Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Coalition Governments and Party Competition: Political Communication Strategies of Coalition Parties*

  • Iñaki Sagarzazu and Heike Klüver
Abstract

Coalition parties have to reconcile two competing logics: they need to demonstrate unity to govern together, but also have to emphasize their own profile to succeed in elections. We argue that the electoral cycle explains whether unity or differentiation prevails. While differentiation dominates at the beginning and the end of the legislative term in close proximity to elections, compromise dominates the middle of the term when coalition governments focus on enacting a common policy agenda. To test our theoretical claims, we draw on an innovative quantitative text analysis of more than 21,000 press releases published by coalition parties from 2000 until 2010.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Iñaki Sagarzazu, Lecturer in Comparative Politics, University of Glasgow, 40 Bute Gardens, Glasgow, UK G12 8RT (inaki.sagarzazu@glasgow.ac.uk). Heike Klüver, Professor of Comparative Politics, Department of Social Sciences, University of Hamburg, Allende-Platz 1, 20146 Hamburg, Germany (heike.kluever@uni-hamburg.de). The authors’ names follow the principle of rotation. Both authors have contributed equally to all work. The authors thank James Adams, Hanna Bäck, Nicholas Charron, William Heller, Thomas Saalfeld, the anonymous reviewers and Ken Benoit for valuable comments and suggestions. To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2015.56

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Bäck, Hanna, Debus, Marc, and Dumont, Patrick. 2011. ‘Who Gets What in Coalition Governments? Predictors of Portfolio Allocation in Parliamentary Democracies’. European Journal of Political Research 50(4):441478.
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Jones, Bryan D.. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1995. ‘What To Do (and Not To Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data’. American Political Science Review 89(3):634647.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1996. ‘Nuisance vs. Substance: Specifying and Estimating Time-Series-Cross-Section Models’. Political Analysis 6(1):136.
Budge, Ian. 1993. ‘Issues, Dimensions, and Agenda Change in Postwar Democracies: Long-Term Trends in Party Election Programs and Newspaper Reports in Twenty-Three Democracies’. In William H. Riker (ed.), Agenda Formation, 4180. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Budge, I., and Farlie, D.. 1983. Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper.
Ennser-Jedenastik, Laurenz, and Schermann, Katrin. 2013. The Dynamics of Policy Implementation in Coalition Governments. Paper presented at the 7th ECPR General Conference. Bordeaux, 4–7 September.
Falcó-Gimeno, Albert. 2014. ‘The Use of Control Mechanisms in Coalition Governments: The Role of Preference Tangentiality and Repeated Interactions’. Party Politics 20(3):341356.
Fortunato, David, and Stevenson, Randolph T.. 2013. ‘Perceptions of Partisan Ideologies: The Effect of Coalition Participation’. American Journal of Political Science 57(2):459477.
Golder, Sona N. 2006a. The Logic of Preelectoral Coalition Formation . Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Golder, Sona Nadenichek. 2006b. ‘Pre-Electoral Coalition Formation in Parliamentary Democracies’. British Journal of Political Science 36(2):193212.
Golding, Peter, and Elliott, Philip. 1979. Making the News. Longman, London, 241pp.
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Mortensen, Peter B.. 2015. ‘Avoidance and Engagement: Issue Competition in Multiparty Systems’. Political Studies 63(4):747764.
Grimmer, Justin. 2010. ‘A Bayesian Hierarchical Topic Model for Political Texts: Measuring Expressed Agendas in Senate Press Releases’. Political Analysis 18(1):135.
Grimmer, Justin. 2013. ‘Appropriators Not Position Takers: The Distorting Effects of Electoral Incentives on Congressional Representation’. American Journal of Political Science 57(3):624642.
Grimmer, Justin, and Stewart, Brandon M.. 2013. ‘Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts’. Political Analysis 21(3):267297.
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News that Matters: Television and American Public Opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jae-Jae, Spoon, and Klüver, Heike. 2014. ‘Do Parties Respond? How Electoral Context Influences Party Responsiveness’. Electoral Studies 35:4860.
Jones, Bryan D., and Baumgartner, Frank R.. 2005. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kayser, Mark Andreas. 2005. ‘Who Surfs, Who Manipulates? The Determinants of Opportunistic Election Timing and Electorally Motivated Economic Intervention’. American Political Science Review 99(1):1727.
King, Gary, Tomz, Michael, and Wittenberg, Jason. 2000. ‘Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation’. American Journal of Political Science 44(2):341355.
Klüver, Heike, and Sagarzazu, Iñaki. forthcoming. ‘Setting the Agenda or Responding to Voters? Political Parties, Voters and Issue Attention’. West European Politics.
Klüver, Heike, and Spoon, Jae-Jae. 2014. ‘Who Responds? Voters, Parties and Issue Attention’. British Journal of Political Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000313 (Epublication ahead of print. October, 2014).
Laver, Michael, and Shepsle, Kenneth A.. 1996. Making and Breaking Governments: Cabinets and Legislatures in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Stegmaier, Mary. 2000. ‘Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes’. Annual Review of Political Science 3(1):183219.
Lupia, Arthur, and Strøm, Kaare. 1995. ‘Coalition Termination and the Strategic Timing of Legislative Elections’. American Political Science Review 89(3):648665.
Martin, Lanny W., and Vanberg, Georg. 2008. ‘Coalition Government and Political Communication’. Political Research Quarterly 61(3):502516.
Martin, Lanny W., and Vanberg, Georg. 2011. Parliaments and Coalitions: The Role of Legislative Institutions in Multiparty Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, Lenny W. 2004. ‘The Government Agenda in Parliamentary Democracies’. American Journal of Political Science 48(3):445461.
Meyer, Thomas M. 2013. Constraints on Party Policy Change. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Müller, Wolfgang, and Strøm, Kaare. 2008a. Cabinets and Coalition Bargaining: The Democratic Life Cycle in Western Europe, 464pp. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Müller, Wolfgang, and Strøm, Kaare. 2008b. ‘Coalition Agreements and Cabinet Governance’. In Kaare Strøm, Wolfgang C. Müller and Torbjörn Bergman (eds), Cabinets and Coalition Bargaining , 159199. Oxford University Press.
Müller, Wolfgang C., and Meyer, Thomas M.. 2010. ‘Meeting the Challenges of Representation and Accountability in Multi-Party Governments’. West European Politics 33(5):10651092.
Rabinowitz, George, and Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1989. ‘A Directional Theory of Issue Voting’. American Political Science Review 83(1):93121.
Riker, William Harrison. 1962. The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Riker, William Harrison. 1993. ‘Rhetorical Interaction in the Ratification Campaigns’. In William H. Riker (ed.), Agenda Formation, 81126. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Saalfeld, Thomas. 2000. ‘Germany: Stable Parties, Chancellor Democracy and the Art of Informal Settlement’. In Wolfgang C. Müller and Kaare Strøm (eds), Coalition governments in Western Europe, 3285. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Saalfeld, Thomas. 2008. ‘Institutions, Chance and Choices: The Dynamics of Cabinet Survival’. In Kaare Strøm, Wolfgang C. Müller and Torbjörn Bergman (eds), Cabinets and Coalition Bargaining: The Democratic Life Cycle in Western Europe, 301326. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schaffner, Brian F. 2006. ‘Local News Coverage and the Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. House’. Legislative Studies Quarterly 31(4):491511.
Schermann, Katrin, and Ennser-Jedenastik, Laurenz. 2014a. ‘Coalition Policy Making Under Constraints: Examining the Role of Preferences and Institutions’. West European Politics 37(3):564583.
Schermann, Katrin, and Ennser-Jedenastik, Laurenz. 2014b. ‘Explaining Coalition-Bargaining Outcomes: Evidence from Austria, 2002–2008’. Party Politics 20(5):791801.
Shoemaker, Pamela J., and Reese, Stephen D.. 2013. Mediating the Message in the 21st Century. London: Routledge, 308pp.
Strøm, Kaare. 1990. ‘A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties’. American Journal of Political Science 34(2):565598.
Thies, Michael F. 2001. ‘Keeping Tabs on Partners: The Logic of Delegation in Coalition Governments’. American Journal of Political Science 45(3):580598.
Thomson, Robert. 2001. ‘The Programme to Policy Linkage: The Fulfilment of Election Pledges on Socio-Economic Policy in the Netherlands, 1986-1998’. European Journal of Political Research 40(2):171197.
Volkens, Andrea, McDonald, Michael D., Bara, Judith, Budge, Ian, and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter (eds) 2013. Mapping Policy Preferences from Texts: Statistical Solutions for Manifesto Analysts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walgrave, Stefaan, Varone, Frédéric, and Dumont, Patrick. 2006. ‘Policy With or Without Parties? A Comparative Analysis of Policy Priorities and Policy Change in Belgium, 1991 to 2000’. Journal of European Public Policy 13(7):10211038.
Warwick, Paul. 1994. Government Survival in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zubek, Radoslaw, and Klüver, Heike. 2015. ‘Legislative Pledges and Coalition Government’. Party Politics 21(4):603614.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Science Research and Methods
  • ISSN: 2049-8470
  • EISSN: 2049-8489
  • URL: /core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Sagarzazu and Klüver supplementary material
Online Appendix

 PDF (224 KB)
224 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed