Spójność, zgodność i dyscyplina ugrupowań parlamentarnych: przegląd aktualnych zagadnień badawczych

• Authors: Sokołowski Jacek K.

Title variants

EN

Unity, cohesion and discipline of parliamentary groups: state of the art and the current research

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

EN

The article sums up the development of a particular subdiscipline in parliamentary research, i.e. the cohesion analysis. By outlining approaches to parliamentary cohesion, it identifies the two major ones: the institutional one, focusing on intra– and extra parliamentary institutions influencing cohesion and the socio‑motivational one, focusing on individual MP’s motivations, shaped by more general or more individual factors (social norms, loyalty, individual preferences). The author assesses possible future developments of the field, noting that the insufficient theoretical framework hinders further progress in comparative studies. With regard to the very few Polish studies of the subject, the author proposes a clear Polish terminology relating to major concepts used to describe the voting behavior of a parliamentary group.

Keywords

EN

parliamentarism; parliamentary cohesion; parliamentary discipline; Sejm

• Publisher: Księgarnia Akademicka
• Journal: Politeja : Pismo Wydziału Studiów Miedzynarodowych i Politycznych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego
• Year: 2014
• Issue: 6(32)
• Pages: 45-62

Contributors

author

Sokołowski Jacek K.

• Centrum Badań Ilościowych nad Polityką UJ

References

• Born R., Nevison Ch., The „Agreement Level” Measure, and the Rice Index of Cohesion Revisited, „American Journal of Political Science” 1974, Vol. 18, nr 3.
• Bowler S., Farrell D.M., Katz R.S., Party Cohesion, Party Discipline, and Parliaments, [w:] Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, red. ciż, Columbus 1999, Parliaments and Legislatures Series.
• Carey J.M., Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting, „American Journal of Political Science” 2007, Vol. 51, nr 1, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540‑5907.2007.00239.x.
• Carey J.M., Legislative Voting and Accountability, Cambridge–New York 2009, Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics.
• Carey J.M., Shugart M., Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote. A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas, „Electoral Studies” 1995, Vol. 14, nr 4, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261‑3794(94)00035‑2.
• Cox G.W., The Efficient Secret. The Cabinet and the Development of Political Parties in Victorian England, Cambridge–New York 1987, Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions.
• Diermeier D., Feddersen T.J., Cohesion in Legislatures and the Vote of Confidence Procedure, „American Political Science Review” 1998, Vol. 92, nr 3, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2585484.
• Figuereido A.Ch., Limongi F., Presidential Power, Legislative Organization, and Party Behavior in Brazil, „Comparative Politics” 2000, Vol. 32, nr 2.
• Hazan R.Y., Does Cohesion Equal Discipline? Towards a Conceptual Delineation, „Journal of Legislative Studies” 2003, Vol. 9, nr 4, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357233042000306227.
• Hirschman A.O., Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States, Cambridge (Mass.) 1970.
• Hix S., Noury A.G., Roland G., Power to the Parties. Cohesion and Competition in the European Parliament, 1979‑2001, „British Journal of Political Science” 2005, Vol. 35, nr 2, [online]http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123405000128.
• Huber J., The Vote of Confidence in Parliamentary Democracies, „American Political Science Review” 1996, Vol. 90, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2082884.
• Hug S., Selection Bias in Comparative Research. The Case of Incomplete Data Sets, „Political Analysis” 2003, Vol. 11, nr 3, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpg014.
• Hug S., Selection Effects in Roll Call Votes, „British Journal of Political Science” 2010, Vol. 40, nr 1, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990160.
• Jasiński M., Przestrzeń ideologiczna oparta na politycznych faktach, „Decyzje” 2012, nr 17.
• Kam Ch.J., Party Discipline and Parliamentary Politics, Cambridge 2009.
• Krehbiel K., Where’s the Party?, „British Journal of Political Science” 1993, Vol. 23, nr 2.
• Lissowski G., Wprowadzenie do przestrzennej teorii głosowania, „Studia Socjologiczne” 2003, t. 168, z. 1.
• Mainwaring S.P., Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization. The Case of Brazil, Stanford 1999.
• Mayhew D.R., Congress. The Electoral Connection, New Haven 1974, Yale Studies in Political Science, 26 (wyd. 2, New Haven–London 2004).
• Miller W.E., Stokes D.E., Constituency Influence in Congress, „American Political Science Review” 1963, Vol. 57, nr 1, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1952717.
• Özbudun E., Party Cohesion in Western Democracies. A Causal Analysis, Beverly Hills 1970, Sage Professional Papers in Comparative Politics, 01‑006.
• Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, red. S. Bowler, D.M. Farrell, R.S. Katz, Columbus 1999, Parliaments and Legislatures Series.
• Persson T., Tabellini G., The Economic Effects of Constitutions, Cambridge (Mass.) 2003, Munich Lectures in Economics.
• Przeworski A., Institutions Matter?, „Government and Opposition” 2004, Vol. 39, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477‑7053.2004.00134.x.
• Rahat G., Determinants of Party Cohesion. Evidence from the Case of the Israeli Parliament, „Parliamentary Affairs” 2007, Vol. 60, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsm003.
• Rice S.A., The Behavior of Legislative Groups. A Method of Measurement, „Political Science Quarterly” 1925, Vol. 40, nr 1.
• Rice S.A., Farmers and Workers in American Politics, New York 1924, Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, 253.
• Rice S.A., Quantitative Methods in Politics, New York 1928.
• Shugart M.S., The Inverse Relationship between Party Strength and Executive Strength: A Theory of Politicians’ Constitutional Choices, „British Journal of Political Science” 1998, Vol. 28, nr 1, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123498000088.
• Sieberer U., Behavioral Consequences of Mixed Electoral Systems. Deviating Voting Behavior of District and List MPs in the German Bundestag, „Electoral Studies” 2010, Vol. 29, nr 3, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2010.04.012.
• Sieberer U., Party Unity in Parliamentary Democracies. A Comparative Analysis, „Journal of Legislative
• Studies” 2006, Vol. 12, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13572330600739413.
• Skjæveland A., Party Cohesion in the Danish Parliament, „The Journal of Legislative Studies” 2001, Vol. 7, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/714003872.
• Słomczyński W. i in., Spójność polskich ugrupowań parlamentarnych, [w:] Wybrane aspekty funkcjonowania
• Sejmu w latach 1997‑2007, red. J.K. Sokołowski, P. Poznański, Kraków 2008.
• Sokołowski J.K., Metody ilościowe we współczesnych badaniach nad parlamentaryzmem, „Annales UMCS. Sectio K: Politologia” 2009, Vol. 16.
• Sokołowski J.K., W obronie pytania „po co?”. Uwagi o znaczeniu filozofii polityki dla współczesnej teorii nauk politycznych, [w:] Wokół teorii stosunków międzynarodowych, red. W. Mich, J. Nowak, Lublin 2012.
• Sokołowski J.K., Stolicki D., Cohesion of Parliamentary Groups in Poland, 1997‑2013, CBIP UJ Research Paper 1/2013, niepubl., dostępny na zamówienie.
• Strøm K., A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties, „American Journal of Political Science” 1990, Vol. 34, nr 2, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111461.
• Tavits M., The Making of Mavericks. Local Loyalties and Party Defection, „Comparative Political Studies” 2009, Vol. 42, nr 6, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414008329900.
• Turner J., Party and Constituency. Pressures on Congress, Baltimore 1951, Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, ser. 59, 1.
• Weyland K., Democracy without Equity. Failures of Reform in Brazil, Pittsburgh 1996, Pitt Latin American Series.
• Willumsen D., Understanding Parliamentarians’ Attitudes to Party Unity. A Study of the Nordic Countries, 2010, niepubl., dostępny prywatnie.
• Willumsen D., Öhberg P., Explaining Legislative Dissent in a Parliamentary Party Democracy. Sweden 2002 to 2011, APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper, SSRN, [online] http://ssrn.com/abstract=2107105.
• Wybrane aspekty funkcjonowania Sejmu w latach 1997‑2007, red. J.K. Sokołowski, P. Poznański, Kraków 2008.

Identifiers

DOI

10.12797/Politeja.11.2014.32.04