Party system closure and openness

Abstract

The degree of closure of the governmental arena is a central aspect of the stabilization of party systems, and yet little systematic effort has been devoted to its operationalization. The article proposes a new index, examines its reliability and validity, and reports the ranking of 60 party systems. By redefining the units of measurement we suggest new indicators that are uniform and transparent in their logic of construction, can be applied both to specific government-changes and to time periods, and are sensitive to the degree of change. The article finds a hierarchy among the components of party system closure, dominated by coalition formula. While new and established democracies can both produced closed patterns, the analysis of inter-war European party systems shows that closed systems are less prone to authoritarian takeover. The article demonstrates the power of inertia: the completely closed configurations stand out as the most durable ones.

Measuring Party System Change: A Systems Perspective

“…Is this also the case in other regions? In recent years, new tools have been developed to examine party system change in Europe (e.g., Bertoa and Enyedi, 2014;Chiaramonte and Emanuele, 2015;Powell and Tucker, 2013). It would be interesting to assess how fluidity index scores relate to results obtained using these indices.…”

“…The closure index, recently proposed by Bertoa and Enyedi (2014), does not build on Pedersen's index and instead operationalizes the conceptualization of 'party system change'…”

“…It is the point of departure for theoretical studies (Mair, 1989a;Smith, 1989), and for empirical studies of system change in specific countries (Bardi, 2007;Mair, 1979Mair, , 1989bQuinn, 2013;Ware, 2009). The framework has influenced the design of quantitative indicators of system change (e.g., Bartolini and Mair, 1990;Bertoa and Enyedi, 2014;Chiaramonte and Emanuele, 2015;Pedersen, 1979Pedersen, , 1980Powell and Tucker, 2013). However, none of these indicators treats 'the system' as a distinct entity, which means they do not measure the magnitude of 'party system change' when this notion is understood in Sartori terms.…”

“…The third section applies the index to study system change in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our arguments in these sections engage with theoretical research on party system change (e.g., Mair, 1989a;Smith, 1989); efforts to devise measures of this phenomenon (e.g., Bartolini and Mair, 1990;Bertoa and Enyedi, 2014;Pedersen, 1979Pedersen, , 1980Sikk, 2005, Tavits, 2008; and research on African party systems (e.g., Bogaards, 2008;Erdmann and Basedau, 2008;Kuenzi and Lambright, 2001;Lindberg, 2007). We discuss these connections with the existing scholarship at appropriate points in these sections.…”

Regional Priorities of Russia’s Foreign Policy in Policy Documents and Initiatives of Political Parties

“…Зарубежные авторы предпочитают артикулировать курс власти и непосредственно главы государства, показывая реакцию России на изменения международной ситуации и вычленяя в ее политике элементы «ревизионизма», реализма, противопоставления западному универсализму и проч. (Allison, 2017;Hedberg, 2018;Ziegler, 2016). Отдельные российские исследователи непосредственно обращаются к данной проблематике, как анализируя внешнеполитическую повестку в представлении российских партий, так и дифференцируя ее на региональные компоненты.…”