Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T04:33:18.058Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Electoral Reform and Strategic Coordination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2020

Jon H. Fiva*
Affiliation:
BI Norwegian Business School, Nydalen, Oslo, Norway
Simon Hix
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: jon.h.fiva@bi.no

Abstract

Electoral reform creates new strategic coordination incentives for voters and elites, but endogeneity problems make such effects hard to identify. This article addresses this issue by investigating an extraordinary dataset, from the introduction of proportional representation (PR) in Norway in 1919, which permits the measurement of parties’ vote shares in pre-reform single-member districts and in the same geographic units in the post-reform multi-member districts. The electoral reform had an immediate effect on the fragmentation of the party system, due in part to strategic party entry. The authors find, though, that another main effect of the reform was that many voters switched between existing parties, particularly between the Liberals and Conservatives, as the incentives for these voters to coordinate against Labor were removed by the introduction of PR.

Type
Letter
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aasland, T (1974) Fra Landmandsorganisasjon Til Bondeparti [From Agragarian Organziation to Farmer Party]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Becher, M (2016) Endogenous credible commitment and party competition over redistribution under alternative electoral institutions. American Journal of Political Science 60(3), 768782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boix, C (1999) Setting the rules of the game: the choice of electoral systems in advanced democracies. The American Political Science Review 93, 609624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordignon, M, Nannicini, T and Tabellini, G (2016) Moderating political extremism: single round versus runoff elections under plurality rule. American Economic Review 106(8), 23492370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvo, E (2009) The competitive road to proportional representation. World Politics 61(02), 254295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, JM and Hix, S (2011) The electoral sweet spot: low-magnitude proportional electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science 55(2), 383397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, GW (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, GW (2015) Electoral rules, mobilization, and turnout. Annual Review of Political Science 18(1), 4968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, GW, Fiva, JH and Smith, DM (2016) The contraction effect: how proportional representation affects mobilization and turnout. The Journal of Politics 78(4), 12491263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, GW, Fiva, JH and Smith, DM (2019) Parties, legislators, and the origins of proportional representation. Comparative Political Studies 52, 102133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duverger, M (1954) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Fiva, JH and Hix, S (2020) “Replication Data for Electoral Reform and Strategic Coordination” http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/AX0ADR, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:vUk7p8r629kRrOcXa0fhcQ== [fileUNF]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiva, JH and Smith, DM (2017) Norwegian parliamentary elections, 1906–2013: representation and turnout across four electoral systems. West European Politics 40(6), 13731391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujiwara, T (2011) A regression discontinuity test of strategic voting and Duverger's Law. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 6, 197233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helland, L and Saglie, J (2003) Candidate competition and strategic coordination: evidence from four early Norwegian elections. Electoral Studies 22(4), 581602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hix, S, Hortala-Vallve, R and Riambau-Armet, G (2017) The effects of district magnitude on voting behavior. The Journal of Politics 79(1), 356361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Høyland, B and Søyland, M (2019) Electoral reform and parliamentary debates. Legislative Studies Quarterly 44(4), 593615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leemann, L and Mares, I (2014) The adoption of proportional representation. The Journal of Politics 76(02), 461478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, A (1999) Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Pons, V and Tricaud, C (2018) Expressive voting and its cost: evidence from runoffs with two or three candidates. Econometrica 86, 16211649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renwick, A (2018) Electoral system change. In Pekkanen, RJ, Herron, ES and Shugart, MS (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 113132.Google Scholar
Rodden, J (2009a) Back to the future: endogenous institutions and comparative politics. In Lichbach, M and Zuckerman, A (eds), Comparative Politics: Rationality, Culture, and Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rodden, J (2009b) Why did Western Europe Adopt Proportional Representation? A Political Geography Explanation. Unpublished manuscript. Available at https://web.stanford.edu/~jrodden/wp/rodden_jan10_workshop_final.docx.Google Scholar
Rokkan, S (1970) Citizens, Elections, Parties : Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Processes of Development. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
St-Vincent, SL, Blais, A and Pilet, J-B (2016) The electoral sweet spot in the lab. Journal of Experimental Political Science 3(1), 7583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taagepera, R and Shugart, MS (1989) Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Valen, H and Rokkan, S (1974) Norway: conflict structure and mass politics in a European periphery. In Rose, R (ed.), Electoral Behavior: A Comparative Handbook. New York: Free Press, pp. 315370.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Fiva and Hix Dataset

Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Fiva and Hix supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Fiva and Hix supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 766.2 KB