2018
DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsx083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Party Lists Matter? Political Party Strategies in Legislative Candidate Nominations1

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
10
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
10
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The Turkish case provides two unique opportunities to test the backlash effect in legislatures. First, Turkey employs a closed-list proportional representation electoral system, where candidate nominations are determined exclusively by the party leadership (Yildirim 2018; Yildirim, Kocapınar, and Ecevit 2017; Ciftci and Yildirim 2017; Ecevit and Kocapınar 2018). Secondly, women have been historically underrepresented in the parliament and in the party leadership (Arat 1989), which in turn created an environment dominated by male MPs.…”
Section: Women and Politics In Turkeymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Turkish case provides two unique opportunities to test the backlash effect in legislatures. First, Turkey employs a closed-list proportional representation electoral system, where candidate nominations are determined exclusively by the party leadership (Yildirim 2018; Yildirim, Kocapınar, and Ecevit 2017; Ciftci and Yildirim 2017; Ecevit and Kocapınar 2018). Secondly, women have been historically underrepresented in the parliament and in the party leadership (Arat 1989), which in turn created an environment dominated by male MPs.…”
Section: Women and Politics In Turkeymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the democratic relevance of the flexibility of candidate lists [i.e., parties' capacity to react to voters' changing preferences], it is surprising how little research has been undertaken into their intertemporal volatility. To our knowledge, the only longitudinal effort, which is limited to demand-side factors, is Ecevit and Kocapınar's (2018) recent study of Turkish parties, which suggests that even in party-driven closed-list systems, electoral defeats incentivize party leaders to seek strategic list changes. The few other recent, cross-sectional studies have also analyzed closed-list systems (Galasso and Nannicini, 2015;Rehmert, 2020) where candidates' personal reputations generally bear less weight (Carey and Shugart, 1995) than in preferential voting systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, as already mentioned, parties' strategic capacity can be hindered by various factors ranging from candidate supply to intra-organizational limitations, resources and skills. Therefore, besides demand [i.e., the question of 'what parties want', which Ecevit and Kocapınar (2018) exclusively focused on], it is important to take into account factors that might limit parties' capacity to operate according to the incentives that the party system bestows on them. By also accounting for these factorstheoretically, empirically and intertemporallywe aim to make a novel contribution to the emerging field of list volatility.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A crucial example of party centralization can be seen in candidacy appointments through party headquarters instead of carrying out primary elections (see Ecevit & Kocapınar, 2018). Just as people started to believe that the governmental dominance of the AKP could not be challenged came the June 2015 election.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%