Abstract
This chapter presents an analysis of elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1996 to 2014. The analysis shows that the way in which Bosnia and Herzegovina’s party system can be best described is as an ‘ethnocracy’, whereby representation and contestation is channeled through parties defined by ethnic divisions. Ethnic divisions in Bosnia are reflected across the whole party system which results in high levels of congruence across all type of elections for the same group of voters but very low levels of congruence across regions. Hence, Bosnia’s party system is poorly nationalized. The major parties play a key role at all levels of government but the particular combination of parties depends on the ethnic composition of each constituency.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The referendum held on 29 February and 1 March 1992 was marked by a 63.6 percent turnout, similar to the combined census figures of Muslim/Bosniak and Croat populations of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The overwhelming majority of 99.7 percent voted for independence. For more details on the independence referendum, see CSCE The Referendum on Independence in Bosnia-Herzegovina February 29–March 1, 1992.
- 2.
Between 1997 and 2004, the High Representative removed or suspended 139 individuals from office including judges, ministers, civil servants and elected parliamentarians or mayors at entity and state level (Venneri 2007, p. 27).
- 3.
In cases where the majority of the population in a municipality in the Federation is different in ethnic composition from that of the canton as a whole, education, culture, tourism, local business and charitable activities, and radio and television are by law allocated to the municipal level to protect the minority within the canton (Constitution of the Federation 1994, Art. V.2b; Jokay 2001).
- 4.
Electoral district no. 1 consists of Cantons 1 (Una-Sana) and 10 (Livno) and elects three Members of Parliament (MPs). Electoral unit 2 consists of Cantons 7 (Herzegovina-Neretva) and 8 (West Herzegovina) and elects three MPs as well. Unit 3 consists of Cantons 5 (Bosnian-Podrinje Canton Goražde) and 9 (Sarajevo) and elects four MPs. Unit 4 consists of the Cantons 4 (Zenica-Doboj) and 6 (Central Bosnia) and elects six MPs. And finally, electoral unit 5 is made of the Cantons 2 (Posavina), 3 (Tuzla) and the Brčko District and elects five members of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Parliament (Izborni zakon [Electoral law] Bosnia and Herzegovina, Article 9.2).
- 5.
The missing data problem is driven by the ways in which the Electoral Commission reports results. The components of election turnout are only reported at the precinct level, whereas the percentage of valid and invalid votes is reported at the aggregate level. Complete, precinct-level datasets are not available for recent elections.
Bibliography
Allcock, J. (2004). Come back, Dayton: All is forgiven! In C. Solioz & T. Vogel (Eds.), Dayton and beyond: Perspectives on the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nomos: Baden-Baden.
Bieber, F. (2004). With more complexity towards better governance? The 2002 constitutional amendments and the proliferation of power-sharing in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In K. Solioz & T. K. Vogel (Eds.), Dayton and beyond: Perspectives on the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina (pp. 74–87). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Bieber, F. (2005). Local institutional engineering: A tale of two cities, Mostar and Brčko. International Peacekeeping, 12(3), 420–433.
Bose, S. (2002). Bosnia after Dayton: Nationalist partition and international intervention. London: C. Hurst & Co. Publishers.
Elazar, D. J. (1994). Federal systems of the world – A handbook of federal, confederal and autonomy arrangements. Harlow: Stockton.
Hooghe, L., Marks, G., Schakel, A. H., Chapman-Osterkatz, S., Niedzwiecki, S., & Shair-Rosenfield, S. (2016a). Measuring regional authority. A postfunctionalist theory of governance, Volume I. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hooghe, L., Marks, G., Schakel, A. H., Chapman-Osterkatz, S., Niedzwiecki, S., & Shair-Rosenfield, S. (2016b). Community, scale, and regional governance. A postfunctionalist theory of governance, Volume II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Howard, L. M. (2012). The ethnocracy trap. Journal of Democracy, 23(4), 155–169.
Hulsey, J. (2015). Party politics in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In V. Perry & S. Keil (Eds.), State-Building and democratization in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Farnham: Ashgate.
Jokay, C. (2001). Local government in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In E. Kandeva (Ed.), Stabilization of local governments. Local governments in Central and Eastern Europe (Vol. 2, pp. 89–140). Budapest: Local Government and Public Sector Reform Initiative.
Keil, S. (2013). Multinational federalism in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Farnham: Ashgate.
Mujkić, A. (2007). We, the citizens of Ethnopolis. Constellations, 14(1), 112–128.
Murtagh, C. (2016). Civic mobilization in divided societies and the perils of political engagement: Bosnia and Herzegovina’s protest and plenum movement. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 22(2), 149–171.
Radan, P. (2002). The break-up of Yugoslavia and international law. London: Routledge.
Ramet, S. P. (1992). Balkan Babel: Politics, culture, and religion in Yugoslavia. Boulder: Westview Press.
Roth, B. R. (2015). Ne-konsensualna disolucija državau meðunarodnom pravu: Inovacija Badinterove komisije u retrospektivi. Politička misao, 52(1), 48–78.
Šedo, J. (2010). The party system of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In V. Stojarova & P. Emerson (Eds.), Party politics in the Western Balkans (pp. 85–99). London/New York: Routledge.
Štiks, I. (2010). A laboratory of citizenship: Shifting conceptions of citizenship in Yugoslavia and its successor states, CITSEE Working Paper Series No. 02.
Stjepanović, D. (2015). Dual sub-state citizenship as institutional innovation: The case of Bosnia’s Brčko district. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 21(4), 379–400.
Stojanović, N., & Hodžić, E. (Eds.). (2015). Reserved seats, parties, and group representation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Ethnopolitics, 14(4) (special section): 382–434.
United Nations Resident Coordinator Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina. (2013). Public opinion poll results: Analytical report. http://www.media.ba/sites/default/files/prism_research_for_un_rco_statistical_report_1.pdf. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hulsey, J., Stjepanović, D. (2017). Bosnia and Herzegovina: An Archetypical Example of an Ethnocracy. In: Schakel, A. (eds) Regional and National Elections in Eastern Europe. Comparative Territorial Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51787-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51787-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-51786-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-51787-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)