Suchergebnisse

The paper deals with the complex issue of (ethno)regional parties conceptualisation. Notions and schematics elaborated and promoted by Lieven de Winter, Klaus von Beyme, Donald L. Horowitz, Francisco Letamendía, Huri Türsan, Ferdinand Müller–Rommel Derek Urwin, John T. Ishiyama etc. are briefly discussed. Ethno–regional parties can be conceived of as political parties whose electoral and legitimation potential is primarily based on identitary mobilisation of an ethno–territorial community of sub–national (sub–state) nature. However, ethnic and territorial aspects may assume different relevance within the different approaches to the study of ethno–regional parties. It should be emphasized, that regional parties are not necessarily ethnic parties – and vice versa. Regional parties could be defined as formations with region–based electorate and mobilisation resources, or as formations representing sub–national (regional) interest communities exercising party functions to the full extent in a regionally defined operating space. Ethno–regional (ethno–regionalist) parties may thus be defined as a sort of regional (regionalist) parties. Finally, some issues of classification and typology of regional party arrangements are assessed. A lot of work is still to be done in this field. More attention should be paid to the heterogeneous nature of compounded territorial–political arrangements, which allows for the coexistence of different types of actors – political parties on the national (nation–wide) and regional level, as well as for simultaneous existence of diverse party and political scenes. To make a comprehensive typology of regional party (sub)systems is not an easy task at all. This is due to the persisting lack of suitable conceptual frameworks and to the fact that an effective reconciliation of the approach to nation–forming identitary and regionalist mobilisations used by regional parties with the traditional platform applied in research into European party systems has proved very difficult. ; The paper deals ...

Election laws regulate the number of deputies who are elected in individual electoral districts, and set them in relation to the population, respectively to the number of voters participating in elections in individual regions. Elected deputies could thus be regarded as political representatives of citizens living in electoral districts. However, under systems of proportional representation, current deputies represent the ideology of the party to which they belong rather than the region. Nevertheless, it makes sense to study the spatial distribution of the places of origin and residence of members of parliament and their changes over time, because it suggests much about the political system and the system of representative democracy in the country. The spatial distribution of places of residence of candidates and elected members indicates not only the territorial proportionality and geographic representativeness, but also the shifting centers of political power. The analysis clearly confirms the gradual decentralization and regionalization of political power in the country, which stands in contrast to the centralization of power in the economy, this latter trend apparent from the concentration of economic management and decision-making in the largest cities, especially in Prague.