Party System Nationalization and Ethnic Conflicts

The Nationalization of political parties and party systems in post-communist Eastern Europe

What determines how ‘European’ a party’s manifesto is? This article examines the salience of European issues in national parties’ Euromanifestos during the 1979–2004 period. I argue that domestic politics, including voter, party, and party system factors, influence the European content of a party’s Euromanifesto. Using data from the Euromanifestos Project for 14 member states, I find that the differential emphasis on European issues in the national party system, intra-party dissent on European integration, voter ambivalence on membership of the European Union, and party type all influence the salience of European issues in a party’s manifesto. These findings have important implications for understanding both how parties use manifestos to manipulate the political agenda and the dimensions of contestation in elections to the European Parliament.

Legislative policy-making authority, party system size, and party system nationalization

Party politics in India display numerous paradoxical features, which reveal the blending of Western and modern forms of bureaucratic organization and participatory politics with indigenous practices and institutions. India's leading political party, the Indian National Congress, is one of the oldest in the world, yet it has not succeeded in providing the nucleus for an institutionalized party system which can be fitted easily into any one of the conventional categories of party systems known in the West. There has been a strong Marxist and Communist revolutionary tradition in modern Indian political history. However, unlike other such traditions in most parts of Asia, its dominant parties and movements have neither succeeded in threatening the stability of the Indian state nor been threatened with physical extinction as in Indonesia, but have instead been integrated in the form of reformist political parties within routine politics in the country. The diversities and social fragmentation of Indian society have produced a proliferation of regional and other political parties which often give to each state in the Indian Union a unique party system imperfectly integrated into the “national party system.” Some characteristically Indian features pervade virtually all parties in the country — factionalism, dynastic succession to leadership, and the presence of ideological differences among the parties without ideological cleavage in the party system.

This article explores the impact of decentralisation on countries’ fiscal outcomes paying attention to one aspect usually neglected in the literature: the relevance of local politics, proxied by party system nationalisation. Based on a wide sample of developed and developing countries over the period 1970–2011, our findings are threefold. First, both fiscal and political decentralisations have a virtuous effect on fiscal performance, improving general government primary balances. Second, there is no strong evidence that nationalisation by itself enhances national fiscal outcomes. Nevertheless, when fiscal decentralisation is coupled with a certain level of nationalisation, the former improves government fiscal balances. However, when nationalisation of party systems is extremely weak, all the disciplining effects of decentralisation tend to disappear.

The nationalisation of politics is a major political phenomenon deriving from the historical trend towards the formation of national electorates and party systems brought about by the progressive reduction in the significance of territorial cleavages. During the last 50 years, though the issue of vote nationalisation has been addressed by a large volume of literature, serious analysis of the Italian case has never made much progress, having been limited to the reflections of a few isolated authors. Over the past 20 years, a period marking the passage from the long period of polarised pluralism to the so-called ‘Second Republic’, the Italian party system has undergone profound changes, with the continuing emergence and growth of new political parties and a sharp increase in the levels of party fragmentation and volatility. How has nationalisation of the vote evolved in this changing framework? This article analyses the process of (de)-nationalisation of the vote in Italy and explains its evolution between the first (1948–1992) and the second (1994–2013) phases of the republican era, assessing the impact of various possible determinants. The empirical analysis shows that vote nationalisation in Italy is strongly associated with competition factors and with the level of institutionalisation of the party system.

Scholars have long expressed concern that the ascendance of the modern presidency since the New Deal and World War II, by hastening the decline of political parties and fostering the expansion of the administrative state, portended an era of chronically low public engagement and voter turnout and an increasingly fractious and impotent national politics. Presidents' inattentiveness to the demands of party-building and grassroots mobilization, coupled with their willingness to govern through administration, were seen as key obstacles to the revitalization of a politics based in widespread political interest and collective responsibility for public policy. This article argues that George W. Bush's potent combination of party leadership and executive administration, foreshadowed by Ronald Reagan's earlier efforts, suggests the emergence of a new presidential leadership synthesis and a “new” party system. This new synthesis does not promise a return to pre-modern party politics; rather, it indicates a rearticulation of the relationship between the presidency and the party system. The erosion of old old-style partisan politics allowed for a more national and issue-based party system to develop, forging new links between presidents and parties. As the 2006 elections reveal, however, it remains to be seen whether such parties, which are inextricably linked to executive-centered politics and governance, can perform the critical function of moderating presidential ambition and mobilizing public support for party principles and policies.Sidney M. Milkis is Professors of Politics (smm8e@cms.mail.virginia.edu) and Jesse H. Rhodes is a doctoral student (jhr7t@cms.mail.virginia.edu) at the University of Virginia. The authors would like to thank the anonymous readers who reviewed the manuscript for their thoughtful and constructive comments.

Simon Hix accurately notes that ‘EU politics is party politics’, and party politicians are an important link between governments and parliaments, parliaments and voters and also the national and European scenes. Milada A. Vachudova also stresses that in the process of European integration, parties are the source of changes in national politics through their compliance or non-compliance with European Union’s (EU) requirements. Despite these voices, the influence of the process of Europeanisation on national parties has long been downplayed and authors usually explain that parties have no institutionalised channels of contact with the decision-making bodies in the EU.The purpose of this article is to present the current state of research into the process of the Europeanisation of parties and party systems, with particular emphasis on the specificity and diversity of responses to challenges related to Europeanisation formulated by parties from Central and Eastern Europe. Three aspects of the Europeanisation of parties can be distinguished: changes in the party environment resulting from the ongoing process of European integration; rare but direct interventions of EU actors into party politics; and the influence of the Transnational Party Cooperation (TPC). The author refers to the neo-institutional paradigm of research into Europeanisation to indicate its mechanisms, factors determining the responses of national parties and the possible dimensions of observing changes. Importantly, the article also describes the author’s model that can be applied to studies of the Europeanisation of national parties and party systems in post-communist countries, both those who joined the EU between 2004 and 2013 and those aspiring to EU membership. Extensive literature studies and field studies conducted by the author for nearly three years in the post-Yugoslavian countries prompts her to make a hypothesis that the impulses for change coming from the broadly understood European environment (including European institutions and Europarties) are modified by several groups of factors: external factors (the credibility of the integration offer and the advancement of this process); intrasystemic factors (primarily, the influence of the communist heritage, constellations of political parties in individual countries and change of public preferences regarding integration); and, finally, intraparty factors (the position of leaders, the faction that is currently dominant in the party and the role of electoral defeats).

Electoral systems, ethnic diversity and party systems in developing democracies

While many studies of party system nationalization examine the effects of various institutional factors, few take into account the impact of party formation cost. This paper aims to fill the empirical gap by focusing on the interactive effect of electoral systems and party registration rules. I argue that the effect of electoral systems on party system nationalization is conditional on spatial registration rules, a requirement that requires a party to collect signatures or organize local branches in a specified geographical manner to maintain the party’s legal status. Based on data for 97 legislative elections in 18 Latin American countries from 1978 to 2011, the empirical analysis demonstrates that a country with an electoral system that encourages a personal vote tends to have a much lower level of party system nationalization when that country does not have spatial registration requirements. The result is robust across different model specifications and estimation techniques.

This comparative and long-term in-depth analysis studies the macro-historical process of the nationalization of politics. Using a large wealth of newly collected and unexplored data on single constituencies in 17 West European countries, the analysis reconstructs the territorial structures of electoral participation and support for political parties, as well as their evolution since the mid-nineteenth century from highly territorialised politics of early competitive elections toward nation-wide alignments. It provides a multi-pronged empirical analysis through time, across countries, and between party families. The inclusion of all the most importan social and political cleavages (class, state-church, rural-urban, ethno-linguistic, and religious) allows to assess the nationalising impact of the left-right dimension that emerged from the National and Industrial Revolutions, and the resistance of pre-industrial cultural and centre-periphery factors to national integration. State formation, institutional, and socio-political mobilisation models are combined with actor-centered explanatory factors to account for key evolutionary steps and differences between national types of territorial configurations of the vote.

The Nationalization of Politics: The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe

Introduction The residential neighbourhood is thought to affect residents because of presumed neighbourhood effects; the independent effects of a neighbourhood’s characteristics on the life chances of its residents. An enormous body of research has tried to measure neighbourhood effects, however, there are no clear conclusions on how much, if any, effect the neighbourhood has on its residents. There is non-random selection of people into neighbourhoods which causes a bias in the modelling of neighbourhood effects. Any correlation found between neighbourhood characteristics and individual outcomes might be explained by selection bias and can therefore not prove the existence of a causal neighbourhood effect. The question is; do poor neighbourhoods make people poor, or do poor people live in unattractive neighbourhoods because they cannot afford to live elsewhere (Cheshire, 2007). Therefore, insight in selection is important to gain more insight in neighbourhood effects (Van Ham and Manley, 2012). For neighbourhood effects research it is important to study selective mobility and neighbourhood choice and to combine neighbourhood effects research with neighbourhood selection research (Doff, 2010a; Van Ham and Manley, 2012; Van Ham et al., 2012; Galster, 2003; Hedman, 2011). The aim of this thesis therefore is to gain more insight in both the causes and the consequences of segregation and thus to study both individual residential mobility and neighbourhood selection and neighbourhood effects. Besides the neighbourhood effects literature, also the segregation literature will benefit from better insights in selective residential mobility because selective residential mobility is one of the main driving forces of segregation. There are two main research questions for this thesis. Firstly, I try to give insight in selective mobility and neighbourhood choice and thus to study where, when and why which people move. What is the effect of personal characteristics, neighbourhood characteristics and macro level housing market developments on individual neighbourhood satisfaction, moving wishes, moving behaviour and neighbourhood selection and on macro level selective mobility patterns and segregation? Secondly, I will test presumed neighbourhood effect mechanisms. Concentration areas of ethnic minorities are seen as undesirable, because their residents are thought to have less contact with the native majority which might hamper their integration and their life chances. It is, however, unclear to what extent social contact is affected by the residential neighbourhood. The second research question therefore asks whether ethnic minorities have less contact with the native majority if they live in minority concentration neighbourhoods. Segregation Segregation is defined as the population composition of neighbourhoods in relation to each other; that is, the concentration or underrepresentation of population groups in neighbourhoods compared to a city or national level average. Selective residential mobility is one of the main driving forces of segregation. Households move to a certain neighbourhood, either because they choose to live there, or because they are constrained in their choice options. Therefore segregation can be both voluntary and involuntary. This thesis focuses on selective residential mobility as cause of segregation, therefore it tries to understand why and where people move. According to residential mobility theory, personal characteristics determine residential preferences and if the residential situation is not in line with these preferences this will lead to dissatisfaction and a desire to move (Brown and Moore, 1970). Whether a dissatisfied household succeeds in moving to a dwelling and neighbourhood more in line with their preferences, depends on their personal resources and restrictions and macro level opportunities and constraints (Mulder and Hooimeijer, 1999). Successful households will move to a neighbourhood more in line with their preferences. There are, however, differences between households in which neighbourhoods are open to choice. Low income households will only be able to select neighbourhoods in which inexpensive dwellings are available. Similarly, households who depend on the social housing sector, or on the owner-occupied sector will only be able to select neighbourhoods where dwellings of this tenure are available. In addition, there are differences between households in which neighbourhood is (deemed) most attractive. People prefer to live among others who are similar to themselves and also facilities directed towards specific groups will make especially concentration neighbourhoods of the own ethnic or income group attractive. Besides residential preferences, also other factors will affect neighbourhood selection; population groups will differ in access to information on neighbourhood attractiveness or housing opportunities and discrimination, or fear of discrimination, can limit the opportunities of minority groups on the housing market. Neighbourhood effects It is typically assumed in European and American urban policy and academic research that spatial concentrations of low income households or ethnic minorities have negative effects on their inhabitants (Friedrichs et al., 2003). An enormous body of research has tried to measure neighbourhood effects; the independent effect of a neighbourhood on its residents when controlling for individual characteristics (see for a review Dietz, 2002; Ellen and Turner, 1997; Sharkey and Faber, 2014; Van Ham et al., 2012). The research attention for neighbourhood effects started with the seminal work of Wilson (1987). He argued that living in concentration areas of the jobless lowest class, isolated from role models, mainstream values and norms, and informal job networks and social contacts with employed, has a negative effect on your life chances. Neighbourhoods can affect their residents via a number of mechanisms (Ellen and Turner, 1997; Erbring and Young, 1979; Galster, 2012). Firstly, the geographical location determines job access and thereby labour market opportunities. Secondly, pollution, noise and disturbance affect health and (thereby) life chances via environmental mechanisms . In addition, neighbourhood stigmatisation can reduce life chances because others have prejudiced ideas and low expectations of the residents of stigmatised neighbourhoods. Also, the quality of institutions such as schools, museums, libraries and sport facilities will generally be lower in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, thereby reducing the life chances of residents. Finally, neighbourhood effects can transpire via social interactions with neighbours. Through collective socialisation and peer pressure people are thought to conform to local social norms (Jencks and Mayer, 1990). Positive role models and social network contacts with individuals with more social capital can help people advance in their work or educational career (Ellen and Turner, 1997). For ethnic minorities it can be important to have social interactions with the native majority to have the opportunity to learn the majority language, standards and values (Lazear, 1999) and to have bridging network ties that can provide access to valuable information not present within the own ethnic network (Buck, 2001). Many neighbourhood effect researchers believe that living in concentrated poverty has negative effects on individuals, and policymakers try to create mixed neighbourhoods to prevent these negative neighbourhood effects. However, although “it is perfectly plausible that poor people are made poorer by the characteristics of the neighbourhoods in which they live” (…) “a close examination of the best research available does not reveal any clear evidence to support it” (Cheshire, 2007: p. ix). Almost all neighbourhood effect studies struggle with selection bias (Cheshire, 2007). Any relation found between neighbourhood characteristics and individual outcomes might be a selection effect and therefore cannot prove the existence of a causal neighbourhood effect. Neighbourhood effects researchers have tried to reduce or eliminate selection bias. Firstly this is done by using quasi-experimental study designs, using households whose residential neighbourhood is determined by external factors (Sampson et al., 2002). Secondly, advanced statistical methods such as sibling studies, fixed effects studies, instrumental variables and propensity score matching are used to reduce selection bias or to control for selection (Harding, 2003). These advancements in methodology have improved our insight in selection bias and in neighbourhood effects, however, since there are no methods that can completely eliminate selection bias, there is still no clear evidence of causal neighbourhood effects. Generally, methods that apply more controls for selection bias find smaller neighbourhood effects. Instead of trying to eliminate selection bias, this thesis tries to provide insight in selection, in why and where which people move. In addition, this thesis tests presumed neighbourhood effect mechanisms. Social interactive mechanisms assume that neighbourhood effects transpire because the population composition of the residential neighbourhood affects with whom you interact (Ellen and Turner, 1997; Galster, 2012). Therefore I test whether the ethnic composition of the neighbourhood affects interethnic contact. Individual differences in determinants of residential satisfaction<

This piece is an extract from the introductory chapter of the first publication in the IKAB series published in 1985 and entitled ‘On the Political Didactics of Intercultural Learning – A Planning Concept for International Youth Work’. Otten begins with a general critique of the contemporary practice of political education conducted at the international level. Since the 2nd World War, political education has, more often than not, been normatively-ontologically and partially empirically-analytically conceptualised, if it has been grounded in theory at all. Of primary importance has been the formal notion of pluralism, in which ‘every political position must find its place’. So organised, political education at the international level refers primarily to national norms and the political positions within national party systems. The everyday educational experience in such activities is almost exclusively based on the methodological organisation of what young people need to learn from an ethical and cognitive point of view. Hence, intercultural learning and, its individual constituent concepts, has been primarily understood as a methodological challenge, with the objective of equalising opposing positions, reconciliation, ensuring peace and the creation of mutual understanding between people/s, without that such objectives and processes would be politically legitimated or considerate of real situations. In Otten’s estimation, characteristic of this ‘harmonising political education’ approach is a lack of explanation and an overestimation of its own educational value.

The article maps party support for national EU-related referendums across the EU after Brexit. It is motivated by conflicting expectations about the trajectory of EU referendum politics in the post-Brexit environment which foreground either possible contagion or deterrent effects of the Brexit referendum. Against this background, the article explores the scope of party support for EU referendums in EU member states, which types of political parties endorse popular votes on European issues and how the Brexit experience has affected EU referendum support among European parties. To that purpose, the article presents novel data from an EU-wide (except Ireland) expert survey. The findings show that EU referendum support varies greatly between national party systems and that it comes mainly from Eurosceptic opposition parties, often on the populist far right. The impact of the Brexit precedent on party positions on EU referendums is relatively weak overall and uneven across parties.