Complements or Substitutes? The Interdependence between Coalition Agreements and Parliamentary Questions as Monitoring Mechanisms in Coalition Governments
{"title":"Complements or Substitutes? The Interdependence between Coalition Agreements and Parliamentary Questions as Monitoring Mechanisms in Coalition Governments","authors":"Daniel Höhmann, S. Krauss","doi":"10.1093/PA/GSAB002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Since coalition governments are formed of at least two different parties with diverging preferences, there is major potential for shirking. Coalition parties can use various institutional mechanisms to keep tabs on their partners and detect ministerial drifts. In this article, we focus on potential interdependencies between monitoring mechanisms and analyse whether the existence of a coalition agreement affects the number of parliamentary questions (PQs) asked by the coalition partner. We argue that parties can hold the coalition partner accountable to the coalition agreement by asking questions. The more detailed the coalition agreement, the more potential targets exist for focused PQs. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the more detailed the coalition agreement, the more frequently governing parties use PQs as a monitoring tool. Empirically, we rely on a newly compiled dataset on PQs and a content analysis of coalition agreements in Germany between 1980 and 2017. The results confirm our hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":19790,"journal":{"name":"Parliamentary Affairs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parliamentary Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PA/GSAB002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Since coalition governments are formed of at least two different parties with diverging preferences, there is major potential for shirking. Coalition parties can use various institutional mechanisms to keep tabs on their partners and detect ministerial drifts. In this article, we focus on potential interdependencies between monitoring mechanisms and analyse whether the existence of a coalition agreement affects the number of parliamentary questions (PQs) asked by the coalition partner. We argue that parties can hold the coalition partner accountable to the coalition agreement by asking questions. The more detailed the coalition agreement, the more potential targets exist for focused PQs. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the more detailed the coalition agreement, the more frequently governing parties use PQs as a monitoring tool. Empirically, we rely on a newly compiled dataset on PQs and a content analysis of coalition agreements in Germany between 1980 and 2017. The results confirm our hypothesis.
期刊介绍:
Parliamentary Affairs is an established, peer-reviewed academic quarterly covering all the aspects of government and politics directly or indirectly connected with Parliament and parliamentary systems in Britain and throughout the world. The journal is published in partnership with the Hansard Society. The Society was created to promote parliamentary democracy throughout the world, a theme which is reflected in the pages of Parliamentary Affairs.