Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T09:08:33.858Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rise and Fall of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2010

Ellis S. Krauss  and
Robert J. Pekkanen
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 69 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 5 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2010

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

2 In 1993, the LDP “won” the election, in the sense that it won by far the most seats of any party and returned almost all incumbents—even if it did not go on to form a government because almost all the opposition parties unprecedentedly united in an unwieldy coalition that soon splintered.

3 See Pempel, T. J., ed., Uncommon Democracies: The One Party Dominant Regimes (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

4 See Scheiner, Ethan, Democracy without Competition in Japan: Opposition Failure in a One-Party Dominant State (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.

5 Our forthcoming book advances novel arguments about the origin and development of kôenkai, PARC, and factions. Drawing on insights from historical institutionalism, we demonstrate the centrality of sequence, complementary institutions, and negative externalities to these institutions.

6 We thank Ethan Scheiner for providing this data and analysis.

7 This is because of “negative externalities,” meaning that a Diet member loses out by not joining a faction—and loses out incrementally more when more of his or her colleagues are in a faction. For a fuller discussion, see Krauss and Pekkanen, forthcoming; see also Krauss, Ellis S. and Pekkanen, Robert, “Explaining Party Adaptation to Electoral Reform: The Discreet Charm of the LDP?” Journal of Japanese Studies 30, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.