Consociational Democracy

Andeweg, Rudy B.

doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.509

Cited by 158 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept is used to explain the persistence of democratic government in polities with deep ethnic, linguistic, religious, or other politically salient cleavages that could fall apart or erupt in civil war if the vital interests of constituent groups were violated by hostile majorities (Lehmbruch 1967;Lijphart 1968Lijphart , 1999Andeweg 2000). They persist because the political elites representing the several "pillars" or "Lager" have agreed to avoid majority decisions and to seek compromises or consensus in all matters affecting the vital interests of any one group.…”

Section: The Risk Of Politicizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political Legitimacy in a Non-Optimal Currency Area

Scharpf

2014

Democratic Politics in a European Union Under Stress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the basis of a brief reconstruction of the causes and impacts of the euro crisis, this paper explores, counterfactually and hypothetically, whether the new euro regime, insisting on fiscal austerity and supply-side reforms, could have prevented the rise of the crisis or is able to deal with its disastrous economic and social impact. A comparison with the likely impact of transfer-based Keynesian reflation suggests that, in both cases, economic success is uncertain, while both approaches are likely to produce severely negative side-effects. In light of such dismal policy choices, attempts to politicize European election campaigns are more likely to provoke unmanageable policy conflict than to overcome the input-oriented, democratic deficit of European economic governance. ZusammenfassungDas Papier analysiert die Ursachen der Eurokrise und fragt dann, kontrafaktisch und hypothetisch, ob das neue, auf fiskalische Konsolidierung und strukturelle Reformen setzende Euro-Regime die Krise hätte vermeiden können oder jetzt geeignet wäre, deren desaströse ökonomische und soziale Folgen zu überwinden. Ein Vergleich mit der Alternative einer keynesianischen Politik der transfergestützten fiskalischen Reflation zeigt, dass in beiden Fällen der ökonomische Erfolg ungewiss bleibt, aber auf jeden Fall mit gravierenden negativen Nebenwirkungen zu rechnen ist. Angesichts derart unerfreulicher Politikoptionen würde der Versuch einer Politisierung der Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament eher kaum zu bewältigende Richtungs-und Verteilungskonflikte provozieren, als zu einer Überwindung des europäischen Demokratiedefizits beitragen.

show abstract

Section: The Risk Of Politicizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political Legitimacy in a Non-Optimal Currency Area

Scharpf

2014

Democratic Politics in a European Union Under Stress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been constant debates in this field (Andeweg 2000) with scholars questioning the predicted positive effects of consociationalism and consensus democracy (Horowitz 1985;Reynolds 2002;Roeder and Rothchild 2005), and demonstrating that the normative typology is incongruent with the empirical typology of democratic systems (Bogaards 2000). Some scholars criticized the inclusion of particular indicators in Lijphart's measurements, for…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which type of democracy performs best?

Doorenspleet

Pellikaan

2013

Acta Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Which type of democracy performs best? While some scholars argue that an electoral system with proportional representation combined with a decentralized system works best, and that the type of electoral system is crucial (Lijphart 1999), others state that a proportional electoral system with a centralized (and hence not decentralized) system lead to better performance (Gerring et al. 2005;Gerring and Thacker 2008). Still other scholars claim that decentralization is crucial, particularly in countries with deeply divided societies (Norris 2008). In this article, we argue that Lijphart's earlier 1960s work needs to be combined with his more recent 1990s work, which results in an eightfold classification. This cube with eight different types of democracy not only enables us to compare the three rival claims in a systematic way, but is also a helpful tool for future studies focusing on types of democratic systems, and their origins and consequences. Our findings show that the type of electoral system is always crucial; the other two dimensions are crucial as well, though under different circumstances. In order to achieve the highest level of good governance, the best choice for the type of political system (centralization or decentralization) depends on the structure of the society (homogeneous or not). Centralization is best in homogeneous societies, while decentralization is best in heterogeneous societies. We recommend that future studies take into account all eight different types of democracy that can be distinguished based on Lijphart's theoretical arguments in earlier and later work.

show abstract

“…Consensus democracy, thus, put considerable constraints on local leaders' attempts to exhibit directive leadership (see also Andeweg, 2000;Goldsmith & Larsen, 2004;Hendriks & Karsten, forthcoming 2013).…”

Section: Directive Leadership In a Consensus Context: Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…31-47; Andeweg, 2000, p. 512;Hendriks, 2010). Consensus democracies are characterised, among other things, by a separation of power, the existence of strong checks and balances, institutionalised interdependencies between different actors, and by practices of consultation, coproduction, and coalition building (Lijphart, 1999;Andeweg, 2000;Hendriks, 2010). Although the characteristics of consensus democracy are generally of a more institutional nature rather than of a behavioural one (Andeweg, 2000, p. 513; 2001, p. 120), democratic decision-making in a consensus context typically is of a collective style (see Lijphart, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decide and Defend: Regaining Authority for Controversial Decisions Through Rendering Account

Karsten

2013

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover design: Lisa KeijzerCover photo: Edwin Wiekens (made in Breda, the Netherlands; not one of the cases included in this book) Layout and printing: Optima Grafische Communicatie, Rotterdam, the Netherlands ISBN 978-94-6169-356-3 © Niels Karsten, 2013All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing from the proprietor(s). Decide and Defend Regaining authority for controversial decisions through rendering accountProefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan Tilburg University op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. Ph. Eijlander, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties aangewezen commissie in de aula van and suddenly you are doing the impossible." Most of the mayors and aldermen discussed in this thesis have done just that. They have managed to establish necessary, but highly controversial facilities for the homeless and have regained authority for their location decisions through explaining and justifying why they made these particular decisions. They have effectively shown directive leadership in a context that is particularly ill-disposed towards such a leadership style. Considering the controversiality of human service facility location decisions and the general mistrust of directive leadership, political-executives' ability to regain authority was unexpected. And indeed, not all succeeded in doing so to the same extent. The aim of this thesis was to gain understanding of how making controversial decisions affects executives' authority, more specifically, whether and how the rendering of account influences mayors and aldermen's authority. My attempt to answer that question has been an unforgettable experience, a true journey of discovery in the realm of locational conflict.Back in 2008, the project started out as a predominantly theoretical enterprise that focused on the relationship between the call for stronger leadership and the call for responsiveness. If it had not been for my supervisor, prof. Frank Hendriks, this thesis would have contained a multitude of intricate conceptual explorations of 'leadership', 'accountability', 'authority', 'political support', and the like. What I will remember most of Frank's supervision is the 'tja…' he occasionally wrote in the margins of sections of my work that I mistakenly thought of as original, though-provoking, and relevant pieces. I have taken 'tja…' to be the Frankian euphemism for 'I cannot say it is wrong', or even 'well thought out, well-written, but utterly irrelevant'. My sincere thanks, Frank, for reminding me to "really say something about really something", as you like to phrase it. A second word of thanks goes out to my co-supervisor, dr. LinzeSchaap, who has also played his part in 'keeping things real' by encouraging me to go out into the field, and at the same time keeping me sharp on non-subst...

show abstract

Consociational Democracy

Cited by 158 publications

References 37 publications

Political Legitimacy in a Non-Optimal Currency Area

Political Legitimacy in a Non-Optimal Currency Area

Which type of democracy performs best?

Decide and Defend: Regaining Authority for Controversial Decisions Through Rendering Account

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About