This article shows how two forms of party conflict (political dissent and antagonistic behaviour) are related but explained by different factors. It is therefore of utmost importance to distinguish between the two forms of conflict. Political dissent is mainly explained by the size of demos while social fragmentation, fiscal stress and party contestation increase antagonistic behaviour. The presence of a local protest party inflates both forms of conflict. Surprisingly, party contestation has less impact on conflict levels than earlier studies have suggested. The study builds on data from a unique survey conducted among all councillors in the 290 municipalities in Sweden.

This article shows that political conflicts are expressed in different arenas and between different actors depending on the degree of horizontal specialization in a political system. In political organizations with a low degree of horizontal specialization, more issues are depoliticized and the discretion of the administration increases. One factor that spurs political conflicts is prioritization between policy fields, rather than within fields. The article is based on an analysis of minutes from Assembly meetings as well as interviews with leading local politicians and Chief Executive Officers in three Swedish municipalities. Related Articles Johansson, Karl Magnus, and Tapio Raunio. 2020. “Centralizing Government Communication? Evidence from Finland and Sweden.” Politics & Policy 48 (6): 1138‐1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12370 Nwokora, Zim, and Riccardo Pelizzo. 2015. “The Political Consequences of Party System Change.” Politics & Policy 43 (4): 453‐473. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12124/abstract Vercesi, Michelangelo. 2016. “Coalition Politics and Inter‐Party Conflict Management: A Theoretical Framework.” Politics & Policy 44 (2): 168‐219. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12154

No abstract

As a way to manage political disagreements over public policies, political representatives might be tempted to avoid open discussions by depoliticising political issues—hoping that the conflict may eventually disappear. When decision-makers employ such strategies, it is up to the administration to make political priorities and manage unresolved policy conflicts. Earlier studies indicate that there are at least two strategies that administrators can employ to manage such ambiguities: (re)framing and technical depoliticisation. This article reveals that public administrators also employ a third framing strategy: repoliticisation, where administrators seek to endow their policy areas with political power by connecting politicians to the work and implementation of policies. The study is based on 38 interviews from 11 municipalities in Sweden.

Trenden att använda styrelser som styrform inom och mellan offentliga organisationer utgör nya utmaningar för de folkvalda politiker som ofta innehar uppdragen som styrelseledamöter. De träder nu in i styrelserum och leder offentligt ägda bolag som verkar enligt en marknadsbaserad logik. I den här litteraturstudien granskar vi forskning om bolagsstyrning för att utröna vilka nya roller detta kan medföra. Tre styrelseroller diskuteras: övervakare, mentorer och länkare till externa resurser. Vi granskar även vilka metoder forskare använt för att studera bolagsstyrning och finner en påtaglig dominans av kvantitativa metoder. Vilket dels kan ha påverkat vilka teoretiska modeller som har skapats, dels pekar det på möjliga luckor som forskningen framåt kan fylla. Analysen visar även att roller som härrör från bolagsstyrning inte behöver stå i strid med klassiska politikerroller – de skulle kunna komplettera dem. Studien bygger på 129 artiklar publicerade i 4 topptidskrifter under 2010–2019.