PL EN


2020 | 27 | 63-78
Article title

Electoral Defeat and Party Change: When do Parties Adapt?

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Electoral defeat has sometimes been called the mother of party change, but is this reputation warranted? In this paper we investigate whether party characteristics such as government status, party systemic origins, or ideological family affect how parties respond to defeat. Examining 73 parties in 28 countries, considering party efforts to change their leadership, their programs and their organizations, we conclude that only systemic origin (post-communist vs. West European countries) is a relevant factor affecting depth of party change. Parties take some corrective actions after electoral defeat, however, they are not likely to be a wholesale reforms. Thus, it would be more accurate to describe electoral defeat as a midwife of a party change, not as its mother.
Contributors
  • University of Wroclaw, Poland
  • University of Wroclaw, Poland
  • University of Warsaw, Poland
References
  • Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L., & Glasgow, G. (2004). Understanding and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results? British Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 589–610.
  • Ágh, A. (2000). Party formation and the 1998 elections in Hungary: defeat as promotor of change for the HSP. East European Politics and Societies, 14(2), 285–315.
  • Anderson, C.J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Listhaug, O. (2005). Losers’ Consent. Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Bendor, J. (2010). Bounded Rationality and Politics. Berkley: University of California Press.
  • Biezen van, I. C. (2003). Political parties in New Democracies. Party Organisation in Southern and East-Central Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Bobbio, N. (1994). Left and Right. The Significance of a Political Distinction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Bolleyer, N. (2013). New Parties in Old Party Systems. Persistence and Decline in Seventeen Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Bosco, A., & Morlino, L. (2006). What Changes in South European parties? A Comparative Introduction. South European Society & Politics, 11(3-4), 331–358.
  • Budge, I. (1994). A New Spatial Theory of Party Competition: Uncertainty, Ideology and Policy Equilibria Viewed Comparatively and Temporally. British Journal of Political Science, 24(4), 443–467.
  • Cyr, J. (2016). Between Adaptation and Breakdown. Comparative Politics, 49(1), 125–145.
  • Eley, G. (2002). Forging Democracy. The History of the Left in Europe, 1850-2000. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Fell, D. (2009). Lessons of Defeat: A Comparison of Taiwanese Ruling Parties Responses to Electoral Defeat. Asian Politics and Policy, 1(4), 660–681.
  • Fraser, D. (2007). Lately, Things Just Don’t Seem the Same’: External Shocks, Party Change and the Adaptation of the Dutch Christian Democrats during ‘Purple Hague. Party Politics, 13(1), 69–87.
  • Gauja, A. (2017). Party Reform: The Causes, Challenges and Consequences of Organizational Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Gherghina, S., & Berge von dem, B. (2018). When Europeanisation meets organisation: enhancing the rights of party members in Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of European Integration, 40(2), 209–226.
  • Gunther, R., & Diamond, L. (2003). Species of Political Parties. A New Typology. Party Politics, 9(2), 167-199.
  • Harmel, R. (2002). Party Organizational Change. Competing Explanations? In: K.R. Luther & F. Müller-Rommel (eds.), Political Parties in the New Europe. Political and Analytical Challenges (pp. 119–142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Harmel, R., & Janda, K. (1994). An integrated theory of party goals and party change. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(3), 259–287.
  • Harmel, R., & Svåsand, L. (1993). Party Leadership and Party Institutionalisation: Three Phases of Development. West European Politics, 16(2), 67–88.
  • Harmel, R., Heo, U., Tan, A., & Janda, K. (1995). Performance, Leadership, Factions and party Change: An Empirical Analysis. West European Politics, 18(1), 1–33.
  • Janda, K. (1990). Toward a Performance Theory of Change in Political Parties. Paper presented at the 12th World Congress of the International Sociological Association. http://www.janda.org/bio/parties/papers/Janda%20(1990).pdf (26/04/2020).
  • Kitschelt, H. (1988). Left-Libertarian Parties: Explaining Innovation in Competitive Party Systems. World Politics, 40(2), 194–234.
  • Kitschelt, H. (1993). Social Movements, Political Parties, and Democratic Theory. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528, 13–29.
  • Kitschelt, H. (1994). The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press. New York.
  • Kopecký, P. (1995). Developing Party Organizations in East-Central Europe: What Type of Party is Likely to Emerge? Party Politics, 1(4), 515–534.
  • Langston, J. (2003). Rising from Ashes? Reorganizing and Unifying the PRI’s State Party Organizations after Electoral Defeat. Comparative Political Studies, 36(3), 293–318.
  • Lawson, K., & Poguntke, T. (eds). (2004). How Political Parties Respond. Interest Aggregation Revisited. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Lewis, P.G. (1996). Party Structure and Organization in East-Central Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Lisi, M. (2010). Innovation and Adaptation in Contemporary Left-Wing Parties: Lessons from Southern Europe. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 11(1), 60–79.
  • Louault, F., & Pellen, C. (eds.). (2019). La défaite électorale. Productions, appropriations, bifurcations. Presses Universitaires de Rennes. Rennes.
  • Moshkovich, Y. (2011). Changes in Likud Party organization as an outcome of electoral victory in 1988 and electoral defeat in 1992: an Israeli case Study. Israel Affairs, 17(4), 583–603.
  • Norris, P., & Lovenduski, J. (2004). Why Parties Fail to Learn. Electoral Defeat, Selective Perception and British Party Politics. Party Politics, 10(1), 85–104.
  • Pacześniak, A., and Bachryj-Krzywaźnia, M. (2019). Electoral Defeat As ‘Mother of Party Change’: Towards Objective-Subjective Approach. Czech Journal of Political Science/Politologický časopis, (26)2: 122-134.
  • Panebianco, A. (1988). Political Parties. Organization and Power. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  • Redding, K., and Viterna, J.S. (1999). Political Demands, Political Opportunities: Explaining the Differential Success of Left-Libertarian Parties. Social Forces, 78(2), 491–510.
  • Schumacher, G., de Vries, C.E., and Vis, B. (2013). Why Do Parties Change Position? Party Organization and Environmental Incentives. The Journal of Politics, 75(2): 464–477.
  • Schumacher, G., Wardt van de, M., Vis, B., and Klitgaard, M. (2015). How aspiration to office conditions the impact of government participation on party platform change. American Journal of Political Science, 59(4): 1040–1054.
  • Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). Timely Decisions: The Effects of Past National Elections on Party Policy Change. The Journal of Politics, 71(1), 238–248.
  • Van der Velden, M., Schumacher, G., and Vis, B. (2017). Living in the Past or Living in the Future? Analyzing Parties’ Platform Change in Between Elections, The Netherlands 1997-2014. Political Communication, 35(3): 393–412.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.mhp-9165c420-8a63-49a1-a414-4aee578f7b35
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.