Search

The question of whether political parties make a systematic difference in terms of public policies is one of the classics of comparative public policy research. However, unstable class cleavages and changing party strategies challenge the assumptions of traditional partisan theory, namely that parties represent a stable group of voters and implement policies according to the preferences of this group. Against this backdrop, several recent studies have called for an "electoral turn" in partisan theory and suggest establishing a party–voter link on the microlevel, depending on the policy area at stake. In this article, we propose a different view on partisan effects. While we do not argue that public opinion is unimportant for parties, we maintain that the electoral turn literature has a tendency to black-box the political actors and their preferences, because they become mere agents of voter preferences. Our argument builds on a growing literature that shows that political actors both at the party member and the elite level do have preferences and that these may or may not be coherent with those of the voters. Hence, the effect of partisan ideology on public policies may also be situated on the level of the parties or policy-makers themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political parties are likely to hold differing views about employment protection legislation (EPL). While pro-welfare parties could support EPL, pro-market parties might focus on labour market deregulation. In this paper, we investigate empirically whether partisan politics, especially the government participation of Social democrats and Christian democrats, matter for EPL in 21 established OECD countries from 1985 to 2019. We show that during the golden age of the welfare state, the level of EPL was much higher where Social and Christian democrats dominated the government than elsewhere. After the golden age and under conditions of high unemployment, these unconditional effects mostly disappeared. Instead, the level of unemployment conditions partisan differences. Christian democrats liberalize EPL for regular employment significantly less than other parties under high levels of unemployment. In contrast, Social democrats defend high levels of EPL for regular and temporary employment when unemployment is low. Against expectations, they even liberalize employment protection for labour market insiders more than other parties at very high levels of unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Classic partisan theory posits that political parties translate their electorates' preferences into policies. Accordingly, the recent changes in left parties' voter base, from predominantly working-class to middle-class voters, should have resulted in changing policy positions and policy effects of left parties. We test this expectation for economic policies (i.e., subsidies, product market regulation, and privatization) in 16 European countries between 1980 and 2012. We find the expected relationships for subsidies but not for regulation and privatization. This can be explained by the fact that only with regard to subsidies, preferences substantially differ between the working- and the middle-class. Thus, economic policy preferences of voters of left parties diverge less than could be expected. Methodologically, the study suggests that empirically testing the complete causal mechanism of classic partisan theory, assessing voters' preferences and investigating more than one issue area, are promising ways to study partisan effects on public policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present new evidence on whether political parties still matter in economic policy-making. We investigate four policy instruments (changes in product market regulation (PMR), subsidies, business taxation, social spending) in 21 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries between 1980 and 2015. We systematically consider how cabinet duration and the challenges of globalization, the European Union and economic problems (debt, unemployment, economic growth) condition partisan differences. Partisan differences only really make themselves felt after about one term in office. Moreover, with the exception of PMR, partisan differences tend to become more pronounced as globalization increases while European integration does not condition partisan effects. The conditioning effect of domestic economic problems on partisan differences depends on a policy instrument's salience. In highly salient issue areas (social expenditure, corporate taxation), we only find partisan differences when problems are low; in contrast, economic problems emphasize partisan differences in non-salient issue areas (PMR, subsidies). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article suggests theoretical refinements to the multiple streams framework (MSF) that make it applicable to parliamentary systems and the decision-making stage of the policy process. Regarding the former, the important role of political parties in parliamentary democracies is highlighted. Party policy experts are expected to be members of the policy communities in the policy stream and to promote viable policy alternatives in their respective parties, while the party leadership is concerned with adopting policies in the political stream. With regard to the latter, the introduction of a second coupling process to analyse decision making more rigorously is suggested. Moreover, the article provides operational definitions of the framework's key concepts when applied to parliamentary systems and derives a systematic set of falsifiable hypotheses for agenda-setting and decision making in these systems, thus addressing one of the main critiques against the MSF -- namely that no hypotheses can be derived from it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding party competition as a ‘political market’, we explore its characteristics during the second Merkel government, 2009–13. On the demand side, analysing opinion polls and the Länder election results, we find that the outcome of the next Bundestag election was uncertain. Thus, electoral competition was likely to be intense. On the supply side, opposition parties presented credible alternatives to government policies with regard to social as well as environmental policy. Regarding the Euro crisis, however, a consensus across the established parties existed. Studying three of the most salient policy issues, we identify party competition as a crucial determinant of decision-making. While the debate on minimum wages was substantially shaped by party competition, resulting in ‘anticipatory obedience’, nuclear energy only became affected by electoral considerations after the ‘Fukushima shock’ which resulted in a major policy shift. Regarding the response to the Euro crisis, however, party competition was essentially suspended. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Many scholars have argued that partisan differences have disappeared since the 1980s because of the ever-increasing economic globalization and the deepening of European integration. Using a new primary data set on public ownership that contains detailed information on privatization in 20 countries between 1980 and 2007, we test these claims empirically in relation to state ownership. We pay special attention to the question of whether changes in the international political economy, notably globalization and different aspects of European integration, condition partisan politics. Our empirical findings suggest that political parties have continued to significantly shape national privatization trajectories in line with the classic partisan hypothesis. While partisan differences are somewhat reduced by the liberalizing and market-building efforts of the European Union, globalization does not condition partisan effects. Moreover, the run-up to the European Monetary Union even seems to have reinforced partisan differences. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The quantitative strand of social policy research suffers from a triple deficit: analyses of aggregate expenditure dominate, most of the few studies of replacement rates focus on unemployment or sickness benefits while pensions are excluded, and the interdependence between public and private pension plans is often ignored. This article addresses the said deficits, first, by discussing the pension sectors' theoretical peculiarities and by proposing two hypotheses: one on the role played by political parties in implementing public pension retrenchment, and the second on their role in extending private pension plans. Second, the article presents regression results of public pension replacement rate changes in 18 developed democracies. The findings show considerably smaller cuts to pensions than to unemployment or sickness benefits, and striking differences regarding partisan effects between the sectors. Lastly, the article assesses partisan effects on private pension plans, detecting some rather surprising effects. Most noteworthy is the fact that those parties which reduced public pension generosity during the 1990s (i.e. Social Democrats) cannot claim responsibility for compensating these cuts by eliciting higher private engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The quantitative strand of social policy research suffers from a double deficit: on the one hand, analyses of aggregate expenditure dominate, and on the other hand, most studies of replacement rates focus on unemployment or sickness benefits, while pensions are excluded. This paper addresses the said deficit firstly by discussing the pension sectors' theoretical peculiarities and by proposing two hypotheses: one on the retrenchment of pension replacement rates and one on the role played by political parties in implementing it. Secondly, after a brief literature review and an outline of our methodological approach, we present regression results of replacement rate changes in 18 developed democracies. Our findings show considerably smaller cuts of pensions than of unemployment or sickness benefits, and striking differences regarding partisan effects between the sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Swiss Political Science Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The 2009 German federal election took place during the deepest recession in German post-war history. It brought to power a coalition of Christian democrats and liberals while the social democrats suffered by far their worst result at a general election since 1949. This paper discusses whether there is a causal relationship between the government's response to the crisis and the election result. While voters basically supported the government's management of the banking crisis they were much more sceptical with regard to the grand coalition's management of the recession. Interestingly, a majority of the voters disapproved of some of the interventionist policies the SPD had suggested and believed that the Christian democrats were the most competent crisis managers. Therefore, the economic crisis may well have helped the bourgeois parties win the election. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

By employing multiple regression analysis, the article identifies the social, economic and political determinants of overall private education expenditure and private spending on tertiary education in 26 OECD countries, testing hypotheses derived from theories of comparative public policy. We find that overall private education expenditure is higher in federal countries and under Conservative parties in government, while it is lower where voters prefer state-centred solutions, where Catholicism is strong and where a Church tax exists. Analysing private expenses for tertiary education only, these findings reappear with one exception: the size of the student population, which is without substantive effect on general private education expenditure, yields the largest single effect in the tertiary sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents a model of the decision-making process that can help to understand the politics of policy change and stability. The model takes as a starting point veto players. Since these actors are mostly political parties in Western democracies, their preferences can be modelled as policy seeking and vote maximization. Thus, governing parties try to adopt certain policies which differ according to their partisan orientation. The adoption of policies may, however, be impeded by electoral considerations unless the government is confronted with economic problems that put its re-election at risk. In addition, the existence of further veto players can make the adoption of reforms difficult. Policy change comes about if at least one element of the veto player constellation changes or if an external shock occurs. Both of these mechanisms are discussed in more detail, taking a change in the partisan complexion of government and globalization as examples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 1990s have witnessed unprecedented attempts at privatizing state-owned enterprises in virtually all OECD democracies. This contribution analyzes the extent to which the partisan control of the government can account for the differences in the privatization proceeds raised by EU and OECD countries between 1990 and 2000. It turns out that privatizations are part of a process of economic liberalization in previously highly regulated economies as well as a reaction to the fiscal policy challenges imposed by European integration and the globalization of financial markets. Partisan differences only emerge if economic problems are moderate, while intense economic, particularly fiscal, problems foreclose differing partisan strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Swiss Political Science Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Was there a turnaround in economic policy after the change of government in Germany in 1998? And to what extent was it adopted or why did adoption fail? These are the questions this article addresses. Analysing fiscal policy and employment policy between 1998 and 2003, it is impossible to detect a stringent policy concept which the government tried to implement. What is more, there exist significant policy discontinuities over time. This is explained by intra-party conflicts within the Social Democratic Party and by the effects of party competition while the institutional obstacles turned out to be of minor importance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]