Abstract
In this paper, we analyse the conditions under which political parties narrow their representative profile (defined by the scope of the issues or the constituencies they represent). This strategy has been neglected in the party literature, which is mainly focused on the adoption of catch-all strategies among mainstream parties or the tendency to stick to core issues among niche parties. In this paper, we develop a theoretical framework that includes central external and internal drivers of party change and we empirically test this framework using novel survey data covering 121 parties across six European democracies: The United Kingdom, Norway, Germany, Switzerland, Italy and Ireland.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Major datasets widely used in the field—for instance the Manifesto Project Dataset – tend to focus on parties with parliamentary representation or significant vote shares. Similarly, cross-national studies on new parties tend to focus on those parties that win a minimum share of the national vote or, alternatively, achieve parliamentary representation (e.g. Kitschelt 1989; Krouwel and Lucardie 2008; Rose and Mackie 1988; but see Hug 2001). For a detailed review, see Bolleyer (2013, Chap. 2).
- 2.
All parties surveyed participated in the last national election and were active when the survey was launched.
- 3.
Note that the concept of niche party is distinct from the concept of single-issue party. While directly contradicting the definition of niche party as used by Meguid (2005), the definition of single-issue party by Mudde as “(1) having an electorate with no particular social structure; (2) being supported predominantly on the basis of one single issue; (3) lacking an ideological programme; and (4) addressing only one all-encompassing issue” (1999, p. 182) is too specific for our purposes (as Mudde shows it does not suitably describe extreme right parties that are commonly subsumed under the niche party concept together with Green and regional parties, for instance). More importantly, as single-issue parties are commonly considered very short-lived, they have not been theorised in terms of programmatic adaptation, which is the focus of this paper.
- 4.
Furthermore, the concept of small party is most usefully conceptualised in relative terms, in the context of its party system, meaning parties of the same absolute size can enjoy advantages in one type of party system but not in another (Bolleyer 2007). Being a niche party as a party-level property is expected to have the same consequences irrespective of their systemic context.
- 5.
Support-party status is usually restricted to specific policy areas in which a party is willing to provide legislative support to a minority government, while still opposing the government in policy areas outside the agreement, which is why we expect this rationale to hold only for parties holding ministries and forming part of the cabinet.
- 6.
This is not to say that there cannot be situations in which certain group of activists might favour more extreme forms of change (including policy change) than leaders. However, to the extent that members have been recruited into the party based on, and are committed to the party with, a given profile, the general expectation can be formulated that they are less open to strategic alterations to a party’s profile than (success-oriented) leaders are.
- 7.
To ensure comparability across first-past-the-post/mixed and list PR systems, in electoral systems with single-member constituencies we only included parties that run in more than one constituency (or in mixed systems also run with a list) to ensure all parties were active beyond one single locality.
- 8.
Deregistration from formal registers is an unreliable indication of parties’ dissolution as not all registers require parties to run regular elections or update information to stay registered and therefore often contain inactive parties.
- 9.
Our sample is representative of the party population in terms of parliamentary representation (parliamentary parties represent 23% of the population, and 28% of our sample) and ideological representativeness (including parties from all party families).
- 10.
This is the case for Switzerland; all other country samples include parties with electoral support higher than 24% of the national vote.
- 11.
- 12.
This period is suitable as a leader needs time to become established in office before being able to implement reforms, which is usually a slow process.
- 13.
In parties with collective leadership structures we considered the replacement of one core figure to be sufficient. This avoided a bias in favour of finding leadership change in centralised, leader-centred parties, had we required all leadership figures to be replaced in parties with several. In cases of parties that refused to have a formal leader, we considered the party spokesperson to be occupying a functionally equivalent role. In the few cases where there were neither leaders nor formal spokespeople, we consulted party publications and available case-study literature regarding who belonged to the core leadership and whether any of them was replaced in the relevant period (see Bolleyer and Bytzek 2017).
- 14.
Note that diagnostic tests indicate that collinearity is not a problem.
- 15.
As a robustness check we have rerun our analysis modifying the temporal sequence between the independent and dependent variables. Accordingly, we have included values capturing the situation two elections ago for Funding access, Government access, and Parliamentary parties. For Member control over policy we have included the values from a survey question asking for the situation five years prior to the survey’s launch. The significance of these variables remains the same.
References
Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., and Glasgow, G. 2004. Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results? British Journal of Political Science, 34(4): 589–610.
Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., and Glasgow, G. 2006. Are Niche Parties Fundamentally Different from Mainstream Parties? The Causes and Electoral Consequences of Western European Parties’ Policy Shifts, 1976–1998. American Journal of Political Science, 50: 513–529.
Biezen, I. van, and Kopecky, P. 2014. The cartel party and the state. Party–state linkages in European democracies. Party Politics, 20(2): 170–182.
Biezen, I. van, Mair, P., and Poguntke, T. 2011. Going, going….gone? The Decline of Party Membership in Contemporary Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 51 (1): 24–56.
Bolleyer, N. 2007. Small parties: From party pledges to government policy. West European Politics, 30(1): 121–147.
Bolleyer, N. 2013. New Parties in Old Party Systems: Persistence and Decline in 17 Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bolleyer, N., and Bytzek, E. 2017. New party performance after breakthrough: Party origin, building and leadership. Party Politics, 23(6): 772–782.
Cross, W., and Blais, A. 2011. Who selects the party leader? Party Politics, 18(2): 127–150.
Dalton, R. and Wattenberg, M. (eds.) 2002. Parties without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dalton, R.J., Farrell, D., and McAllister, I. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dalton, R.J., and Weldon, S. 2005. Public Images of Political Parties: A Necessary Evil? West European Politics 28(5): 31–51.
Deschouwer, K. (2008). New Parties in Government. London: Routledge.
Döring, H., and Manow, P. 2016. Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov) – Information on parties, elections and cabinets in modern democracies. Development version. Available at: http://www.parlgov.org/, accessed October 25, 2017.
Duverger, M. 1954. Political Parties. New York: Johns Wiley and Sons.
Fox, J. 2008. Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models. London: SAGE.
Gauja, A. 2017. Party Reform: The Causes, Challenges and Consequences of Organisational Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harmel, R., and Janda, K. 1994. An Integrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change. Journal of Theoretical Politics 6 (July): 259–87.
Harmel, R., Heo, U., Tan, A.C., and Janda, K. 1995. Performance, Leadership, Factions and Party Change: An Empirical Analysis. West European Politics, 18(1): 1–33.
Harmel, R., and Tan, A.C. 2003. Party Actors and Party Change: Does Factional Dominance Matter? European Journal of Political Research, 42(3): 409–424.
Hug, S. 2001. Altering Party Systems: Strategic Behaviour and the Emergence of New Political Parties in Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Janda, K., Harmel, R., Edens, C., and Goff, P. 1995. Changes in Party Identity. Evidence from Party Manifestos. Party Politics, 1(2): 171–196.
Katz, R.S. 2001. The Problem of Candidate Selection and Models of Party Democracy. Party Politics, 7(3): 277–296.
Katz, R.S., and Mair, P. 1995. Changing Models of Party Organisation and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party. Party Politics 1(1): 5–28.
Katz, R.S., and Mair, P. 2002. The Ascendancy of the Party in Public Office: Party Organizational Change in 20th-Century Democracies. In Gunther, R. Montero, J.R. and Linz, J.J. (eds.) Political Parties: Old Concepts and New Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Katz, R.S., and Mair, P. 2009.The Cartel Party Thesis: A Restatement. Perspectives on Politics 7(4): 753–66.
Kirchheimer, O. 1966. The Transformation of Western European Party Systems. In La Palombara, J. and Weiner, M. (eds.). Political Parties and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kitschelt, H. 1989. The Logic of Party Formation, Ecological Politics in Belgium and West Germany. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Klüver, H. and Spoon, J.J. 2016. Who Responds? Voters, Parties and Issue Attention. British Journal of Political Science, 46(3): 633–654.
Krouwel, A. 2006. Party Models. In Katz, R.S. and Crotty, W. (eds). Handbook of Party Politics. London: SAGE.
Krouwel, A., and Lucardie, P. 2008. Waiting in the Wings: New Parties in the Netherlands. Acta Politica, 43: 278–307.
Lucardie, P. 2000. Prophets, Purifiers and Prolocutors, Towards a Theory on the Emergence of New Parties. Party Politics, 6: 175–185.
Mack, C. S. 2010. When Political Parties Die: A Cross-National Analysis of Disalignment and Realignment. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Mair, P., Müller, W.C., and Plasser, F. 2004. Political Parties and Electoral Change. London: SAGE.
Meguid, B. M. 2005. Competition Between Unequals: The Role of Mainstream Party Strategy in Niche Party Success. American Political Science Review, 99: 347–59.
Meyer, T., and Wagner, M. 2013. Mainstream or Niche? Vote-Seeking Incentives and the Programmatic Strategies of Political Parties. Comparative Political Studies, 46(10): 1246–1272.
Mudde, C. 1999. The single issue party thesis: Extreme right parties and the immigration issue, West European Politics, 22(3): 182–197.
Müller, W.C. 1997. Inside the Black Box. A Confrontation of Party Executive Behaviour and Theories of Party Organizational Change. Party Politics, 3(3): 293–313.
Müller, W.C., and K. Strøm, (eds). 1999. Policy, Office, Or Votes?: How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Müller, W.C., and Strøm, K. (eds). 2003. Coalition Governments in Western Europe, Oxford: Oxford UP.
Nassmacher, K. 2009. The Funding of Party Competition. Political Finance in 25 Democracies. Frankfurt, Germany: Nomos.
Panebianco, A. 1988. Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pedersen, M.N. 1982. Towards a New Typology of Party Lifespans and Minor Parties, Scandinavian Political Studies 5 (1):1–16.
Polk, J., Rovny, J., Bakker, R., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Koedam, J., Kostelka, F., Marks, G., Schumacher, G., Steenbergen, M., Vachudova, M., and Zilovic, M. 2017. Explaining the salience of anti-elitism and reducing political corruption for political parties in Europe with the 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey data, Research & Politics (January-March): 1–9.
Rose, R., and Mackie, T. T. 1988. Do Parties Persist or Fail? The Big Trade-off Facing Organizations. In K. Lawson and P. Merkl (eds.), When Parties Fail (pp. 533–558). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sartori, G. 1976. Parties and Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Schumacher, G. C. E. de Vries and B. Vis. 2013. Why Do Parties Change Position? Party Organization and Environmental Incentives, Journal of Politics 75 (2), 464–477.
Spoon, J. 2009. Holding Their Own: Explaining the Persistence of Green Parties in France and the UK. Party Politics, 15: 615–634.
Spoon, J. 2011. Political Party Survival of Small Parties in Europe. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Vassallo, F., and Wilcox, C. 2006. Parties as carrier of ideas. In Katz, R. and Crotty, W. (eds). Handbook of Party Politics, London: SAGE.
Williams, M.H. 2009. (eds). Catch-All in the Twenty-First Century? Special Issue of Party Politics, Volume 15(5).
Wilson, F.L. 1980. Sources of Party Transformation: The Case of France. In Merkl, P.H.(ed.) Western European Party Systems. New York: Free Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bolleyer, N., Correa, P. (2020). Why Parties Narrow Their Representative Profile: Evidence from Six European Democracies. In: Bukow, S., Jun, U. (eds) Continuity and Change of Party Democracies in Europe. Politische Vierteljahresschrift Sonderhefte. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28988-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28988-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-28987-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-28988-1
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)