Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe arrival of Luiz Inácio 'Lula' da Silva and the Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers' Party, PT) at the helm of the Brazilian federal government in 2003 represented the culmination of a slow and deep-rooted process of party transformation. Attributable partly to the inevitable consequences of the party gradually inserting itself into governmental institutions, and partly to strategic decisions made by the dominant coalition that had controlled the PT since 1995, these transformations significantly changed the organisational features of the party, paving its way to the federal government. This article analyses these processes, and the subsequent changes throughout the Lula government, from an organisational perspective, linking exogenous challenges and the party's genetic model with the strategies consciously adopted by thepetistaleadership.

Por meio da análise de estatutos e outros documentos partidários, o trabalho compara as estruturas decisórias internas das maiores legendas do país: PMDB, PSDB, PT e PFL/DEM. Com um recorte temporal entre 1995 (ano de implantação da nova legislação partidária) e 2011, duas dimensões analíticas são mobilizadas: a) a inclusividade da estrutura decisória, que diz respeito à possibilidade de influência das bases nas decisões tomadas pelas elites partidárias; b) o nível de centralização orgânica, em termos da articulação, hierarquia e controle entre os órgãos dos distintos níveis territoriais (local, estadual e nacional). As conclusões apontam que as elites partidárias não estão inertes: elas têm atuado de modo incisivo para mudar e adaptar as organizações partidárias, principalmente devido a pressões exógenas.

The article analyzes the current Brazilian party system under the conceptual lens of Katz and Mair's cartel party theory (1995, 2009), using some of its indicators, but without trying a systematic and comprehensive test of the thesis. Three sets of indicators are explored: a) the party linkages with society and state; b) competition and collusion among the major parties; c) organization and internal decision-making structure. The conclusions discuss the efficacy of cartelization model to understand the patterns and changes of the Brazilian political system, and point out the empirical difficulties and the theoretical and conceptual inconsistencies of the model, proposing a theoretical reelaboration which restricts it to its essential core. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThis article proposes a novel theoretical framework to account for the combined effects of regime type and patterns of executive authority on legislative party unity. We argue that broad presidential legislative powers favour coordination between the president and legislative parties under pure presidentialism, whereas under semi-presidentialism, strong presidents increase the potential for intra-executive conflict, submitting parties to cross-cutting pressures. We expect higher levels of legislative authority to increase party unity under presidentialism but decrease under semi-presidentialism. Moreover, when presidents are endowed with limited legislative authority, semi-presidentialism produces higher levels of party unity than presidentialism, but for sufficiently high levels of legislative authority there should be no difference across regime types. Our analyses of 1,586 pooled observations for 72 democracies from all regions of the world using the V-Dem measure of party cohesion demonstrate that presidential legislative authority, in combination with regime type, is indeed a key predictor of party unity.

The 'time factor' has not been systematically considered in cross-national studies on party organizations. Relying on the largest dataset to date on party organizations, namely the Political Party Database Project (PPDB), the article tests the impact of time as a two-level variable (duration of democracy and age of parties) on parties' organizational strength in new and established democracies. We add original data from three Latin American countries to the nineteen countries covered by the first PPDB database (132 parties overall). The results suggest that parties in established democracies have less members and more money than those of newer democracies. Among the latter, the greater capacity for mass mobilization produces stronger parties—as in Latin America—compared to the Eastern European countries. The findings challenge the traditional view of the exceptional weakness of Latin American parties and point to the importance of time as a multilevel variable: besides the national context, the "ancestral" party origin in previous regimes have a large impact on organizational strength.

The 'time factor' has not been systematically considered in cross-national studies on party organizations. Relying on the largest dataset to date on party organizations, namely the Political Party Database Project (PPDB), the article tests the impact of time as a two-level variable (duration of democracy and age of parties) on parties' organizational strength in new and established democracies. We add original data from three Latin American countries to the nineteen countries covered by the first PPDB database (132 parties overall). The results suggest that parties in established democracies have less members and more money than those of newer democracies. Among the latter, the greater capacity for mass mobilization produces stronger parties—as in Latin America—compared to the Eastern European countries. The findings challenge the traditional view of the exceptional weakness of Latin American parties and point to the importance of time as a multilevel variable: besides the national context, the "ancestral" party origin in previous regimes have a large impact on organizational strength.

AbstractThis paper explores external (country-level) and internal (party-level) drivers of membership variations across parties. Relying on the Political Party Database combined with other datasets, we provide original, cross-sectional analyses of membership variation across 223 parties in 38 countries, innovatively covering third-wave democracies, post-communist countries, and advanced democracies. It allows for a unique analysis of recruitment patterns of parties under quite different contexts. Departing from the dominant view that parties are the powerless victims of external trends, we show that, while context matters, parties' choices regarding affiliation rules and organization structure also matter. They are more powerful determinants of membership ratios than country-level variables. Especially, the representation of sub-groups in the party structure is a key driver of membership recruitment. We also show how party origins, and the foundational environment in which they emerged, are important to understand how membership varies across parties today. Overall, this study strongly advocates for a broad comparative, multilevel approach to party membership.