Chapter Five Interest Aggregation and Political Parties Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Personal Interest Aggregation  The process by which political demands are combined into policy programs  How interests are aggregated is key feature of political process  Democracies: two or more parties compete to gain support for their alternative policy programs.  Autocracies: ruling party may try to mobilize citizens’ support for its policies but it is covert and controlled  Parties  The distinctive and defining goal of a political party - its mobilization of support for policies and candidates - is especially related to interest aggregation  The process by which political demands are combined into policy programs  How interests are aggregated is key feature of political process  Democracies: two or more parties compete to gain support for their alternative policy programs.  Autocracies: ruling party may try to mobilize citizens’ support for its policies but it is covert and controlled  Parties  The distinctive and defining goal of a political party - its mobilization of support for policies and candidates - is especially related to interest aggregation Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Personal Interest Aggregation  Patron-Client Networks  System in which central authority figure provides benefits (patronage) to supporters in exchange for loyalty  Primitive structure out of which larger more complicated political structures are composed  With patron-client networks it is difficult to mobilize political resources behind unified policies or to respond to crises  Static system  Structure runs through the political processes of countries such as the Philippines, Japan, and India.  Patron-Client Networks  System in which central authority figure provides benefits (patronage) to supporters in exchange for loyalty  Primitive structure out of which larger more complicated political structures are composed  With patron-client networks it is difficult to mobilize political resources behind unified policies or to respond to crises  Static system  Structure runs through the political processes of countries such as the Philippines, Japan, and India. Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Institutional Interest Aggregation  In developing societies:  citizens become aware of larger collective interests; have resources and skills to work for them  personal networks are regulated, limited, incorporated within broader organizations.  Institutional Groups:  bureaucratic agencies and military groups are important interest aggregators  government agencies may be “captured” by interest groups and used to support their demands.  In developing societies:  citizens become aware of larger collective interests; have resources and skills to work for them  personal networks are regulated, limited, incorporated within broader organizations.  Institutional Groups:  bureaucratic agencies and military groups are important interest aggregators  government agencies may be “captured” by interest groups and used to support their demands. Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Competitive Party Systems and Interest Aggregation  Parties are primary structures of interest aggregation.  Political parties are groups or organizations that seek to place candidates in office under their label.  competitive party system – build electoral support  authoritarian party system – parties direct society  Parties are primary structures of interest aggregation.  Political parties are groups or organizations that seek to place candidates in office under their label.  competitive party system – build electoral support  authoritarian party system – parties direct society Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Competitive Party Systems and Interest Aggregation  History and development of parties  internally created parties  externally created parties  Stable party families: Social Democrats, Conservatives, Christian Democrats, Nationalists, Liberals, etc.  Party systems of democratic countries show stability  Two-party systems are not exactly alike  differences emerge due to various factors, including electoral systems  History and development of parties  internally created parties  externally created parties  Stable party families: Social Democrats, Conservatives, Christian Democrats, Nationalists, Liberals, etc.  Party systems of democratic countries show stability  Two-party systems are not exactly alike  differences emerge due to various factors, including electoral systems Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Elections  In democracies, elections are important to parties:  Determine whether they survive  Voting is simplest and most frequently performed political act  Citizens make collective decisions about future leaders and policies  Elections aggregate diverse concerns into collective decision  In democracies, elections are important to parties:  Determine whether they survive  Voting is simplest and most frequently performed political act  Citizens make collective decisions about future leaders and policies  Elections aggregate diverse concerns into collective decision Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Electoral Systems  Rules by which elections are conducted  Determine who can vote, how people vote, how votes get counted  Single-member district plurality (SMDP) election rule  First past the post  Variation on this is majority runoff system  Proportional representation (PR)  Primary elections  SMD elections: party officials select candidates  Proportional representation elections: party draws up list of candidates  Rules by which elections are conducted  Determine who can vote, how people vote, how votes get counted  Single-member district plurality (SMDP) election rule  First past the post  Variation on this is majority runoff system  Proportional representation (PR)  Primary elections  SMD elections: party officials select candidates  Proportional representation elections: party draws up list of candidates Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Patterns of Electoral Competition  Duverger’s law: single-member districts create 2-party systems  Mechanical effect – 3 rd parties don’t win  Psychological effect – voters anticipate mechanical effect  Strategic voting- support given to avoid worse situation  Anthony Downs  2-party systems: centrist pull or “convergence”  Effective number of parties  Duverger’s law: single-member districts create 2-party systems  Mechanical effect – 3 rd parties don’t win  Psychological effect – voters anticipate mechanical effect  Strategic voting- support given to avoid worse situation  Anthony Downs  2-party systems: centrist pull or “convergence”  Effective number of parties Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Competitive Parties in Government  Ability to implement policies is determined by nature of electoral outcome  W inning control of legislature and executive  Coalition governments  Aggregation of interests at executive level rather than electoral can have costs and benefits  Ability to implement policies is determined by nature of electoral outcome  W inning control of legislature and executive  Coalition governments  Aggregation of interests at executive level rather than electoral can have costs and benefits Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Cooperation and Conflict in Competitive Party Systems  Majoritarian two-party systems:  dominated by two parties (U.S)  have two dominant parties and election laws that create legislative majorities for one (Britain)  Majority-coalition systems:  establish pre-electoral coalitions so voters know which parties will work together to form government  Multiparty systems:  election laws and party systems that ensure no single party wins legislative majority  no tradition of pre-election coalitions  Majoritarian two-party systems:  dominated by two parties (U.S)  have two dominant parties and election laws that create legislative majorities for one (Britain)  Majority-coalition systems:  establish pre-electoral coalitions so voters know which parties will work together to form government  Multiparty systems:  election laws and party systems that ensure no single party wins legislative majority  no tradition of pre-election coalitions Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Cooperation and Conflict in Competitive Party Systems  Consensual party system:  parties are not far apart on policies and trust each other and political system  Conflictual party system:  parties are far apart on policies and are antagonistic toward each other and political system  Consociational (accommodative) party system:  party systems have both consensual and conflictual features  Consensual party system:  parties are not far apart on policies and trust each other and political system  Conflictual party system:  parties are far apart on policies and are antagonistic toward each other and political system  Consociational (accommodative) party system:  party systems have both consensual and conflictual features Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Authoritarian Party Systems  Can also aggregate interests  Aggregation takes place within party or interactions with groups  Exclusive governing party – total control, permits no opposition  Inclusive governing party – accepts some groups  Authoritarian corporatist system – encourages interests but gives them no power  Electoral authoritarianism – façade of democracy  Can also aggregate interests  Aggregation takes place within party or interactions with groups  Exclusive governing party – total control, permits no opposition  Inclusive governing party – accepts some groups  Authoritarian corporatist system – encourages interests but gives them no power  Electoral authoritarianism – façade of democracy Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

The Military and Interest Aggregation  Military has instruments of force and organizational capacity  Absent strong constitutional tradition, it is effective contender for power  Major limitation in interest aggregation is that military is not designed for this  Military has instruments of force and organizational capacity  Absent strong constitutional tradition, it is effective contender for power  Major limitation in interest aggregation is that military is not designed for this Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Trends in Interest Aggregation  Democratic trend in the world has gained momentum since the end of the 1980s.  In 1990s – first time in world history there are more free than unfree states  Many African nations have moved toward freedom  Unfree states remain in Middle East, Central Asia, Africa  Authoritarian regimes remain in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Somalia  Democratic trend in the world has gained momentum since the end of the 1980s.  In 1990s – first time in world history there are more free than unfree states  Many African nations have moved toward freedom  Unfree states remain in Middle East, Central Asia, Africa  Authoritarian regimes remain in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Somalia Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Significance of Interest Aggregation  How interests are aggregated is important determinant of what government does for and to citizens  Democratic countries’ competitive party systems narrow down and combine policy preferences  Noncompetitive party systems, military governments, monarchies - aggregation works differently, but with similar effect of narrowing policy options  Aggregation ultimately affects government’s adaptability and stability  How interests are aggregated is important determinant of what government does for and to citizens  Democratic countries’ competitive party systems narrow down and combine policy preferences  Noncompetitive party systems, military governments, monarchies - aggregation works differently, but with similar effect of narrowing policy options  Aggregation ultimately affects government’s adaptability and stability Copyright © 2012, 2010, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.