Abstract
Electoral systems have well known implications for party systems in general and the creation and representation of small parties in particular: while proportional representation (PR) favours small parties’ electoral success, large parties tend to benefit from first past the post majoritarian electoral systems. However, it has been observed that small parties more easily form in PR systems, but also tend to be less successful in PR elections in the long run. These seemingly contradictory observations might be explained by the conservation of disproportionality that electoral systems bring with them Instead of fostering the electoral success of small parties, PR might prevent parties and voters from strategic coordination and thus punish small parties. In order to investigate the question whether conservation of disproportionality occurs and discriminates against small parties more than we would expect, I theoretically derive particular temporal patterns of development of disproportionality and analyse data on electoral system change from 10 Central and Eastern European democracies. I show that there is some evidence that conservation of disproportionality occurs. However, it is not possible to draw a direct line from electoral system change to the electoral success of small parties.
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 subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ashworth, T. R., and H. P. C. Ashworth. 1901. Proportional Representation applied to Party Government. A New Electoral System. London: Swan Sonnenschein.
Blais, A., and M. A. Bodet. 2006. “How Do Voters Form Expectations about the Parties’ Chances of Winning the Election?” Social Science Quarterly 87(3), 477-493.
Blais, A., E. Gidengil, P. Fournier, N. Nevitte, and B. M. Hicks. 2008. “Measuring Expectations: Comparing Alternative Approaches.” Electoral Studies 27(2), 337-343.
Blais, A., and M. Turgeon. 2004. “How Good Are Voters at Sorting Out the Weakest Candidate in Their Constituency?” Electoral Studies 23(3), 455-461.
Brambor, T., W. R. Clark, and M. Golder. 2006. “Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses.” Political Analysis 14(1), 63-82.
Cox, G. W. 1997. Making Votes Count. Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Döring, H., and P. Manow. 2015. Parliaments and Governments Database (ParlGov): Information on Parties, Elections and Cabinets in Modern Democracies. Stable Version 2015. 12 March 2016, www.parlgov.org.
Duch, R. M., and H. D. Palmer. 2002. “Strategic Voting in Post-Communist Democracy?” British Journal of Political Science 32(1), 63-91.
Duverger, M. 1950. L’influence des systèmes électoraux sur la vie politique. In Duverger, M. (Ed.), L’influence des systèmes électoraux sur la vie politique, 11-68. Paris: Armand Colin.
Duverger, M. 1951. Les partis politiques. Paris: Armand Colin.
Finer, H. 1935. The Case Against Proportional Representation. London: Fabian Society. (2nd Edn.).
Friedrich, C. J. 1937. Constitutional Government and Politics. Nature and Development. New York: Harper & Bros.
Gallagher, M. 1991. “Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems.” Electoral Studies 10(1), 33-51.
Gallagher, M., and P. Mitchell (Eds.). 2005. The Politics of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Golder, M. 2003. “Explaining Variation in the Success of Extreme Right Parties in Western Europe.” Comparative Political Studies 36(4), 432-466.
Harfst, P. 2007. Wahlsystemwandel in Mittelosteuropa: Strategisches Design einer politischen Institution. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Harfst, P. 2016. “The Political Consequences of Changes in District Magnitude.” Acta Politica. doi: 10.1057/s41269-016-0022-0.
Harmel, R., and J. D. Robertson. 1985. “Formation and Success of New Parties: A Cross-National Analysis.” International Political Science Review 6(4), 501-523.
Hermens, F. A. 1941. Democracy or Anarchy? A Study of Proportional Representation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
Jackman, R. W., and K. Volpert. 1996. “Conditions Favouring Parties of the Extreme Right in Western Europe.” British Journal of Political Science 26(4), 501-521.
Lijphart, A. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mair, P. 1991. “The Electoral Universe of Small Parties in Postwar Western Europe.” In Müller-Rommel, F., and G. Pridham (Eds.), Small Parties in Western Europe. Comparative and National Perspectives, 41-70. London: Sage.
Meguid, B. 2005. “Competition Between Unequals: The Role of Mainstream Party Strategy in Niche Party Success.” American Political Science Review 99(3), 347-359.
Müller-Rommel, F. 1992. “Erfolgsbedingungen Grüner Parteien in Westeuropa.” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 33(2), 189-218.
Müller-Rommel, F. 1993. Grüne Parteien in Westeuropa: Entwicklungsphasen und Erfolgsbedingungen. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Nohlen, D., and M. Kasapovic. 1996. Wahlsysteme und Systemwechsel in Osteuropa: Genese, Auswirkungen und Reform politischer Institutionen. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
O’Donnell, G., and P. C. Schmitter. 1986. Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. Baltimore, London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Rae, D. W. 1967. The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Rev. Edn.).
Riker, W. H. 1982. “The Two-Party System and Duverger’s Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science.” American Political Science Review 76(4), 753-766.
Rustow, D. A. 1950. “Some Observations on Proportional Representation.” Journal of Politics 12(1), 107-127.
Selb, P., and S. Pituctin. 2010. “Methodological Issues in the Study of New Parties’ Entry and Electoral Success.” Party Politics 16(2), 147-170.
Taagepera, R. 1998a. “Effective Magnitude and Effective Threshold.” Electoral Studies 17(4), 393-404.
Taagepera, R. 1998b. “Nationwide Inclusion and Exclusion Thresholds of Representation.” Electoral Studies 17(4), 404-417.
Taagepera, R. 2002. “Nationwide Threshold of Representation.” Electoral Studies 21(3), 383-401.
Taagepera, R., and M. S. Shugart. 1989. Seats and Votes. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
Tavits, M. 2006. “Party System Change. Testing a Model of New Party Entry.” Party Politics 12(1), 99-119.
Tavits, M., and T. Annus. 2006. “Learning to Make Votes Count: The Role of Democratic Experience.” Electoral Studies 25(1), 72-90.
Van Der Brug, W., M. Fennema, and J. Tillie. 2005. “Why Some Anti-Immigrant Parties Fail and Others Succeed. A Two-Step Model of Aggregate Electoral Support.” Comparative Political Studies 38(5), 537-573.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Harfst, P. (2017). The ‘Law of Conservation of Disproportionality’ and Electoral Prospects of Small Parties. In: Harfst, P., Kubbe, I., Poguntke, T. (eds) Parties, Governments and Elites. Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-17446-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-17446-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-17445-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-17446-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)