District magnitude, electoral coordination, and legislative fragmentation

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1080/17457289.2021.1952210
Patrick Cunha Silva
{"title":"District magnitude, electoral coordination, and legislative fragmentation","authors":"Patrick Cunha Silva","doi":"10.1080/17457289.2021.1952210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Theories of party systems suggest that more restrictive rules should lead to fewer parties. According to this line of reasoning, parties and voters should strategically respond to reforms in electoral rules, such as changes in district magnitude. That is, a decrease in district magnitude should decrease the size of the party system, whereas an increase in magnitude should enlarge the party system. Using a series of difference-in-differences models based on data from Brazilian municipalities before and after an exogenous reform in magnitude, I study the effects of this electoral reform on both electoral coordination and legislative fragmentation. Contrary to the expectation, the number of lists did not change after a decrease in magnitude. However, parties formed more pre-electoral coalitions in municipalities that lost seats. Voters also coalesced around fewer lists. Lastly, as expected, the reform produced a decrease in legislative fragmentation. Both mechanical and psychological effects were responsible for this modification in fragmentation.","PeriodicalId":46791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","volume":"11 1","pages":"462 - 478"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1952210","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: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Theories of party systems suggest that more restrictive rules should lead to fewer parties. According to this line of reasoning, parties and voters should strategically respond to reforms in electoral rules, such as changes in district magnitude. That is, a decrease in district magnitude should decrease the size of the party system, whereas an increase in magnitude should enlarge the party system. Using a series of difference-in-differences models based on data from Brazilian municipalities before and after an exogenous reform in magnitude, I study the effects of this electoral reform on both electoral coordination and legislative fragmentation. Contrary to the expectation, the number of lists did not change after a decrease in magnitude. However, parties formed more pre-electoral coalitions in municipalities that lost seats. Voters also coalesced around fewer lists. Lastly, as expected, the reform produced a decrease in legislative fragmentation. Both mechanical and psychological effects were responsible for this modification in fragmentation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
地区规模、选举协调和立法分裂
政党制度理论认为,更多的限制性规则将导致更少的政党。根据这一推理,政党和选民应该战略性地应对选举规则的改革,例如地区规模的变化。也就是说,选区规模的减少会减少政党体系的规模,而选区规模的增加则会扩大政党体系的规模。基于外生幅度改革前后巴西各市的数据,我使用了一系列差异中的差异模型,研究了这一选举改革对选举协调和立法碎片化的影响。与预期相反,列表的数量在减少幅度后没有变化。然而,政党在选举前在失去席位的地方组成了更多的联盟。选民们也在更少的名单上联合起来。最后,正如预期的那样,改革减少了立法的分裂。机械和心理两方面的影响都是造成碎片化的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Have heads cooled? Changes in radical partisanship from 2020–2022 Only losers use excuses? Exploring the association between the winner-loser gap and referendum attitudes following a local referendum The effect of signing ballot petitions on turnout Determinants of swing voting in Africa: evidence from Ghana's elections Issue salience and affective polarization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1