Coalition Politics and Inter‐Party Conflict Management: A Theoretical Framework

Vercesi, Michelangelo

doi:10.1111/polp.12154

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 90 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the purposes of our research, therefore, we explore instigator-defender policy scenarios using perspectives from the literature on policy conflict. Policy conflict captures many types of situations in which actors take contrasting positions related to public policy (Vercesi, 2016) and where one actor's policy positions can threaten other actors (Weible & Heikkila, 2017). The literature often treats all policy conflict situations as if the level of conflict is static in time (Heidbreder et al, 2011;Matland, 1995).…”

Section: Theoretical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring instigator and defender policy scenarios in the siting of energy infrastructure

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy infrastructure is the foundation of any modern society, yet decisions on where and how to site this infrastructure can be contentious. This article argues that energy infrastructure siting is illustrative of policy scenarios involving instigators of a proposed policy and defenders of the status quo. Through analyzing natural gas pipelines, electricity transmission lines, solar power plants, and wind power plants, and leveraging a unique dataset of over 1000 newspaper articles on 16 selected cases, we extract discourse over the project life cycle across infrastructure types and conflict intensities. This article delineates policy scenarios involving two primary sets of actorsthe proposal instigator (e.g., an energy corporation) and the defender of the status quo (e.g., a community). When higher levels of conflict exist, defenders represent more actors than instigators, as defenders have the advantage of mobilizing and recruiting around the status quo. The frames used by defenders are also more diverse than those used by instigators. Additionally, the balance of discourse is associated with the characteristics of the proposal and conflict intensity, as well as who wins or loses.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring instigator and defender policy scenarios in the siting of energy infrastructure

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a third step, I investigate those coalition mechanisms that involve the whole coalition, including party members outside the executive (Vercesi 2016). In our case, the coalition agreement ('Contract for the Government of Change') is a postelectoral pact drafted (among others) by party leaders who became ministers.…”

Section: Extra-parliamentary Arenamentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Populists Govern Differently? Insights from the Italian M5S-League Case in Comparative Perspective

Vercesi

2019

PJPS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In West European context, the first fully-fledged populist government that entered office in Italy in 2018 (Conte I) has been presented as a peculiar case. After discussing party dilemmas within coalitions, the article analyses – in comparative perspective – how the two partners M5S and League managed inter-party relations despite their divergent policy preferences. The work focuses on both structural and dynamic mechanisms of coalition governance. Particular attention is paid to the coalition agreement, which is compared to the benchmark case of the German Merkel IV cabinet. Findings show that the Conte I cabinet diverged from the Italian tradition, but approached other European models, despite its rhetoric of exceptionality. Yet, poor definition of policy goals and ambiguous governance mechanisms are observed. Resumo No contexto da Europa Ocidental, o primeiro governo populista de pleno direito que entrou em funções na Itália em 2018 (Conte I) foi apresentado como um caso peculiar. Após discutir os dilemas partidários dentro das coligações, o artigo analisa - em perspectiva comparativa - como os dois parceiros M5S e Liga geriram as relações interpartidárias apesar das suas preferências políticas divergentes. O trabalho centra-se tanto nos mecanismos estruturais como dinâmicos de governação da coligação. É dada especial atenção ao acordo da coligação, que é comparado com o caso de referência do gabinete alemão Merkel IV. Os resultados mostram que o gabinete Conte I divergiu da tradição italiana, mas abordou outros modelos europeus, apesar da sua retórica de excepcionalidade. No entanto, observa-se uma má definição dos objetivos políticos e mecanismos ambíguos de governança.

show abstract

“…These distances can have a psychological meaning for political actors (Grofman, 1982;Laver, 1998). In this sense, it has been shown that the increase of this distance makes coalition formation more difficult (Hinckley, 1972;Bäck & Dumont, 2008, Vercesi, 2016. Besides, parties that are ideologically close are more likely to share overlapping voters (Martin & Vanberg, 2003), and they are driven to assess possible coalitions drawing on their expectations about the closeness of the future government with their own political positions (Bäck, 2003).…”

Section: Tablementioning

confidence: 99%

Government Formation and Political Discussions in Twitter: An Extended Model for Quantifying Political Distances in Multiparty Democracies

Guerrero-Solé

López-González

2017

Social Science Computer Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Retweet Overlap Network (RON) method has proved to be successful in quantifying the distances between political parties in multiparty democracies (Guerrero-Solé, Corominas-Murtra & López-González, 2014; Guerrero-Solé, 2017). These distances are frequently used in political science to explain the formation of coalitions and governments (Volden & Carrubba, 2004). This paper aims to explore how the data collected from Twitter can be related to the ideological similarities between political parties drawing on an extended development of the RON method that calculates the overlaps between the communities of retweeters of the most influential users in a political discussion. The method is applied to two conversations in Twitter during the last two General Elections in Spain in 2015 and 2016. Our results are consistent with the dynamics and the outcomes of the bargaining processes after both elections, and support Spanish President's statement on the reasonableness of a government of the Popular Party (PP), the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) and the Citizens-Party of the Citizenry (Cs) (Del Riego, 2016) after the Spanish General Elections in 2016. 2 This work links quantitative analysis of the overlaps of the parties' communities of retweeters with the theories of coalition and government formation. It aims to be a contribution to the exploration of Twitter metrics that can be used as new indicators of the support for coalitions in multiparty democracies.

show abstract

Coalition Politics and Inter‐Party Conflict Management: A Theoretical Framework

Cited by 14 publications

References 90 publications

Exploring instigator and defender policy scenarios in the siting of energy infrastructure

Exploring instigator and defender policy scenarios in the siting of energy infrastructure

Do Populists Govern Differently? Insights from the Italian M5S-League Case in Comparative Perspective

Government Formation and Political Discussions in Twitter: An Extended Model for Quantifying Political Distances in Multiparty Democracies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About