Abstract
Taking Gerhard Lehmbruchs studies as point of departure, the article outlines an approach to comparative research on democratic governments. Lehmbruch started to study consensus or negotiation democracy at about the same time as Arend Lijphart. While Lijphart drew attention to two dimensions of democratic governments which he condensed into two types, Lehmbruch focused on uncovering the mechanisms of collective action that are connected in consensus democracies. From different perspectives, both political scientists demonstrated that democracy can only work in a complex institutional setting reflecting different values and different functions. Lehmbruch chose a historical-institutionalist approach and included, at least in his later works, elements of actor-centered institutionalism. This approach highlights structure-induced tensions in governments. In consequence, Lijphart’s typology needs to be revised and differentiated. Following Lehmbruch’s studies, democratic governments have to be regarded as multidimensional political systems, where internal tensions have to be coped with, and where tensions can be turned into productive policy by actors’ discretion, their capacities and strategies, as far as they are supported by enabling institutions and procedures. In order to outline this analytical approach and research program, the article explains basic mechanisms driving politics in democratic governments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
In the present context, the term regime is defined as a form of institutionalized power.
References
Abromeit, H., & Stoiber, M. (2006). Demokratien im Vergleich. Einführung in die vergleichende Analyse politischer Systeme. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Armingeon, K. (2000). Swiss federalism in comparative perspective. In U. Wachendorfer-Schmidt (Ed.), Federalism and political performance (pp. 112–129). London: Routledge.
Armingeon, K. (2002). The effects of negotiation democracy: A comparative analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 41(1), 81–105.
Bednar, J. (2009). The robust federation: Principles of design. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Benz, A. (2000). Politische Steuerung in lose gekoppelten Mehrebenensystemen. In R. Werle & U. Schimank (Eds.), Gesellschaftliche Komplexität und kollektive Handlungsfähigkeit (pp. 99–126). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Benz, A. (2004). Institutionelle Regime in Bundesstaaten und in der Europäischen Union. In S. Marschall & S. Strünck (Eds.), Grenzenlose Macht? Politik und Politikwissenschaft im Umbruch (pp. 173–192). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Benz, A. (2010). The EU as a loosely coupled multi-level system. In H. Enderlein, S. Wälti, & M. Zürn (Eds.), Handbook on multi-level governance (pp. 214–226). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Breton, A. (1996). Competitive governments: An economic theory of politics and finance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Broschek, J. (2009). Der kanadische Föderalismus. Eine historisch-institutionalistische Analyse. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Bühlmann, M., Merkel, W., Müller, L., Giebler, H., & Weßels, B. (2012). Demokratiebarometer: ein neues Instrument zur Messung von Demokratiequalität. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, 6(1), 115–159.
Czada, R. (2003). Der Begriff Verhandlungsdemokratie und die vergleichende Policy-Forschung. In R. Mayntz & W. Streeck (Eds.), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie. Innovationen und Blockaden (pp. 173–204). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Dahl, R. (1994). A democratic dilemma: System effectiveness versus citizen participation. Political Science Quarterly, 109, 23–34.
Kriesi, H. (2013). Introduction—The new challenges to democracy. In H. Kriesi, D. Bochsler, J. Matthes, S. Lavenex, M. Bühlmann, & F. Esser (Eds.), Democracy in the age of globalization and mediatization (pp. 1–16). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kriesi, H., & Bochsler, D. (2013). Varieties of democracy. In H. Kriesi, D. Bochsler, J. Matthes, S. Lavenex, M. Bühlmann, & F. Esser (Eds.), Democracy in the age of globalization and mediatization (pp. 69–102). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kriesi, H., Bochsler, D., Matthes, J., Lavenex, S., Bühlmann, M., & Esser, F. (2013). Democracy in the age of globalization and mediatization. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lehmbruch, G. (1967). Proporzdemokratie. Politisches System und politische Kultur in der Schweiz und in Österreich. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck.
Lehmbruch, G. (1976). Parteienwettbewerb im Bundesstaat. Regelsysteme und Spannungslagen im Institutionengefüge der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag.
Lehmbruch, G. (1996). Die korporative Verhandlungsdemokratie in Westmitteleuropa. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Politische Wissenschaft, 2, 19–41.
Lehmbruch, G. (1999). Verhandlungsdemokratie, Entscheidungsblockaden und Arenenverflechtung. In W. Merkel & A. Busch (Eds.), Demokratie in Ost und West (pp. 402–424). Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Lehmbruch, G. (2000). Parteienwettbewerb im Bundesstaat. Regelsysteme und Spannungslagen im Institutionengefüge der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Lehmbruch, G. (2002). Der unitarische Bundesstaat in Deutschland: Pfadabhängigkeit und Wandel. In A. Benz & G. Lehmbruch (Eds.), Föderalismus. Analysen in entwicklungsgeschichtlicher und vergleichender Perspektive (pp. 53–110). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Lehmbruch, G. (2003). Verhandlungsdemokratie. Beiträge zur vergleichenden Regierungslehre. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Lehmbruch, G. (2012). Die Entwicklung der vergleichenden Politikforschung und die Entdeckung der Konkordanzdemokratie—eine historisch-institutionelle Perspektive. In U. Kranenpohl & S. Köppl (Eds.), Konkordanzdemokratie—ein Demokratietyp der Vergangenheit? (pp. 33–49). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Lehmbruch, G., & Schmitter, P. C. (1982). Patterns of corporatist policy-making. London: Sage.
Lijphart, A. (1968). The politics of accommodation: Pluralism and democracy in the Netherlands. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Lijphart, A. (1969). Consociational democracy. World Politics, 21(2), 207–225.
Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Müller-Rommel, F. (2008). Demokratiemuster und Leistungsbilanz von Regierungen: Kritische Anmerkungen zu Arend Lijphart’s “Patterns of democracy”. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, 2(1), 78–94.
Naschold, F. (1972). Organisation und Demokratie. Untersuchung zum Demokratisierungspotential in komplexen Organisationen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Neidhart, L. (1970). Plebiszit und pluralitäre Demokratie. Eine Analyse der Funktionen des schweizerischen Gesetzesreferendums. Bern: Francke.
Offe, C., & Wiesenthal, H. (1980). Two logics of collective action. Theoretical notes on social class and organizational form. Political Power and Social Theory, 1, 67–115.
Onoma, A. K. (2010). The contradictory potential of institutions: The rise and decline of land documentation in Kenya. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Explaining institutional change. Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 63–93). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Riklin, A. (2005). Machtteilung. Geschichte der Mischverfassung. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Sayers, A. M., & Banfield, A. C. (2013). The evolution of federalism and executive power in Canada and Australia. In A. Benz & J. Broschek (Eds.), Federal dynamics. Continuity, change, and the varieties of federalism (pp. 185–205). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scharpf, F. W. (1970). Demokratietheorie zwischen Utopie und Anpassung. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag.
Scharpf, F. W. (1987). Sozialdemokratische Krisenpolitik in Europa. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus Verlag.
Scharpf, F. W. (1988). The joint decision trap: Lessons from German federalism and European integration. Public Administration, 66(3), 239–278.
Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players. How political institutions work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Vile, M. J. C. (1998). Constitutionalism and the separation of powers. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Benz, A. (2015). Lehmbruch Versus Lijphart: Comparing Democratic Governments as Multidimensional Regimes. In: Schneider, V., Eberlein, B. (eds) Complex Democracy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15850-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15850-1_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-15849-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-15850-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)