Advertisement

Public Choice

, Volume 174, Issue 1–2, pp 61–80 | Cite as

Gaining new insights by going local: determinants of coalition formation in mixed democratic polities

  • Martin Gross
  • Marc Debus
Article

Abstract

We develop a simple spatial model suggesting that Members of Parliament strive for the inclusion of the head of state’s party in coalitions formed in mixed democratic polities, and that parliamentary parties try to assemble coalitions that minimize the ideological distance to the head of state. We identify the German local level of government as functionally equivalent to a parliamentary setting, such that the directly elected mayor has competencies similar to a president in a mixed national polity. Our findings show that the party affiliation of the head of state is a key factor considered by party members in the legislature when forming coalitions: coalitions in the legislature are more likely to form if they include the party of the head of the executive branch. Furthermore, the policy preferences of the head of the executive branch matter for the legislators’ behavior in the coalition formation process: the smaller the ideological distance between the position of a coalition and the position of the head of state, the more likely a coalition is to be formed.

Keywords

Mixed democratic polities Legislative coalition formation Head of state Spatial model 

References

  1. Ade, F. (2014). Do constitutions matter? Evidence from a natural experiment at the municipality level. Public Choice, 160(3), 367–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alemán, E., & Tsebelis, G. (2011). Political parties and government coalitions in the Americas. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 3(1), 3–28.Google Scholar
  3. Altman, D. (2000). The politics of coalition formation and survival in multiparty presidential democracies: The case of Uruguay, 1989–1999. Party Politics, 6(3), 259–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amorim Neto, O. (2006). The presidential calculus: Executive policy making and cabinet formation in the Americas. Comparative Political Studies, 39(4), 415–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amorim Neto, O., & Strøm, K. (2006). Breaking the parliamentary chain of delegation: presidents and non-partisan cabinet members in European democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 36(4), 619–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bäck, H. (2003). Explaining and predicting coalition outcomes: Conclusions from studying data on local coalitions. European Journal of Political Research, 42(4), 441–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bäck, H. (2005). The institutional setting of local political leadership and community involvement. In M. Haus, H. Heinelt, & M. Stewart (Eds.), Urban governance and democracy. Leadership and community involvement (pp. 65–101). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Bäck, H., & Dumont, P. (2008). Making the first move. A two-stage analysis of the role of formateurs in parliamentary government formation. Public Choice, 135(3–4), 353–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baylis, T. A. (1996). Presidents versus Prime Ministers: Shaping executive authority in Eastern Europe. World Politics, 48(3), 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benz, A., & Zimmer, C. (2011). Germany: Varieties of democracy in a federal system. In J. Loughlin & A. Lidström (Eds.), The oxford handbook of local and regional democracy in Europe (pp. 146–172). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bergman, T. (1993). Formation rules and minority governments. European Journal of Political Research, 23(1), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beuman, L. M. (2015). Cohabitation in new post-conflict democracies: The case of Timor-Leste. Parliamentary Affairs, 68(3), 453–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bogumil, J., & Holtkamp, L. (2013). Kommunalpolitik und Kommunalverwaltung: Eine praxisorientierte Einführung. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.Google Scholar
  14. Bräuninger, T., & Debus, M. (2012). Parteienwettbewerb in den deutschen Bundesländern. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bräuninger, T., & König, T. (1999). The checks and balances of party federalism: German federal government in a divided legislature. European Journal of Political Research, 36(2), 207–234.Google Scholar
  16. Bucur, C., & Cheibub, J. A. (2017). Presidential partisanship in government formation: Do Presidents favor their parties when they appoint the Prime Minister? Political Research Quarterly.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917716334.Google Scholar
  17. Chang, C. H. (2014). Cohabitation in semi-presidential countries. Social Sciences, 3(2), 31–43.Google Scholar
  18. Cheibub, J. A. (2007). Presidentialism, parliamentarism, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cheibub, J. A., & Chernykh, S. (2008). Constitutions and democratic performance in semi-presidential democracies. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 9(2), 269–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheibub, J. A., & Chernykh, S. (2009). Are semi-presidential constitutions bad for democratic performance? Constitutional Political Economy, 20(3–4), 202–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cheibub, J. A., Elkins, Z., & Ginsburg, T. (2014). Beyond presidentialism and parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science, 44(3), 515–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cheibub, J. A., Gandhi, J., & Vreeland, J. R. (2010). Democracy and dictatorship revisited. Public Choice, 143(1–2), 67–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheibub, J. A., & Limongi, F. (2002). Democratic institutions and regime survival: parliamentary and presidential democracies reconsidered. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cheibub, J. A., & Limongi, F. (2010). From conflict to coordination: Perspectives on the study of executive-legislative relations. Revista Ibero-Americana de Estudos Legislativos, 1(1), 38–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cheibub, J. A., Przeworski, A., & Saiegh, S. M. (2004). Government coalitions and legislative success under presidentialism and parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 565–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chiba, D., Martin, L. W., & Stevenson, R. T. (2015). A copula approach to the problem of selection bias in models of government survival. Political Analysis, 23(1), 42–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Chiou, F. Y., & Rothenberg, L. S. (2003). When pivotal politics meets partisan politics. American Journal of Political Science, 47(3), 503–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Clark, W., Golder, M., & Golder, S. N. (2013). Principles of comparative politics. Washington: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  29. Crombez, C., & Hix, S. (2015). Legislative activity and gridlock in the European Union. British Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 477–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dassonneville, R., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2013). Economic policy voting and incumbency: Unemployment in Western Europe. Political Science Research and Methods, 1(1), 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Däubler, T., & Debus, M. (2009). Government formation and policy formulation in the German States. Regional and Federal Studies, 19(1), 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Debus, M. (2009). Pre-electoral commitments and government formation. Public Choice, 138(1), 45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Debus, M., & Gross, M. (2016). Coalition formation at the local level: Institutional constraints, party policy conflict, and office-seeking political parties. Party Politics, 22(6), 835–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Duverger, M. (1980). A new political system model: Semi-presidential government. European Journal of Political Research, 8(2), 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Egner, B. (2015). Parliaments in disguise? How German councillors perceive local councils. Local Government Studies, 41(2), 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Elgie, R. (1999). The politics of semi-presidentialism. In R. Elgie (Ed.), Semi-presidentialism in Europe (pp. 1–21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Elgie, R. (2011). Semi-presidentialism in Western Europe. In R. Elgie, S. Moestrup, & Y. S. Wu (Eds.), Semi-Presidentialism and democracy (pp. 81–97). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Elgie, R., & McMenamin, I. (2011). Explaining the onset of cohabitation under semi-presidentialism. Political Studies, 59(3), 616–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ennser-Jedenastik, L. (2014). The politics of patronage and coalition: How parties allocate managerial positions in state-owned enterprises. Political Studies, 62(2), 398–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fernandes, J. M., & Magalhães, P. C. (2016). Government survival in semi-presidential regimes. European Journal of Political Research, 55(1), 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Glasgow, G., & Golder, S. N. (2015). A new approach to the study of parties entering government. British Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 739–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Glasgow, G., Golder, M., & Golder, S. N. (2012). New empirical strategies for the study of parliamentary government formation. Political Analysis, 20(2), 248–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gross, D. A., & Sigelman, L. (1984). Comparing party systems: A multidimensional approach. Comparative Politics, 16(4), 463–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kang, S. G. (2009). The influence of presidential heads of state on government formation in European democracies: Empirical evidence. European Journal of Political Research, 48(4), 543–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kirschke, L. (2007). Semipresidentialism and the perils of power-sharing in neopatrimonial states. Comparative Political Studies, 40(11), 1372–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Krehbiel, K. (1996). Institutional and partisan sources of gridlock. A theory of divided and unified government. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 8(1), 7–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Krehbiel, K. (1998). Pivotal politics. A theory of U.S. law making. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Laver, M., Benoit, K., & Garry, J. (2003). Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review, 92(2), 311–331.Google Scholar
  49. Laver, M., Benoit, K., & Sauger, N. (2006). Policy competition in the 2002 French legislative and presidential elections. European Journal of Political Research, 45(4), 667–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Laver, M., & Schofield, N. (1998). Multiparty government: The politics of coalition in Europe. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lewis-Beck, M., & Stegmaier, M. (2000). Economic determinants of electoral outcomes. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 183–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Linz, J. J. (1990). The perils of presidentialism. Journal of Democracy, 1(1), 51–69.Google Scholar
  53. Linz, J. J. (1994). Presidential or parliamentary democracy: Does it make a difference? In J. J. Linz & A. Valenzuela (Eds.), The failure of presidential democracy: Comparative perspectives (pp. 3–87). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Martin, L. W., & Stevenson, R. T. (2001). Government formation in parliamentary democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 45(1), 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Martin, L. W., & Stevenson, R. T. (2010). The conditional impact of incumbency on government formation. American Political Science Review, 104(3), 503–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Martin, L. W., & Vanberg, G. (2011). Parliaments and coalitions: The role of legislative institutions in multiparty governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Martínez-Gallardo, C. (2012). Out of the cabinet: What drives defections from the government in presidential systems? Comparative Political Studies, 45(1), 62–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Martínez-Gallardo, C. (2014). Designing cabinets: presidential politics and ministerial instability. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 6(2), 3–38.Google Scholar
  59. Martínez-Gallardo, C., & Schleiter, P. (2015). Choosing whom to trust: Agency risks and cabinet partisanship in presidential democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 48(2), 231–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  61. Mellors, C., & Brearey, P. (1986). Multi-dimensional approaches to the study of local coalitions: some cross-national comparisons. In G. Pridham (Ed.), Coalitional behaviour in theory and practice: an inductive model for Western Europe (pp. 278–295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nikolova, P. (2011). Bulgaria: The dawn of a new era of inclusive subnational democracy? In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The oxford handbook of local and regional democracy in Europe (pp. 665–684). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Olislagers, E., & Steyvers, K. (2015). Choosing coalition partners in Belgian local government. Local Government Studies, 41(2), 202–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pasquino, G. (1997). Semi-presidentialism: A political model at work. European Journal of Political Research, 31(1–2), 128–137.Google Scholar
  65. Protsyk, O. (2005). Politics of intraexecutive conflict in semipresidential regimes in Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 19(2), 135–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Protsyk, O. (2006). Intra-executive competition between President and Prime Minister: Patterns of institutional conflict and cooperation under semi-presidentialism. Political Studies, 54(2), 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Roper, S. D. (2002). Are all semipresidential regimes the same? A comparison of premier-presidential regimes. Comparative Politics, 34(3), 253–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Samuels, D. J., & Shugart, M. S. (2010). Presidents, parties, and prime ministers. How the separation of powers affects party organization and behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schleiter, P., & Morgan-Jones, E. (2009a). Party government in Europe? Parliamentary and semi-presidential democracies compared. European Journal of Political Research, 48(5), 665–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Schleiter, P., & Morgan-Jones, E. (2009b). Review article: Citizens, presidents and assemblies: The study of semi-presidentialism beyond Duverger and Linz. British Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 871–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schleiter, P., & Morgan-Jones, E. (2010). Who’s in charge? Presidents, assemblies, and the political control of semipresidential cabinets. Comparative Political Studies, 43(11), 1415–1441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sedelius, T., & Mashtaler, O. (2013). Two decades of semi-presidentialism: issues of intra-executive conflict in Central and Eastern Europe 1991–2011. East European Politics, 29(2), 109–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Shugart, M. S. (2005). Semi-presidential systems: Dual executive and mixed authority patterns. French Politics, 3(3), 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Shugart, M. S., & Carey, J. M. (1992). Presidents and assemblies. Constitutional design and electoral dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Siaroff, A. (2003). Comparative presidencies: The inadequacy of the presidential, semi-presidential and parliamentary distinction. European Journal of Political Research, 42(3), 287–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Skjæveland, A., Serritzlew, S., & Blom-Hansen, J. (2007). Theories of coalition formation: An empirical test using data from Denmark. European Journal of Political Research, 46(5), 721–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Snyder, R. (2001). Scaling down: The subnational comparative method. Studies in Comparative International Development, 36(1), 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ştefuriuc, I. (2013). Government formation in multi-level settings. Party strategy and institutional constraints. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Strøm, K., Müller, W. C., & Bergman, T. (Eds.). (2010). Cabinets and coalition bargaining: The democratic life cycle in Western Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Swianiewicz, P. (2011). Poland: Europeanization of Subnational Governments. In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The oxford handbook of local and regional democracy in Europe (pp. 480–504). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Tavits, M. (2008). Presidents with Prime Ministers: Do direct elections matter?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Thomson, R. (2011). Citizens’ evaluations of the fulfillment of election pledges: Evidence from Ireland. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tsai, J. H. (2008). Sub-types of semi-presidentialism and political deadlock. French Politics, 6(1), 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players: How political institutions work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Turgeon, M., & Bélanger, É. (2017). Institutions and attribution of responsibility outside the electoral context: a look at French semi-presidentialism. European Political Science Review, 9(2), 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wu, Y. S. (2011). Clustering of semi-presidentialism: A first cut. In R. Elgie, S. Moestrup, & Y. S. Wu (Eds.), Semi-presidentialism and democracy (pp. 21–41). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geschwister Scholl Institute of Political ScienceUniversity of MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.Mannheim Centre for European Social Research & School of Social SciencesUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations