Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:40:52.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Defining and measuring party system nationalization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

Ignacio Lago  and
José Ramón Montero
Ignacio Lago*
Affiliation:
Department of Political and Social Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Ramon Trias Fargas, Barcelona, Spain
José Ramón Montero
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science and International Relations, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Marie Curie, Cantoblanco, Madrid, Spain
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a new measure of party system nationalization based on a minimalist definition of the phenomenon. A perfectly nationalized party system is a party system with only national parties or, in other words, without sub-national parties. Instead of the homogeneity of parties’ vote shares or the number of parties throughout the country, our measure captures the aspirations of parties to be national whose proxy is the proportion of districts (weighted by seats) that a party runs a candidate. The measure is compared with existing indicators through a longitudinal analysis of 256 elections in 18 Western European countries from 1945 to 1998.

Keywords

nationalizationpartiesparty systemsEuropeelections
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , May 2014 , pp. 191 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © European Consortium for Political Research 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alemán, E. Kellam, M. (2008), ‘The nationalization of electoral change in the Americas’, Electoral Studies 27: 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochsler, D. (2010), ‘Measuring party nationalization: a new Gini-based indicator that corrects for the number of units’, Electoral Studies 29: 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brancati, D. (2008), ‘The origins and strengths of regional parties’, British Journal of Political Science 38: 135–159.Google Scholar
Caramani, D. (2000), Elections in Western Europe since 1815: Electoral Results by Constituencies, London and New York: McMillan-Grove's Dictionaries.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caramani, D. (2004), The Nationalization of Politics: The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Chambers, W.N. (1966), ‘Parties and nation-building in America’, in J. LaPalombara and M. Weiner (eds), Political Parties and Political Development, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 79–98.Google Scholar
Chhibber, P. Kollman, K. (1998), ‘Party aggregation and the number of parties in India and the United States’, American Political Science Review 92: 329–342.Google Scholar
Chhibber, P. Kollman, K. (2004), The Formation of National Party Systems: Federalism and Party Competition in Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, G.W. (1997), Making Votes Count Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, G.W. (1999a), ‘Electoral rules and electoral coordination’, Annual Review of Political Science 2: 145–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, G.W. (1999b), ‘Electoral rules and the calculus of mobilization’, Legislative Studies Quarterly XXIV 3: 387–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, G.W., Knoll, J.S. (2003), ‘Ethnes, Fiscs, and Electoral Rules: the determinants of party-system inflation’. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Daalder, H. (1966), ‘Parties, elites, and political developments in western Europe’, in J. LaPalombara and M. Weiner (eds), Political Parties and Political Development, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 43–78Google Scholar
De Winter, L., Gómez-Reino, M. Lynch, P. (eds) (2006), Autonomist Parties in Europe: Identity Politics and the Revival of the Territorial Cleavage, Barcelona: Institut de Ciències Polítiques i Socials.Google Scholar
Harbers, I. (2010), ‘Decentralization and the development of nationalized party systems in new democracies: evidence from Latin America’, Comparative Political Studies 43: 606–627.Google Scholar
Hearl, D.J., Budge, I. Peterson, B. (1996), ‘Distinctiveness of regional voting: a comparative analysis across the European community (1979-1993)’, Electoral Studies 15: 167–182.Google Scholar
Hicken, A. (2009), Building Party System in Developing Democracies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicken, A., Stoll, H. (2007), ‘Presidents, powers and parties: the sources of Legislative Electoral Coordination in Presidential Regimes’. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L., Marks, G. Schakel, A.H. (2008), ‘Regional authority in 42 democracies 1950–2006: a measure and five hypotheses’, Regional and Federal Studies 18: (2–3), 111–302.Google Scholar
Jones, M.P. Mainwaring, S. (2003), ‘The nationalization of parties and party systems: an empirical measure and an application to the Americas’, Party Politics 9: 139–166.Google Scholar
Kasuya, Y. Moenius, J. (2008), ‘The nationalization of party systems: conceptual issues and alternative district-focused measures’, Electoral Studies 27: 126–135.Google Scholar
Kollman, K., Hicken, A., Simmons, J. (2010), ‘Party system nationalization and public goods production’, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Laakso, M. Taagepera, R. (1979), ‘Effective’ number of parties: a measure with applications to west Europe’, Comparative Political Studies 12: 3–27.Google Scholar
Lago-Peñas, I. Lago-Peñas, S. (2009), ‘Does the nationalization of party systems affect the composition of public spending?’, Economics of Governance 10: 85–98.Google Scholar
Lago-Peñas, I. Lago-Peñas, S. (2011), ‘Decentralization and the nationalization of party systems’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 29: 244–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, A. 1988. ‘The persistence of difference: electoral change in Cornwall’. Presented at the Political Studies Association Conference, Plymouth.Google Scholar
Linz, J.J. Montero, J.R. (2001), ‘The party systems of Spain: old cleavages and new challenges’, in L. Karvonen and S. Kuhnle (eds), Party Systems and Voter Alignments Revisited, London: Routledge, pp. 150–196Google Scholar
Moenius, J. Kasuya, Y. (2004), ‘Measuring party linkage across districts: some party system inflation indices and their properties’, Party Politics 10: 543–564.Google Scholar
Monroe, B.L. Rose, A.G. (2002), ‘Electoral systems and unimagined consequences partisan effects of districted proportional representation’, American Journal of Political Science 46: 67–89.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, S. Potthoff, R.F. (2005), ‘The components of elections: district heterogeneity, district-time effects, and volatility’, Electoral Studies 24: 17–40.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, S., Swindle, S.M. Castagnola, A. (2009), ‘Party nationalization and institutions’, Journal of Politics 71: 1322–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolenyi, C. (2009), ‘Party inflation in India: why has a multiparty format prevailed in the national party system?’, in B. Grofman, A. Blais, and S. Bowler (eds), Duverger's Law of Plurality Voting. The Logic of Party Competition in Canada, India, the United Kingdom and the United States, New York: Springer, pp. 97–114Google Scholar
Powell, E.N., Tucker, J.A. (2009), ‘New approaches to electoral volatility: evidence form postcommunist countries’. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto.Google Scholar
Rokkan, S. (1970), Citizens, Elections, Parties, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E.E. (1960), The semi-sovereign people: a realist's view of democracy in America, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Simón, P. (2013), ‘The combined impact of decentralization and personalism on the nationalization of party systems’, Political Studies, doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urwin, D.W. (1982), ‘Germany: from geographical expression to regional accommodation’, in S. Rokkan and D. Urwin (eds), The Politics of Territorial Identity: Studies of European Regionalism, London: Sage.Google Scholar