Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intra-party democracy from members’ viewpoint: the case of left-wing parties in Portugal

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Politica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Focusing on the Portuguese case, this article aims to examine how members evaluate items of intra-party democracy and the ways in which their evaluations vary significantly across parties and key individual-level factors. It uses data from online surveys conducted in 2014 to grassroots members of three left-wing parties that differ in their organisational and participative profiles: the centre-left Socialist Party and the radical left Left Bloc and Livre. The results reveal more positive evaluations among members of radical left parties and for those featuring higher levels of activism and ideological congruence with the party. However, appraisals tend to be more negative when there are higher expectations of influencing the candidate selection process and of gaining professional benefits through membership. The findings suggest that democratising reforms may be a double-edged sword by attracting members who value this kind of change but at the same time fostering critical appraisals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In Portugal, open party primaries always require enrolment in a specific party file before acquiring voting rights.

  2. An important strand of literature addresses the effects of IPD on the performance of political parties. Internal democracy seems to have negative effects on internal cohesion (Teorell 1999), or the probability of entering coalition governments (Bäck 2008). Moreover, it seems that IPD may also foster internal conflicts and factionalism (Giannetti and Benoit 2008).

  3. There are also interesting studies that use survey data on party members in order to investigate the meaning of IPD—deliberative, participatory, etc.—according to members’ perceptions (Young and Cross 2002; Saglie and Heidar 2004; Hansen and Saglie 2005).

  4. The PS also conducted open primaries in 2014 to select the candidate for prime minister, but this was a temporary mobilisation that did not affect the more centralised and hierarchical structure of the party.

  5. See more details at http://www.projectmapp.eu/.

  6. The Communist Party (Partido Comunista Português) did not participate in the survey despite the contacts made.

  7. The universe of socialist members was 83524, whereas that of BE members was approximately 6000 and 1000 for Livre. The number of total answers was 1581 for the PS, 767 for the BE and 150 for Livre. Overall, the response rate varies from 16 to 25%. Estimates based on the registered due-paying members with updated contact information.

  8. Disagreement expresses more positive evaluations.

  9. Cronbach’s Alphas are acceptable: BE = 0.7, Livre = 0.7, PS = 0.7. The component analysis gives a two-dimensional solution with only two out of the eight items being clustered together; this might result more from the imbalance of the sample as theoretically we do see the eight items as one-dimensional measures of IPD.

  10. Members were asked to position themselves and their party on a left–right scale ranging from 1 (left) to 10 (right). After subtracting the members’ position in these two questions, we rescaled the result into a 0 (congruent) to 9 (incongruent) scale.

  11. The nine surveyed political activities are as follows: (1) helping organise local meetings of the party, (2) helping organise party gatherings, (3) helping organise meetings between the party and the community, (4) donation of money (besides membership fees), (5) meeting other party members to discuss politics, (6) meeting other party members for activities other than politics, (7) meeting people from outside the party to discuss politics, (8) distributing propaganda material during campaigns and (9) conducting other activities outside the campaign period. Cronbach’s Alphas are good: BE = 0.9, Livre = 0.9 and PS = 0.9.

  12. The full wording of the question is: ‘Thinking about the motivations that led you to join the party, to what extent were each of the following reasons important in your decision’. Members used a five-point scale with 1 being not at all important and 5 very important.

  13. For the BE and the PS, we consider whether the members have held posts in national bodies, regional or local branches, at present or in the last two years. For Livre, we consider whether the members have held posts in national bodies, territorial local branches, thematic circles or other.

  14. Seniority was not surveyed in Livre due to the party’s short lifespan.

References

  • Bäck, H. 2008. Intra-party Politics and Coalition Formation: Evidence from Swedish Local Government. Party Politics 14 (1): 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baras, M., J.R. Teruel, O. Barberà, and A. Barrio. 2012. Intra-party Democracy and Middle-Level Elites in Spain. Working Paper no. 304. Barcelona: Institut de Ciències Polítiques i Socials.

  • Belchior, A. 2008. Democracia nos partidos políticos portugueses. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas 58: 131–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, L., G. Sandri, and A. Seddone. 2016. Challenges of Political Participation and Intra-party Democracy: Bittersweet Symphony from Party Membership and Primary Elections in Italy. Acta Politica. doi:10.1057/ap.2016.4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethlehem, J. 2010. Selection Bias in Web Surveys. International Statistical Review 78 (2): 161–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bille, L. 2001. Democratizing a Democratic Procedure: Myth or Reality? Candidate Selection in Western European Parties, 1960-1990. Party Politics 7 (3): 363–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordandini, P., A. Di Virgilio, and R. Mulè (eds.) 2011. I delegati congressuali di partito. Polis 25 (2): 159–286.

  • Carty, R.K. 2013. Are Political Parties Meant to Be Internally Democratic? In The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy, ed. W. Cross, and R.S. Katz, 11–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Coelho, M. 2013. Os Partidos Políticos e o Recrutamento do Pessoal Dirigente em Portugal —o caso do PS e do PPD/PSD. Lisbon: Europress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croissant, A., and P. Chambers. 2010. Unravelling Intra-Party Democracy in Thailand. Asian Journal of Political Science 18 (2): 195–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, W., and R.S. Katz. 2013a. The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, W., and R.S. Katz. 2013b. The Challenges of Intra-party Democracy. In The Challenges of Intra-party Democracy, ed. W. Cross, and R.S. Katz, 1–10. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R.J., and M.P. Wattenberg. 2000. Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R.J., D. Farrell, and I. McAllister (eds.). 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • do Espírito Santo, P. do, and M. Lisi. 2014. Filiados e Delegados dos Partidos: Portugal em Perspetiva Comparada. Base de dados, Lisbon: ISCSP-UL and FCSH-UNL.

  • Duverger, M. 1959. Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A., and J.M.L. Viegas (eds.). 2009. Representação Política. O Caso Português em Perspectiva Comparada. Lisbon: Sextante.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A., and C.P. Teixeira. 2011. A escolha antes da escolha: a seleção dos candidatos a deputados—Parte II: Teoria e prática. Revista de Ciências Sociais e Políticas 2: 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannetti, D., and K. Benoit (eds.). 2008. Intra-party Politics and Coalition Governments. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/ECPR Studies in European Political Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazan, R.Y., and G. Rahat. 2010. Democracy Within Parties. Candidate Selection Methods and Their Political Consequences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, B., and J. Saglie. 2005. Who Should Govern Political Parties? Organizational Values in Norwegian and Danish Political Parties. Scandinavian Political Studies 28 (1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalali, C. 2007. Partidos e Democracia em Portugal 1974–2005. Lisbon: Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, R.S., and P. Mair. 1995. Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party. Party Politics 1 (1): 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenig, O. 2009. Democratization of Party Leadership Selection: Do Wider Selectorates Produce More Competitive Contests? Electoral Studies 28 (2): 240–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kittilson, M.C., and S.E. Scarrow. 2003. Political Parties and the Rhetoric and Realities of Democratization. In Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies, ed. B.E. Cain, R.J. Dalton, and S.E. Scarrow, 59–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kölln, A.-K., and J. Polk. 2017. Emancipated Party Members. Party Politics 23 (1): 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeDuc, L. 2001. Democratizing Party Leadership Selection. Party Politics 7 (3): 323–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lisi, M. 2010. The Democratisation of Party Leadership Selection: The Portuguese Experience. Portuguese Journal of Social Sciences 9 (2): 127–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lisi, M. 2015a. Party Change, Recent Democracies and Portugal. Comparative Perspectives. Lanham: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lisi, M. 2015b. Democracia intra-partidária, filiados e elites intermédias: o caso do Partido Socialista Português. Análise Social 214 (1): 160–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lisi, M., and A. Freire. 2014. The Selection of Party Leaders in Portugal. In The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies, ed. J.-B. Pilet, and W. Cross, 124–140. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobo, M.C. 2003. A Elite Partidária em Portugal, 1976–2002. In Elites, Sociedade e Mudança Política, ed. A.C. Pinto, and A. Freire, 249–275. Oeiras: Celta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, F.F. 2002. Os Partidos Portugueses numa Perspectiva Organizacional. In Partidos Políticos e Sistemas Eleitorais, ed. F.F. Lopes, and A. Freire, 43–87. Oeiras: Celta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loxbo, K. 2013. The Fate of Intra-Party Democracy: Leadership Autonomy and Activist Influence in the Mass Party and the Cartel Party. Party Politics 19 (4): 537–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, P. 2013. Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michels, R. 1962. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. New York: Collier Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettitt, R.T. 2012. Exploring Variations in Intra-party Democracy: A Comparative Study of the British Labour Party and the Danish Centre-Left. British Journal of Politics & International Relations 14 (4): 630–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilet, J.-B., and W. Cross (eds.). 2014. The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poguntke, T., S.E. Scarrow, and P. Webb. 2016. Party Rules, Party Resources and the Politics of Parliamentary Democracies. How Parties Organise in the 21st Century. Party Politics. 22 (6): 661–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saglie, J., and K. Heidar. 2004. Democracy within Norwegian Political Parties. Complacency or Pressure for Change? Party Politics 10 (4): 385–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandri, G. 2012. Perceptions of Intra-Party Democracy and their Consequences on Activism: A Comparative Analysis of Attitudes and Behaviors of Grass-roots Party Members. Paper presented at the IPSA Meeting, Madrid, Spain (8–12 July 2012).

  • Sanches, E.R., and Razzuoli, I. 2017. A democracia intrapartidária em Portugal: uma análise comparada das perceções dos militantes do BE, CDS-PP, LIVRE, PS e PSD. In Militantes e Activismo nos Partidos Políticos. Portugal em Perspectiva Comparada, ed. M. Lisi, and P. do Espírito Santo, 187–212. Lisbon: Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.

  • Sandri, G., and A. Amjahad. 2015. Party Membership and Intra-Party Democracy How do Members React to Organizational Change within Political Parties? The Case of Belgium. Partecipazione e Conflitto 8 (1): 190–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarrow, S.E. 2005. Political Parties and Democracy in Theoretical and Practical Perspectives: Implementing Intra-Party Democracy. Washington: National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarrow, S.E. 2015. Beyond Party Members: Approaches to Partisan Mobilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyd, P., and P. Whiteley. 1992. Labour’s Grass Roots: The Politics of Party Membership. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, C.P. 2009. O Povo Semi-Soberano. Partidos Políticos e Recrutamento Parlamentar em Portugal (1990–2003). Coimbra: Almedina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, C.P., E. Tsatsanis, and A.M. Belchior. 2014. Support for Democracy in Times of Crisis: Diffuse and Specific Regime Support in Portugal and Greece. South European Society and Politics 19 (4): 501–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teorell, J. 1999. A deliberative defense of intra-party democracy. Party Politics 5 (3): 363–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torcal, M. 2014. The Decline of Political Trust in Spain and Portugal: Economic Performance or Political Responsiveness? American Behavioral Scientist 58 (12): 1542–1567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Biezen, I. 2008. State Intervention in Party Politics: The Public Funding and Regulation of Political Parties. European Review 16 (3): 337–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Biezen, I. 2014. The End of Party Democracy as We Know It? A Tribute to Peter Mair. Irish Political Studies 29 (2): 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Biezen, I., P. Mair, and T. Poguntke. 2012. Going, going…gone? The Decline of Party Membership in Contemporary Europe. European Journal of Political Research 51 (1): 24–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Haute, E., and R.K. Carty. 2012. Ideological misfits. Party Politics 18 (6): 885–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Haute, E., and A. Gauja (eds.). 2015. Party Members and Activists. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Holsteyn, J., and R. Koole. 2009. Is It True What They Say? Dutch Party Members and Their Opinion on Internal Party Democracy. Paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions Workshops, Lisbon, Portugal (14–19 April 2009).

  • Von Dem Berge, B., T. Poguntke, P. Obert, and D. Tipei. 2013. Measuring Intra-Party Democracy: a Guide for the Content Analysis of Party Statutes with Examples from Hungary, Slovakia and Romania. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wauters, B. 2009. Intra-Party Democracy in Belgium: On Paper, in Practice and through the Eyes of the Members. Paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions Workshops, Lisbon, Portugal (14–19 April 2009).

  • Wauters, B. 2014. Democratising Party Leadership Selection in Belgium: Motivations and Decision Makers. Political Studies 62 (1): 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, L., and W. Cross. 2002. The Rise of Plebiscitary Democracy in Canadian Political Parties. Party Politics 8 (6): 673–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) within the projects ‘UID/CPO/04627/2013’ and ‘PTDC/IVCCPO/1864/2014’.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Professor Aníbal de Bettencourt, 9, 1600-189, Lisbon, Portugal

    Edalina Rodrigues Sanches

  2. Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas and Instituto Português de Relações Internacionais, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Marco Lisi

  3. Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Isabella Razzuoli

  4. CAPP (Centro de Administração e Políticas Públicas), Instituto Superior de Ciências Sociais e Políticas, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Paula do Espírito Santo

Authors
  1. Edalina Rodrigues Sanches
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Lisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabella Razzuoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paula do Espírito Santo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edalina Rodrigues Sanches.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Party members’ satisfaction with their influence within the party (%)

 

Not at all

Not very satisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

(N)

BE

11

43

41

5

(585)

Livre

4

26

52

18

(126)

PS

17

51

29

3

(1273)

All

14

47

34

5

(1984)
  1. (1) Do not know/No answer excluded from the analysis; (2) The index of satisfaction with intra-party party functioning ranges between 1 (not satisfied) and 4 (very satisfied). (3) η = 0.387; F(2) = 175.595, p < 0.001. (4) Question: ‘Overall, do you feel satisfied with your influence within the party?’

Appendix 2: Descriptive statistics on dependent, independent and control variables

 

BE

LIVRE

PS

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Dependent variables

 Satisfaction with IPD

2.8

0.4

3.2

0.4

2.4

0.5

Independent variables and controls

 Age

44.1

13.9

38.9

10.5

48.2

13.9

 Education

3.9

1.0

4.2

0.7

3.8

0.9

 Sex

1.3

0.5

1.2

0.4

1.2

0.4

 Posts within party

0.5

0.8

1.1

0.9

1.0

1.5

 Seniority

6.6

5.1

    

14.4

12.6

 Activism

2.7

1.0

2.2

1.0

2.8

1.0

 Ideological (in)congruence

1.0

1.0

0.6

0.8

1.6

1.6

 To help fulfil the ideals that I defend

4.5

0.7

4.6

0.7

4.5

0.8

 To influence the candidate selection process

2.9

1.3

3.8

1.2

3.2

1.2

 To gain professional benefits

1.2

0.5

1.2

0.4

1.5

0.8
  1. Note: Seniority data is non-available for Livre

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sanches, E.R., Lisi, M., Razzuoli, I. et al. Intra-party democracy from members’ viewpoint: the case of left-wing parties in Portugal. Acta Polit 53, 391–408 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-017-0057-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-017-0057-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation