Party Primaries: Towards a Definition and Typology

Prime Ministers unchained? Explaining Prime Minister Policy Autonomy in coalition governments

“…We followed the operationalization formulated by Pilet and Cross (2014) and by Kenig et al . (2015): the variable has value 1 if the PM’s selectorate corresponds to one person, 2 if it is a party’s elite (for instance, an executive organ), 3 if it is made by a party’s MPs, 4 if it corresponds to the party congress, 5 if it is made by party members and, finally, 6 if it corresponds to party voters. Data for this variable are taken from Sandri et al .…”

Candidate selection methods and electoral performance in comparative perspective

“…Although primary elections were limited to the US context for almost a century, they have spread to many Western countries in the last few years. Consequently, notwithstanding the relative novelty of the phenomenon, academic studies in the field have exponentially increased over the last decade (Caul Kittilson and Scarrow, 2006;Hazan, 2006;Hazan and Rahat, 2010;Astudillo, 2012;Krouwel, 2012;Cross and Blais, 2012a, b;Pilet and Cross, 2014;Gauja and Cross, 2015;Kenig et al, 2015;Sandri et al, 2015;Boatright 2018). As a matter of fact, the term 'primaries' specifically refers to the selection of candidates for national or local elections involving all party members or, at least, party sympathizers (Pasquino, 2006;Kenig et al, 2015).…”

“…Consequently, notwithstanding the relative novelty of the phenomenon, academic studies in the field have exponentially increased over the last decade (Caul Kittilson and Scarrow, 2006;Hazan, 2006;Hazan and Rahat, 2010;Astudillo, 2012;Krouwel, 2012;Cross and Blais, 2012a, b;Pilet and Cross, 2014;Gauja and Cross, 2015;Kenig et al, 2015;Sandri et al, 2015;Boatright 2018). As a matter of fact, the term 'primaries' specifically refers to the selection of candidates for national or local elections involving all party members or, at least, party sympathizers (Pasquino, 2006;Kenig et al, 2015). Yet, this concept has been often used beyond its narrow meaning, to indicate more generally the growth of intra-party democracy and the involvement of a growing number of people in candidate and leader selection or in a party's internal decision-making process (Kenig and Rahat, 2012;Sandri et al, 2015).…”

The ‘Open Garden of Politics’: The impact of open primaries for candidate selection in the British Conservative Party

“…Although the expression is used by scholars and journalists in relation to the case of the British Conservative Party, the method used by the party actually involves a procedure of candidate selection, which is open to both party members and registered voters in the constituencies concerned. Although this article will continue to use this label for practical reasons, the method should in fact be more accurately identified as one of ‘mixed primaries’ (Kenig et al, 2015). Since 2003, two kinds of open primaries have been introduced: all-postal primaries, organised throughout the constituencies concerned, with voting bulletins and pre-paid envelopes sent to all registered voters and primary meetings advertised in the local press, in which all registered voters are invited to participate.…”

“…Arguing that the efficiency of open primaries relies on a balanced system combining a preliminary centralised filtering by an exclusive selectorate and a final decision made by an inclusive selectorate (Hazan and Rahat, 2010: 174), Hazan and Rahat conclude that democratisation is not necessarily the ultimate aim of open primaries, but that a subtle compromise with centralisation should be sought. Moreover, the complexity of the procedure adopted by the Conservative Party (Kenig et al, 2015), implying that the final decision is made by a selectorate, which is not fully inclusive (associating voters and members), is not expected therefore to produce the same democratic outputs as a fully inclusive method.…”