Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T23:19:05.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Understanding Power-Sharing within Political Parties: Stratarchy as Mutual Interdependence between the Party in the Centre and the Party on the Ground

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2016

Abstract

Recent literature has renewed interest in the stratarchical model of intraparty decision-making. In this version of party organization, the functions performed by parties are distributed among their discrete levels. The result is a power-sharing arrangement in which no group has control over all aspects of party life. Thus, the model potentially provides an antidote to the hierarchical version of organization. This article examines the principal parties in Australia, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand to test whether there is empirical evidence of stratarchy. An examination of candidate nomination, leadership selection and policy development finds strong evidence of shared authority between both levels of the party in key areas of intraparty democracy. Both levels accept that they cannot achieve their goals without the support of the other and so a fine balancing act ensues, resulting in constant recalibration of power relations. There is, however, little evidence of the commonly presented model of stratarchy as mutual autonomy for each level within discrete areas of competency. Instead, both the party on the ground and in the centre share authority within all three areas, resulting in a pattern of mutual interdependence rather than mutual autonomy.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

William Cross is the Hon. Dick and Ruth Bell Chair for the Study of Canadian Parliamentary Democracy in the Department of Political Science at Carleton University. Contact email: bill_cross@carleton.ca.

References

References

Aarts, K., Blais, A. and Schmitt, H. (2011) (eds), Political Leaders and Democratic Elections (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Bennister, M. and Heppell, T. (2016), ‘Comparing the Dynamics of Party Leadership Survival in Britain and Australia: Brown, Rudd and Gillard’, Government and Opposition, 51(1): 134159.Google Scholar
Bolleyer, N. (2012), ‘New Party Organization in Western Europe: Of Hierarchies, Stratarchies and Federations’, Party Politics, 18(3): 315336.Google Scholar
Bracks, S., Faulkner, J. and Carr, B. (2011), 2010 National Review: Report to the ALP National Executive (Barton, ACT: Australian Labor Party).Google Scholar
Carty, R.K. (2002), ‘The Politics of Tecumseh Corners: Canadian Political Parties as Franchise Organizations’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 35(4): 723745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carty, R.K. (2004), ‘Parties as Franchise Systems: The Stratarchical Organizational Imperative’, Party Politics, 10(1): 524.Google Scholar
Carty, R.K. and Cross, W. (2006), ‘Can Stratarchically Organized Parties be Democratic? Evidence from the Canadian Experience’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 16(2): 93114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carty, R.K., Cross, W. and Young, L. (2000), Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics (Vancouver: UBC Press).Google Scholar
Cross, W. (1998), ‘Teledemocracy: Canadian Political Parties and Communication Technology’, in L. Pal and C. Alexander (eds), Digital Democracy: Politics and Policy in the Wired World (Toronto: Oxford University Press): 132148.Google Scholar
Cross, W. (2004), Political Parties (Vancouver: UBC Press).Google Scholar
Cross, W. (2006), ‘Candidate Nomination in Canadian Political Parties’, in J. Pammett and C. Dornan (eds), The Canadian General Election of 2006 (Toronto: Dundurn Press): 171195.Google Scholar
Cross, W. (2016), ‘Considering the Appropriateness of State Regulation of Intra-party Democracy: A Comparative Politics Perspective’, Election Law Journal, 15(1): 2030.Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Blais, A. (2011), ‘Holding Party Leaders to Account: The Westminster Cases’, in P. ’t Hart and J. Uhr (eds), How Power Changes Hands: Leadership Transition and Succession in Government (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan): 133156.Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Blais, A. (2012), Politics at the Centre: The Selection and Removal of Party Leaders in the Anglo Parliamentary Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Gauja, A. (2014a), ‘Evolving Membership Strategies in Australian Political Parties’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 49(4): 611625.Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Gauja, A. (2014b), ‘Designing Candidate Selection Methods: Exploring Diversity in Australian Political Parties’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 49(1): 2239.Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Katz, R.S. (2013) (eds), The Challenges of Intra-party Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Cross, W. and Pilet, J. (2015) (eds), The Politics of Party Leadership: A Cross-national Perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Duverger, M. (1954), Political Parties (London: Methuen).Google Scholar
Eldersveld, S. (1964), Political Parties: A Behavioral Analysis (Chicago: Rand McNally).Google Scholar
Fianna, Fáil (2013), ‘Election of Uachtaran Fhianna Fail: Discussion Document and Proposals’ (Dublin).Google Scholar
Foley, M. (2000), The British Presidency (Manchester: Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. (1988), ‘Introduction’, in M. Gallagher and M. Marsh (eds), Candidate Selection in Comparative Perspective: The Secret Garden of Politics (London: Sage): 119.Google Scholar
Galligan, Y. (2003), ‘Candidate Selection: More Democratic or More Centrally Controlled?’, in M. Gallagher, M. Marsh and P. Mitchell (eds), How Ireland Voted 2002 (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan): 3756.Google Scholar
Gauja, A. (2005), ‘The Pitfalls of Participatory Democracy: A Study of the Australian Democrat’s GST’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 40(1): 7185.Google Scholar
Gauja, A. (2013), The Politics of Party Policy (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Gustafson, B. (1986), The First 50 Years: A History of the New Zealand National Party (Auckland: Reed Methuen).Google Scholar
Hanley, S. (2015), ‘All Fall Down? The Prospects for Established Parties in Europe and Beyond’, Government and Opposition, 50(2): 300323.Google Scholar
Harmel, R. and Janda, K. (1994), ‘An Integrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change’, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(3): 259287.Google Scholar
Hazan, R. and Rahat, G. (2010), Democracy within Parties: Candidate Selection Methods and their Political Consequences (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Helms, L. (2014), ‘From Party Government to Party Governance’, Government and Opposition, 49(1): 120138.Google Scholar
Ignazi, P. and Pizzimenti, E. (2014), ‘Intra-party Power in the Italian Political Parties’, paper presented at the IPSA World Congress, Montreal.Google Scholar
Katz, R.S. (1981), ‘But How Many Candidates Should we Have in Donegal’, British Journal of Political Science, 11(1): 117122.Google Scholar
Katz, R.S. and Mair, P. (1995), ‘Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: the Emergence of the Cartel Party’, Party Politics, 1(1): 528.Google Scholar
Kirchheimer, O. (1966), ‘The Transformation of the Western European Party Systems’, in J. Palombara and M. Weiner (eds), Political Parties and Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press): 177200.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (1995), ‘Party Organizations: From Civil Society to the State’, in R.S. Katz and P. Mair (eds), How Parties Organize: Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies (London: Sage): 122.Google Scholar
Mair, P. and van Biezen, I. (2001), ‘Party Membership in Twenty European Democracies, 1980–2000’, Party Politics, 7(1): 521.Google Scholar
Michels, R. (1911), Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy (New York: Collier Books).Google Scholar
Miller, R. (2005), Party Politics in New Zealand (Melbourne: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Mughan, A. (2000), Media and the Presidentialization of Parliamentary Elections (Basingstoke: Palgrave).Google Scholar
Panebianco, A. (1988), Political Parties: Organization and Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Pilet, J. and Cross, W. (2014) (eds), The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies: A Comparative Study (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
Poguntke, T. and Webb, P. (2005) (eds), The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranney, A. (1981), ‘Candidate Selection’, in D. Butler, H.R. Penniman and A. Ranney (eds), Democracy at the Polls (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute): 75106.Google Scholar
Reidy, T. (2011), ‘Candidate Selection’, in M. Gallagher and M. Marsh (eds), How Ireland Voted 2011: The Full Story of Ireland’s Earthquake Election (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan): 4767.Google Scholar
Reith, P. (2011), ‘Review of the 2010 Federal Election’ (Australian Liberal Party).Google Scholar
Salmond, R. (2003), ‘Choosing Candidates: Labour and National in 2002’, in J. Boston, S. Church, S. Levine, E. McLeay and N. Roberts (eds), New Zealand Votes: The General Election of 2002 (Wellington: Victoria University Press): 192208.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. (1976), Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Savoie, D. (1999), Governing From the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics (Toronto: University of Toronto Press).Google Scholar
Scarrow, S. (2014), ‘Multi-speed Membership Parties: Evidence and Implications’, paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions (Salamanca).Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. (1942), Party Government (New York: Rinehart).Google Scholar
Webb, P., Farrell, D. and Holliday, I. (2002) (eds), Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Weeks, L. (2008), ‘Candidate Selection: Democratic Centralism or Managed Democracy?’, in M. Gallagher and M. Marsh (eds), How Ireland Voted 2007: The Full Story of Ireland’s General Election (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan): 4864.Google Scholar
Weller, P. (1985), First Among Equals: Prime Ministers in Westminster Systems (Sydney: George Allen and Unwin).Google Scholar
Whiteley, P. (2011), ‘Is the Party Over? The Decline of Party Activism and Membership Across the Democratic World’, Party Politics, 17(1): 2144.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, S.I. (2015), ‘Where’s the Party? The Decline of Party Institutionalization and What (If Anything) That Means for Democracy’, Government and Opposition, 50(3): 420445.Google Scholar
Young, L. (2013), ‘Party Members and Intra-party Democracy’, in W. Cross and R.S. Katz (eds), The Challenges of Intra-party Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 6580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Party Constitutions and Rules

Australian Labor Party (ALP) (2011), Constitution and Rules.Google Scholar
Conservative Party of Canada (2013), Constitution.Google Scholar
Conservative Party of Canada (2014), Candidate Nomination Rules and Procedures.Google Scholar
Liberal Party of Australia (2009), Federal Constitution.Google Scholar
Liberal Party of Canada (2014), Constitution.Google Scholar
Fianna Fáil: The Republican Party (2012), Constitution and Rules.Google Scholar
Fine Gael (2011), Constitution and Rules.Google Scholar
New Zealand Labour Party (2014), Constitution and Rules.Google Scholar
New Zealand National Party (2011), Constitution and Rules.Google Scholar