MIXED INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND ELECTORAL AUTHORITARISM
Keywords:
political regime, electoral authoritarianism, mixed electoral system, electoral strategy, dominant partyAbstract
Over the past decade, the mixed system became the fastest growing variety of electoral systems used in elections for national legislatures. Opinions about the reasons for the popularity of mixed systems in the research literature still vary. There are no cross-national studies in political science that would link the use of a mixed independent electoral system with the consolidation of an authoritarian order. Under authoritarianism, elections perform three functions: imitation, control and signaling. These functions set the structure of incentives for choosing an electoral formula. The purpose of my study is to determine the structure of incentives for the employment of mixed independent electoral systems under conditions of electoral authoritarianism. One of the main results of the study is that, in comparison with democracies, mixed independent electoral systems are more often used in authoritarian regimes. This is due to the fact that mixed independent electoral system provides an opportunity to effectively realize the imitation, control and signaling functions of elections under electoral authoritarianism. DOI: 10.17072/2218-1067-2021-1-19-34References
Рoгов, К. (2013) ‘Сверхбольшинство для сверхпрезидентства', Pro et Contra, 7 (3-4), сс. 102–125. [Rogov, K. (2013) ‘Super Majority for Super Presidency’ [Sverhbol'shinstvo dlja sverhprezident-stva], Pro et Contra, 7 (3‒4), pр. 102–125. (In Russ.)].
Albaugh, E. A. (2011) ‘An autocrat's toolkit: adaptation and manipulation in ‘democratic’Cameroon’, Democratization, 18(2), pp. 388‒414.
Bochsler, D. (2009) ‘Are mixed electoral systems the best choice for Central and Eastern Europe or the reason for defective party systems?’, Politics & Policy, 37(4), pp. 735‒767.
Bochsler, D. (2012) ‘A quasiproportional electoral system “only for honest men”? The hidden potential for manipulating mixed compensatory electoral systems’, International Political Science Review, 33(4), pp. 401‒420.
Bormann, N. and Matt Golder, M. (2013) ‘Democratic Electoral Systems Around the World, 1946‒2011’, Electoral Studies, 32, pp. 360‒369.
Cox, K. and Schoppa, L. (2002) ‘Interaction effects and mixed-member systems: Theory and evidence from Germany, Japan, and Italy’, Comparative Political Studies, 35, pp. 1027‒1053.
Doorenspleet, R. (2005) ‘Electoral Systems and Democratic Quality: Do Mixed Systems Combine the Best or the Worst of Both Worlds? An Explorative Quantitative Cross-national Study’, Acta Polit, 40, pp. 28–49, DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500093.
Elklit, J. (2008) ‘The 2007 general elections in Lesotho: Abuse of the MMP system?, Journal of African Elections, 7(1), pp. 10‒19.
Gandhi, J. and Lust-Okar, E. (2009) ‘Elections under authoritarianism’, Annual Review of Political Science, 12, pp. 403‒422, DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060.106.095434.
Gandhi, J. and Przeworski, A. (2007) ‘Authoritarian Institutions and the Survival of Autocrats’, Comparative political studies, 40(11), pp. 1279–1301.
Golosov, G. (2013) ‘The Case for Mixed Single Vote Electoral Systems’, The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, 38(3), pp. 317‒345.
Golosov, G. (2011) ‘Russia’s regional legislative elections, 2003-2007: Authoritarianism incorporated’, Europe-Asia Studies, 63, pp. 397‒414.
Herron, E. and Nishikawa, M. (2001) ‘Contamination effects and the number of parties in mixed-superposition electoral systems’, Electoral Studies, 20(1), pp. 63‒86.
Howard, M. and Roessler, P. (2006) ‘Liberalizing electoral outcomes in competitive authoritarian regimes’, American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), pp. 365‒381.
Joseph, R. (1997) ‘Democratization in Africa af-ter 1989: Comparative and Theoretical Perspectives’, Comparative Politics, 29(3), pp. 363‒382.
Kostadinova, T. (2002) ‘Do mixed electoral systems matter? A cross-national analysis of their effects in Eastern Europe’, Electoral Studies, 21, pp. 23–34.
Levitsky, S. and Way, L. (2010) Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lijphart, A. (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies 1945–1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
Magaloni, B. and Kricheli, R. (2010) ‘Political order and one-party rule’, Political Science, 13, pp. 123‒143, DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.031908.220529.
Magaloni, B. (2008) ‘Credible power-sharing and the longevity of authoritarian rule’, Comparative political studies, 41(4/5), pp. 715–741.
Malesky, E. and Schuler, P. (2010) ‘Nodding or Needling: Analyzing Delegate Responsiveness in an Authoritarian Parliament American’, Political Science Review, 104(3), pp. 482‒502, DOI:10.1017/S0003055410000250.
Massicotte, L. and Blais, A. (1999) ‘Mixed electoral system: a conceptual and empirical survey’, Electoral Studies, 18(30), pp. 341–366.
Michalak, B. (2016) ‘Mixed Electoral Systems: A Hybrid or A New Family of Electoral Systems?’, World Political Science Review, 12(1), pp. 87–106, DOI:10.1515/wps-2015-0012.
Moser, R. G. and Scheiner E. (2004) ‘Mixed Electoral Systems and Electoral Systems Effects: Controlled Comparison and Cross-National Analysis’, Electoral Stud-ies, 23(4), pp. 575–599.
Mozaffar, S., and Vengroff, R. (2002) ‘A ‘whole system’approach to the choice of electoral rules in democratizing countries: Senegal in comparative perspective’, Electoral Studies, 21(4), pp. 601‒616.
Rae, D. (1967) The political consequences of electoral laws. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Reuter, J. and Remington, F. (2009) ‘Dominant party regimes and the commitment problem: The case of United Russia’, Comparative Political Studies, 42(4), p. 501–526.
Reynolds, A., Reilly, B., and Ellis, A. (2008) ‘Electoral system design: The new international IDEA handbook’, International Institute for Democracy and Elec-toral Assistance.
Rogowski, R. (1987) ‘Trade and the Variety of Democratic Institutions’, International Organization, 41, pp. 203‒223.
Sartori, G. (1994) Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry into Structures, Incentives and Outcomes. London: Mac-millan.
Schedler, A. (2002) ‘Elections without Democracy: The Menu of Manipulations’, Journal of Democracy, 13(2), pp. 36‒50.
Shugart, M. and Wattenberg, M. P. (Eds.) (2001) Mixed-member electoral systems: The best of both worlds? OUP Oxford.
Simpser, A. (2008) ‘Unintended consequences of election monitoring’ in: M. Alvarez, Hall, T. and Hyde, S. (ed.) Election fraud: Detecting and preventing electoral manipulation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Taagepera, R. and Shugart, M. (1989) Seats and votes: The effects and determinants of electoral systems. Yale University Press.
Thames, F. and Edwards, M. (2006) ‘Differentiating mixed-member electoral systems: mixed-member majoritarian and mixed-member proportional systems and government expenditures’, Comparative Po-litical Studies, 39(7), pp. 905‒ 927.
Tsebelis, G. (1990) ‘Nested games: Rational choice in comparative politics’, Univ of California Press, Vol. 18.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The author grants the Publisher of the journal (Perm State University) the right to use their article in the journal, as well as to include the text of the abstract, the full text of the article and information about authors in the "Russian Science Citation Index" (RSCI).
The author agrees to the processing of personal data.
The right to use the journal as a whole belongs to the Publisher and acts indefinitely on the territory of the Russian Federation and beyond in accordance with cl. 1260 of the Russian Federation Civil Code.
There is no author's fee paid for providing the above rights by the author.
The author of the article included in the journal retains the exclusive right to it, regardless of the Publisher's right to use the journal as a whole:
a. The authors retain their copyrights to the article and transfer the right of the first publication along with the article to the journal, while also licensing it on the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to distribute this article with the obligatory indication of authorship of the article and reference to the original publication in this journal.
b. The authors retain the right to enter into separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive dissemination of the version of the text published by this journal (for example, post it in a university archive or publish it in a book), with reference to the original publication in this journal.
c. d. Authors are allowed to post their text on the Internet (for example, in a university archive or on their personal website) before and during the review process by this journal, as this can lead to a fruitful discussion and to higher number of the references to this published work (Please refer to The Effect of Open Access).
Submission of an article by the author implies that they agree for it to be used by the Publisher on the above conditions and to be included in the RSCI system. It also implicates that the author is aware of the terms of its use. The information about the author sent to the Publisher, including by e-mail, is also considered as such consent.
The editorial board posts the full text of the article on the Perm State University site: http://www.psu.ru and in the OJS system at http://press.psu.ru
The publication fee is not collected and fees are not paid. The author's copy is sent to the author to the address provided by them.
