysis while employing a multilevel model that explicitly considers the hierarchical structure of our data does not alter any of our findings. The results are available upon request.
 
9
The correlation between PARTISAN SHARE and the actual vote share of a party is 0.88. Therefore, larger parties also have larger values of PARTISAN SHARE.
 
10
This is no longer true if we assume policy-seeking parties, that is, parties that seek office to implement their desired policies rather than proposing policies to maximize their vote shares. In this case, parties will offer more radical policies as their valence images improve (as long as those parties have non-centrist preferences) because their superior valence images give such parties the electoral leeway to announce policies that reflect their sincere beliefs (Adams and Merrill 2007; Adams et al. 2013).
 
11
Interestingly, this value is surprisingly close to the ones observed in Adams et al.’s (2005) simulation analysis.
 
12
Indeed, in our dataset, approximately 91 % of the observations have an actual position that is more centrifugal than the corresponding optimal position. This is a common finding in the literature (Adams et al. 2005).
 
13
Following Curini and Hino (2012), the variable CABINET HABITS also takes a value of 1 when a minority government was in place in any of the four legislatures preceding the CSES survey.
 
14
In Model 6, the socialist party family is used as the omitted category because no data are available regarding the selection procedure of the parties that belong to the communist party family.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J. (1999). Policy divergence in multicandidate probabilistic spatial voting. Public Choice, 100, 103–122.CrossRef Adams, J. (1999). Policy divergence in multicandidate probabilistic spatial voting. Public Choice, 100, 103–122.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., & Glasgow, G. (2004). Understanding change and stability in party ideologies: Do parties respond to public opinion or to past election results? British Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 586–610.CrossRef Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., & Glasgow, G. (2004). Understanding change and stability in party ideologies: Do parties respond to public opinion or to past election results? British Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 586–610.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J., Ezrow, L., Merrill, S., & Somer-Topcu, Z. (2013). Does collective responsibility for performance alter party strategies? Policy-seeking parties in proportional systems. British Journal of Political Science, 43(1), 1–23.CrossRef Adams, J., Ezrow, L., Merrill, S., & Somer-Topcu, Z. (2013). Does collective responsibility for performance alter party strategies? Policy-seeking parties in proportional systems. British Journal of Political Science, 43(1), 1–23.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J., & Merrill, S. (2007). Policy seeking parties in a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation: A valence uncertainty model. British Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 539–558.CrossRef Adams, J., & Merrill, S. (2007). Policy seeking parties in a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation: A valence uncertainty model. British Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 539–558.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J., Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (2005). A unified theory of party competition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Adams, J., Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (2005). A unified theory of party competition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Adams, J., & Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). Policy adjustment in response to rival parties’ policy shifts: Spatial theory and the dynamic of party competition in twenty-five post-war democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 825–846.CrossRef Adams, J., & Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). Policy adjustment in response to rival parties’ policy shifts: Spatial theory and the dynamic of party competition in twenty-five post-war democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 825–846.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Aldrich, J. (1983). A Downsian spatial model with party activism. American Political Science Review, 77(4), 974–990.CrossRef Aldrich, J. (1983). A Downsian spatial model with party activism. American Political Science Review, 77(4), 974–990.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Alvarez, M. R., & Nagler, J. (1998). When politics and models collide: Estimating models of multiparty elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 1349–1363.CrossRef Alvarez, M. R., & Nagler, J. (1998). When politics and models collide: Estimating models of multiparty elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 1349–1363.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Axelrod, R. (1997). The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Axelrod, R. (1997). The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Benoit, K., & Laver, M. (2006). Party policy in modern democracies. London: Routledge. Benoit, K., & Laver, M. (2006). Party policy in modern democracies. London: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Budge, I. (1994). A new theory of party competition: uncertainty, ideology, and policy equilibria viewed comparatively and temporally. British Journal of Political Science, 24(4), 443–467.CrossRef Budge, I. (1994). A new theory of party competition: uncertainty, ideology, and policy equilibria viewed comparatively and temporally. British Journal of Political Science, 24(4), 443–467.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Budge, I., Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., & Tanenbaum, E. (2001). Mapping policy preferences. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Budge, I., Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., & Tanenbaum, E. (2001). Mapping policy preferences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Calvo, E., & Hellwig, T. (2011). Centripetal and centrifugal incentives under different electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 27–41.CrossRef Calvo, E., & Hellwig, T. (2011). Centripetal and centrifugal incentives under different electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 27–41.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ceron, A. (2012). Bounded oligarchy: How and when factions constrain leaders in party position-taking. Electoral Studies, 31, 689–701.CrossRef Ceron, A. (2012). Bounded oligarchy: How and when factions constrain leaders in party position-taking. Electoral Studies, 31, 689–701.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ceron, A. (2013). Gamson rule not for all: Patterns of portfolio allocation among Italian party factions. European Journal of Political Research, doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12020. Ceron, A. (2013). Gamson rule not for all: Patterns of portfolio allocation among Italian party factions. European Journal of Political Research, doi:10.​1111/​1475-6765.​12020.
Zurück zum Zitat Cox, G. (1990). Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 903–935.CrossRef Cox, G. (1990). Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 903–935.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Curini, L., & Hino, A. (2012). Missing links in party-system polarization: How institutions and voters matter. Journal of Politics, 74(2), 460–473.CrossRef Curini, L., & Hino, A. (2012). Missing links in party-system polarization: How institutions and voters matter. Journal of Politics, 74(2), 460–473.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dalton, R. (2010). Left-right orientations, context, and voting choices. In R. Russell & C. J. Anderson (Eds.), Citizens, context and choice: How context shapes citizens’ electoral choices (pp. 103–125). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Dalton, R. (2010). Left-right orientations, context, and voting choices. In R. Russell & C. J. Anderson (Eds.), Citizens, context and choice: How context shapes citizens’ electoral choices (pp. 103–125). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dow, J. K. (2011). Party system compactness in majoritarian and proportional electoral systems. British Journal of Political Science, 41, 341–361.CrossRef Dow, J. K. (2011). Party system compactness in majoritarian and proportional electoral systems. British Journal of Political Science, 41, 341–361.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dow, J. K., & Endersby, J. W. (2004). A comparison of conditional logit and multinomial probit models in multiparty elections. Electoral Studies, 23, 107–122.CrossRef Dow, J. K., & Endersby, J. W. (2004). A comparison of conditional logit and multinomial probit models in multiparty elections. Electoral Studies, 23, 107–122.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Zurück zum Zitat Ennser, L. (2012). The homogeneity of West European party families: The radical right in comparative perspective. Party Politics, 18(2), 151–171.CrossRef Ennser, L. (2012). The homogeneity of West European party families: The radical right in comparative perspective. Party Politics, 18(2), 151–171.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ezrow, L. (2008). Parties’ policy programs and the dog that didn’t bark. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 479–497.CrossRef Ezrow, L. (2008). Parties’ policy programs and the dog that didn’t bark. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 479–497.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gallagher, M., & Mitchell, P. (2008). The politics of electoral systems. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Gallagher, M., & Mitchell, P. (2008). The politics of electoral systems. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Golder, S. N. (2006). The logic of pre-electoral coalition formation. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press. Golder, S. N. (2006). The logic of pre-electoral coalition formation. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Green, J. (2007). When voters and parties agree: Valence issues and party competition. Political Studies, 55(3), 629–655.CrossRef Green, J. (2007). When voters and parties agree: Valence issues and party competition. Political Studies, 55(3), 629–655.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Groseclose, T. (2001). A model of candidate location when one candidate has a valence advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 862–886.CrossRef Groseclose, T. (2001). A model of candidate location when one candidate has a valence advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 862–886.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Katz, R. S. (2001). The problem of candidate selection and models of party democracy. Party Politics, 7(3), 277–296.CrossRef Katz, R. S. (2001). The problem of candidate selection and models of party democracy. Party Politics, 7(3), 277–296.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kedar, O. (2005). When Moderate voters prefer extreme parties: Policy balancing in parliamentary elections. American Political Science Review, 99(2), 185–199.CrossRef Kedar, O. (2005). When Moderate voters prefer extreme parties: Policy balancing in parliamentary elections. American Political Science Review, 99(2), 185–199.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Laver, M., & Sergenti, E. (2012). Party competition: An agent-based model. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Laver, M., & Sergenti, E. (2012). Party competition: An agent-based model. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in 36 countries. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in 36 countries. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Lin, T. M., Enelow, J. M., & Dorussen, H. (1999). Equilibrium in multicandidate probabilistic spatial voting. Public Choice, 98, 59–82.CrossRef Lin, T. M., Enelow, J. M., & Dorussen, H. (1999). Equilibrium in multicandidate probabilistic spatial voting. Public Choice, 98, 59–82.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Mair, P., & Mudde, C. (1998). The party family and its study. Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 211–229.CrossRef Mair, P., & Mudde, C. (1998). The party family and its study. Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 211–229.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat McDonald, M., & Budge, I. (2005). Elections, parties, and democracy: Conferring the median mandate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef McDonald, M., & Budge, I. (2005). Elections, parties, and democracy: Conferring the median mandate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Merrill, S., & Adams, J. (2001). Computing Nash equilibria in probabilistic, multiparty spatial models with nonpolicy components. Political Analysis, 9, 347–361.CrossRef Merrill, S., & Adams, J. (2001). Computing Nash equilibria in probabilistic, multiparty spatial models with nonpolicy components. Political Analysis, 9, 347–361.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (1999). A unified theory of voting: Directional and proximity spatial models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (1999). A unified theory of voting: Directional and proximity spatial models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Meyer, T. M. (2012). Dropping the unitary actor assumption: the impact of intra-party delegation on coalition governance. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 24, 485–506.CrossRef Meyer, T. M. (2012). Dropping the unitary actor assumption: the impact of intra-party delegation on coalition governance. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 24, 485–506.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Plümper, T., & Martin, C. W. (2008). Multi-party competition: A computational model with abstention and memory. Electoral Studies, 27, 424–441.CrossRef Plümper, T., & Martin, C. W. (2008). Multi-party competition: A computational model with abstention and memory. Electoral Studies, 27, 424–441.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rabinowitz, G., & Macdonald, S. E. (1989). A directional theory of voting. American Political Science Review, 83, 93–121.CrossRef Rabinowitz, G., & Macdonald, S. E. (1989). A directional theory of voting. American Political Science Review, 83, 93–121.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Schofield, N., & Sened, I. (2006). Multiparty Democracy: Parties, elections and legislative politics in multiparty systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Schofield, N., & Sened, I. (2006). Multiparty Democracy: Parties, elections and legislative politics in multiparty systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Schumacher, G., de Vries, C. E., & Vis, B. (2013). Why do parties change position? Party organization and environmental incentives. Journal of Politics, 75(2), 464–477.CrossRef Schumacher, G., de Vries, C. E., & Vis, B. (2013). Why do parties change position? Party organization and environmental incentives. Journal of Politics, 75(2), 464–477.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat von Beyme, K. (1985). Political parties in Western democracies. New York: St. Martin’s Press. von Beyme, K. (1985). Political parties in Western democracies. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Waller, M., & Fennema, M. (1988). Communist parties in Western Europe: Decline or adaption?. Oxford: Blackwell. Waller, M., & Fennema, M. (1988). Communist parties in Western Europe: Decline or adaption?. Oxford: Blackwell.
Zurück zum Zitat Ware, A. (1996). Political parties and party systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ware, A. (1996). Political parties and party systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Warwick, P. V. (2004). Proximity, directionality, and the riddle of relative party extremeness. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(3), 263–287.CrossRef Warwick, P. V. (2004). Proximity, directionality, and the riddle of relative party extremeness. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(3), 263–287.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Explaining party ideological stances
verfasst von
Luigi Curini
Publikationsdatum
01.01.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Public Choice / Ausgabe 1-2/2015
Print ISSN: 0048-5829
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7101
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-014-0199-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1-2/2015

Public Choice 1-2/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner