Research on Legislative–Executive Relations

Recent research describes multiple factors that influence the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches (Dearborn Reference Dearborn2021; Moser Reference Moser1997). One of the dominant theoretical perspectives in the field argues that institutions matter. Scholars of the institutional perspective generally agree that the structural features of legislative institutions affect institutional performance and the overall distribution of power between the legislative and executive branches (Lijphart Reference Lijphart, Longley and Olson1991). Institutions define the framework within which politics takes place and are central factors in shaping political behavior (March and Olson Reference March and Olsen1995). Scholarly publications within this theoretical perspective discuss multiple factors, including constitutional and administrative reforms and changes to electoral rules.

In addition to institutional factors, scholars examine the effects of political polarization and argue that it is an increasing trend in multiple countries (Abramowitz Reference Abramowitz2022; Abramowitz and Webster Reference Abramowitz and Webster2016; Haglund Reference Haglund, Schulze and Vangelov2022; Hunt and Rouse Reference Hunt and Rouse2023; Jacobson Reference Jacobson2016a, Reference Jacobson2016b; Pearson Reference Pearson, Courser, Helland and Miller2018; Pool and Rosenthal Reference Poole and Rosenthal2007; Rehmert and Fujimura Reference Rehmert and Fujimura2023). The emergence of ultra-right groups in some countries and the increasing range of political ideologies present additional challenges to a system of legislative–executive relations. Democracies rely on the ability of different groups to reach a political consensus. The larger the range of ideologies, the more time it takes to reach a consensus. When coupled with world crises (e.g., a pandemic or a war), the functioning of legislative–executive relations becomes even more challenging.

The literature also addresses populism as another factor that further complicates the system’s legislative–executive relations (Graber, Levinson, and Tushnet Reference Graber, Levinson and Tushnet2018; Levitsky and Ziblatt Reference Levitsky and Ziblatt2018; Mounk Reference Mounk2018; Sunstein Reference Sunstein and Sunstein2018; Weyland Reference Weyland2022). Populism may challenge political and administrative professionalism. Reaching a political consensus may become increasingly difficult and time-consuming in the presence of these competing alternatives. Moreover, this gives the executive branch an opportunity to claim more power to accelerate the decision-making process. However, this comes at the expense of the power of the legislative branch and sacrificing the deliberations among multiple groups. Furthermore, recent research also discusses the role of political culture (EU Observer 2020; Holmberg, Rothstein, and Nasiritousi Reference Holmberg, Rothstein and Nasiritousi2009; Iyengar et al. Reference Iyengar, Lelkes, Levendusky, Malhotra and Westwood2019; Iyengar and Westwood Reference Iyengar and Westwood2015; Knack Reference Knack2022; Li and He Reference Li and He2022; Meckling and Nahm Reference Meckling and Nahm2018; Robinson and Jackson Reference Robinson and Jackson2001). Political culture provides a foundation for a functioning democracy. When political culture changes, legislative–executive relations respond to these shifts.

Studies also highlight party and election systems development as important explanatory factors in any research that discusses the functioning of a governmental system in general and legislative–executive relations in particular (Colton Reference Colton and Remington1994; Moser Reference Moser1997; Olson and Mezey Reference Olson and Mezey1991). Finally, there also is a body of research that examines economic factors that influence the quality of democracy in general and the dynamics in legislative–executive relations in particular (Houle and Kenny Reference Houle and Kenny2018; Kyle and Mounk Reference Kyle and Mounk2018; Ruth‐Lovell, Lührmann, and Grahn Reference Ruth‐Lovell, Lührmann and Grahn2019; Urbinati Reference Urbinati2019; Weyland Reference Weyland and de la Torre2018) . Governments in countries experiencing economic turmoil face calls from their citizens to relieve the pain that is causes. Both legislative and executive branches of power address economic issues in any country. Economic turmoil usually provides grounds for the executive branch to claim more power at the expense of the legislative branch.

Research Design and Methodology

The Spotlight section in PS is an appropriate venue for providing research on issues that require timely attention due to the rapid pace of changes in legislative–executive relations worldwide. The significance of these changes may affect not only the future of democracy but also security in the world.

The articles in this Spotlight share the most recent and important developments in different countries. Highlighting these factors that influence the dynamics of legislative–executive relations globally will facilitate academic research. In addition, discussing important practical implications of this research may be useful for policy makers.

Each article addresses the central research questions posed above. We selected 11 country cases to be broadly representative of trends in legislative–executive relations in the world, but the sample was small enough to “fit” the limits of a Spotlight. The selected cases were based not only on geographical but also institutional variations (e.g., basic constitutional orders and different election systems). For example, the selected countries represent both presidential and parliamentary governmental systems as well as systems with different electoral rules, including proportional and majoritarian rules. By using these criteria, we maximized variation and generalizability of the findings. We believe this to be most effective in sparking ideas that can develop this Spotlight into an edited volume and stimulate further research in the area of comparative legislative–executive relations.

In sum, existing research highlights several factors that explain the dynamics of legislative–executive relations, including institutional, economic, and cultural or ideological factors in a country. Institutional changes may include constitutional and election-law reforms, among others. Economic factors may include indicators of a country’s economic development. Cultural factors may lead to discussions of major changes in political cultures and ideologies and their influence on legislative–executive relations.

This Spotlight is a collection of articles that discuss the most recent and significant trends in legislative–executive relations globally. The contributors are country experts, and their expertise identifies the most recent and significant developments in legislative–executive relations in a specific country. The Spotlight concludes with a discussion of the findings and ideas for future research, which would provide the opportunity to empirically test these ideas. Future theory development on legislative–executive relations could be the result.