New Insights into Coalition Negotiations—The Case of German Government Formation

Abstract

Research on coalition negotiations after general elections in parliamentary systems usually focuses on the parties’ utility maximization as corporate actors. However, the most recent process of government formation after the German general election in 2017 followed a different type of logic and led to an outcome unlike that of other coalition negotiations. Regarding policy seeking, office seeking, and vote seeking, the outcomes of both the exploratory talks between Christlich Demokratische Union (CDU)/Christlich‐Soziale Union (CSU), Freie Demokratische Partei, and the Greens and the negotiations between CDU/CSU and Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands are at least partly irrational from a cost–benefit analysis. This article examines the formation of Germany’s government in 2017–2018 and reveals the paradoxical outcomes of each phase of the negotiations. Empirical data to underpin the argument stem from interviews with negotiators and statements of direct participants in the formation of the coalition. Instead of the parties’ utility maximization, negotiations were largely dominated by intraparty conflicts, in which individual interests and personal trust rather than partisan unitary programs were most relevant to the negotiation process and outcome. Our work answers the question of why the grand coalition was unexpectedly renewed in the end—contrary to what might be predicted based on established theories of coalition building. The observations and conclusions set forth are of general interest not only for future coalition negotiations in Germany but also for other European parliamentary democracies facing increasing party fragmentation. Most importantly, the analysis yields insights into negotiations undertaken in the absence of rationalist behavior.

Chancellor Wanted! The 2021 German Chancellor Candidates in Context

“…As the formation of governing coalitions at the federal level has become significantly more imponderable and time-consuming over the years 12 , forecasting the possible emergence of future coalitions and their leaders ahead of the polls has increasingly turned into a major scholarly gamble. The government-building experience in the aftermath of the 2017 Bundestag election with its many paradoxical twists and turns provided a major lesson for the public and the profession alike (Hornung et al 2020). 13 Still, as the way political leaders come to office tends to shape their perceived performance in office to a considerable extent (see Weller 2014, 494), even this early and cursory assessment of the first steps of the making of Merkel's supposed successor should not fail to contribute its share to a deeper understanding of the evolving German chancellorship.…”

Compromise-Building in the Spotlight of the Media? Individual and Situational Influences on the Self-Mediatization of Parliamentary Negotiations

“…The FDP leader justified the decision claiming that it had not been possible to develop a common basis of trust. 1 Scholars and other commentators have explained the failure of the "Jamaica" negotiations (at least partly) by the fact that negotiators publicly communicated important information about the negotiations (Hornung et al 2020). In line with this explanation, several relevant actors, such as the Green Party co-leader, pointing to the breakdown of the negotiations in 2017, stated ahead of the coalition talks following the 2021 German federal election that, this time, they intended to create a discreet space of trust.…”