Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-16T20:48:22.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prime Ministers unchained? Explaining Prime Minister Policy Autonomy in coalition governments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2018

Nicola Martocchia Diodati ,
Bruno Marino Open the ORCID record for Bruno Marino [Opens in a new window]  and
Benedetta Carlotti
Nicola Martocchia Diodati
Affiliation:
Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence, Italy
Bruno Marino*
Affiliation:
Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence, Italy
Benedetta Carlotti
Affiliation:
Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence, Italy
*
*E-mail: bruno.marino@sns.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The personalization of politics has become a central concern in political science. This is also true for parliamentary governments, where the Prime Minister has allegedly acquired an increasing relevance. Nonetheless, a key question remains unanswered: How can we estimate the Prime Minister Policy Autonomy (PMPA) in parliamentary governments? Moreover, what are the determinants of this autonomy? This article aims to answer these questions by proposing a novel and easily replicable index of PMPA, based on data from an analysis of Prime Ministers’ and members of Parliament’s parliamentary speeches, and specifically from cosine similarity analysis. In this article, we explore PMPA by focussing on two most different cases of coalition governments, Italy and Germany between 1994 and 2014. A multilevel regression analysis shows that coalition-related factors strongly influence PMPA, party-related factors are somewhat relevant, and the Prime Minister-related factor (its selectorate) does not have a significant impact on such autonomy.

Keywords

coalition governmentspolitical elitestext analysiscosine similaritypersonalization of politics
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , November 2018 , pp. 515 - 536
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2018 

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

Akerlof, G.A. (1970), ‘The market for “lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 84(3): 488–500.Google Scholar
Bäck, H., Debus, M. and Dumont, P. (2011), ‘Who gets what in coalition governments? Predictors of portfolio allocation in parliamentary democracies’, European Journal of Political Research 50(4): 441–478.Google Scholar
Bäck, H., Debus, M. and Müller, W.C. (2016), ‘Intra-party diversity and ministerial selection in coalition governments’, Public Choice 166(3): 355–378.Google Scholar
Bäck, H., Müller, W.C. and Nyblade, B. (2017), ‘Multiparty government and economic policy-making’, Public Choice 170(1–2): 33–62.Google Scholar
Bergman, T., Müller, W.C., Strøm, K. and Blomgren, M. (2003), ‘Democratic delegation and accountability: cross-national patterns’, in K. Strøm, W.C. Müller and T. Bergman (eds), Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 109–220.Google Scholar
Campus, D. (2010), ‘‘Mediatization and personalization of politics in Italy and France: the cases of Berlusconi and Sarkozy’’, The International Journal of Press/Politics 15(2): 219–235.Google Scholar
Casal Bértoa, F. (2014), ‘Party systems and cleavage structures revisited: a sociological explanation of party system institutionalization in East Central Europe’, Party Politics 20(1): 16–36.Google Scholar
Ceron, A. (2012), ‘Bounded oligarchy: how and when factions constrain leaders in party’, Electoral Studies 31(4): 689–701.Google Scholar
Ceron, A. (2014), ‘Gamson rule not for all: patterns of portfolio allocation among Italian party factions’, European Journal of Political Research 53(1): 180–199.Google Scholar
Chiaramonte, A. (2007), ‘Il nuovo sistema politico italiano tra bipolarismo e frammentazione’, in R. D’Alimonte and A. Chiaramonte (eds), Proporzionale ma non solo, Bologna: il Mulino, pp. 369–406.Google Scholar
Chiaramonte, A. and Emanuele, V. (2013), ‘Volatile and tripolar: the new Italian party system’, in L. De Sio, V. Emanuele, N. Maggini and A. Paparo (eds), The Italian General Election of 2013, Roma: CISE, pp. 63–68.Google Scholar
Chiaramonte, A. and Emanuele, V. (2017), ‘Party system volatility, regeneration and de-institutionalization in Western Europe (1945–2015)’, Party Politics 23(4): 376–388.Google Scholar
Costa Lobo, M. and Curtice, J. (eds) (2015), Personality Politics? The Role of Leader Evaluation in Democratic Elections, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Curini, L. and Martelli, P. (2009), I Partiti della Prima Repubblica. Maggioranze e Governi dalla Costituente a Tangentopoli, Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Curtice, J. and Lisi., M. (2015), ‘The impact of leaders in parliamentary and presidential regimes’, in M. Costa Lobo and J. Curtice (eds), Personality Politics? The Role of Leader Evaluation in Democratic Elections, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 63–86.Google Scholar
D’Alimonte, R. (2007), ‘Il nuovo sistema elettorale. Dal collegio uninominale al premio di maggioranza’, in A. Chiaramonte and R. D’Alimonte (eds), Propozionale ma non solo. Le elezioni politiche del 2006, Bologna: Il Mulino, pp. 51–88.Google Scholar
D’Alimonte, R. and Chiaramonte, A. (1993), ‘Il nuovo sistema elettorale italiano: quali opportunità?’, Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 23(3): 513–547.Google Scholar
D’Alimonte, R. and Bartolini, S. (eds) (1997), Maggioritario per caso, Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Detterbeck, K. and Rohlfing, I. (2014), ‘Party leader selection in Germany’, in J.-B. Pilet and W.P. Cross (eds), The Selection of Political Party leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 77–92.Google Scholar
Dowding, K. (2013a), ‘The prime ministerialisation of the British PM’, Parliamentary Affairs 66: 617–635.Google Scholar
Dowding, K. (2013b), ‘Beneath the surface: replies to three critics’, Parliamentary Affairs 66(3): 663–672.Google Scholar
Dowding, K. and Dumont, P. (2009), The Selection of Ministers in Europe: Hiring and Firing, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Duch, R., May, J. and Armstrong, D.A. II (2010), ‘Coalition-directed voting in multiparty democracies’, American Political Science Review 104(4): 698–719.Google Scholar
Foley, M. (2000), The British Presidency: Tony Blair and the Politics of British Leadership, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Gamson, W.A. (1961), ‘A theory of coalition formation’, American Sociological Review 26(3): 373–382.Google Scholar
Gelman, A. and Hill, J. (2007), Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giannetti, D. and Laver, M. (2005), ‘Policy position and jobs in the government’, European Journal of Political Research 44(1): 91–120.Google Scholar
Golder, S.N. (2006), ‘Pre-electoral coalition formation in parliamentary democracies’, British Journal of Political Science 36(2): 193–212.Google Scholar
Hazan, R.Y. and Rahat, G. (2010), Democracy Within Parties. Candidate Selection Methods and Their Political Consequences, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Helms, L. (eds) (2012), Comparative Political Leadership, London: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Hoberg, G. and Maksimovic, V. (2015), ‘Redefining financial constraints: a text-based analysis’, Review of Financial Studies 28(5): 1312–1352.Google Scholar
Ieraci, G. (2006), ‘Governments, policy space and party positions in the Italian parliament (1996–2001): an inductive approach to parliamentary debate and votes of investiture’, South European Society and Politics 11(2): 261–285.Google Scholar
Kang, K. (2015), ‘Policy influence and private returns from lobbying in the energy sector’, Review of Economic Studies 83: 269–305.Google Scholar
Karvonen, L. (2010), Personalisation of Politics, Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Katz, R.S. (ed.) (1987), Party Governments: European and American Experiences, Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kenig, O., Rahat, G. and Hazan, R. (2015), ‘Leadership selection versus candidate selection: similarities and differences’, in G. Sandri, A. Seddone and F. Venturino (eds), Party Primaries in Comparative Perspective, Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 21–39.Google Scholar
Laver, M. and Schofield, N. (1990), Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe , Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laver, M. and Budge, I. (eds) (1992), Party Policy and Government Coalitions, New York: St. Martins Press.Google Scholar
Laver, M. and Shepsle, K.A. (1996), Making and Breaking Governments, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laver., M., Benoit, K. and Garry, J. (2003), ‘Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data’, The American Political Science Review 97(2): 311–331.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1999), Patterns of Democracy, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, A. (2000), ‘Delegation and its perils’, in K. Strøm, W.C. Müller and T. Bergman (eds), Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 33–54.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (1994), ‘Party organizations: from civil society to the state’, in R.S. Katz and P. Mair (eds), How Parties Organize – Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies, London: Sage, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (2013), Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy, London: Verso.Google Scholar
Manning, C.D., Raghavan, P. and Schütze, H. (2008), Introduction to Information Retrieval, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, L.V. and Vanberg, G. (2003), ‘Wasting time? The impact of ideology and size on delay in coalition formation’, British Journal of Political Science 33(2): 323–332.Google Scholar
Martocchia Diodati, N. and Verzichelli, L. (2017), ‘Changing patterns of ministerial circulation: the Italian case in a long-term perspective’, West European Politics 40(6): 1352–1372.Google Scholar
Massicotte, L. and Blais, A. (1999), ‘Mixed electoral systems: a conceptual and empirical survey’, Electoral Studies 18(3): 341–366.Google Scholar
Moury, C. (2013), Coalition Government and Party Mandate, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Müller, W.C. (2000), ‘Political parties in parliamentary democracies: making delegation and accountability work’, European Journal of Political Research 37(3): 309–333.Google Scholar
Müller, W.C. and Strøm, K. (eds) (2000), Policy, Office, or Votes? How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Musella, F. and Webb, P. (2015), ‘The revolution of personal leaders’, Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 45(3): 223–226.Google Scholar
Pilet, J.-B. and Cross, W.P. (2014), The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Poguntke, T. (2014), ‘Towards a new party system: the vanishing hold of the catch-all parties in Germany’, Party Politics 20(6): 950–963.Google Scholar
Poguntke, T. and Webb, P.D. (2005), The Presidentialization of Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Poguntke, T. and Webb, P.D. (2015), ‘Presidentialization and the politics of coalition: lessons from Germany and Britain’, Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 45(3): 249–275.Google Scholar
Proksch, S.-O. and Slapin, J.B. (2010), ‘Position taking in European parliament speeches’, British Journal of Political Science 40(3): 587–611.Google Scholar
Proksch, S.-O., Slapin, J.B. and Thies, M.F. (2011), ‘Party system dynamics in post-war Japan: a quantitative content analysis of electoral pledges’, Electoral Studies 30(1): 114–124.Google Scholar
Riker, W.H. (1962), The Theory of Political Coalitions, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Salton, G. (1989), Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis, and Retrieval of Information by Computer, Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Sandri, G., Seddone, A. and Venturino, F. (2014), ‘The selection of party leaders in Italy, 1989–2012’, in W.P. Cross and J.-B. Pilet (eds), The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 93–107.Google Scholar
Sandri, G., Seddone, A. and Venturino, F. (2015), Party Primaries in Comparative Perspective, Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. (1997), Comparative Constitutional Engineering, New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. (2005 [1976]), Parties and Party Systems – A Framework of Analysis, Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Schofield, N. (1993), ‘Political competition and multiparty coalition governments’, European Journal of Political Research 23(1): 1–33.Google Scholar
Schwarz, D., Traber, D. and Benoit, K. (2017), ‘Estimating intra-party preferences: comparing speeches and votes’, Political Science Research and Methods 5(2): 379–396.Google Scholar
Seawright, J. and Gerring, J. (2008), ‘Case selection techniques in case study research: a menu of qualitative and quantitative options’, Political Research Quarterly 61(2): 294–308.Google Scholar
Sebastiani, F. (2002), ‘Machine learning in automated text categorization’, ACM Computing Surveys 34(1): 1–47.Google Scholar
Siaroff, A. (2003), ‘Two-and-a-half party systems and the comparative role of the “half”’, Party Politics 9(3): 267–290.Google Scholar
Slapin, J.B. and Proksch, S.-O. (2008), ‘A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts’, American Journal of Political Science 52(3): 705–722.Google Scholar
Slapin, J.B. and Proksch, S.-O. (2010), ‘Look who’s talking: parliamentary debate in the European Union’, European Union Politics 11(3): 333–357.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, M. and Jones, B.S. (2002), ‘Modelling multilevel data structures’, American Journal of Political Science 46(1): 218–237.Google Scholar
Stegmueller, D. (2013), ‘How many countries for multilevel modelling? A comparison of frequentist and Bayesian approaches’, American Journal of Political Science 57(3): 748–761.Google Scholar
Strøm, K. (1997), ‘Rules, reasons and routines: legislative roles in parliamentary democracies’, Journal of Legislative Studies 3(1): 155–174.Google Scholar
Strøm, K. (2000), ‘Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies’, European Journal of Political Research 37(3): 261–289.Google Scholar
Strøm, K. (2003), ‘Parliamentary democracy and delegation’, in K. Strøm, W.C. Müller and T. Bergman (eds), Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 55–106.Google Scholar
Tormey, S. (2015), The End of Representative Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Van Biezen, I., Mair, P. and Poguntke, T. (2012), ‘Going, going,…gone? The decline of party membership in contemporary Europe’, European Journal of Political Research 51(1): 24–56.Google Scholar
Verzichelli, L. (2009), ‘Italy: the difficult road towards a more effective process of ministerial selection’, in K. Dowding and P. Dumont (eds), The Selection of Ministers in Europe: Hiring and Firing, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 79–100.Google Scholar
Volkens, A., Lehmann, P., Matthieß, T., Merz, N. and Regel, S. (2016), The Manifesto Data Collection, Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR), Berlin, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).Google Scholar
Webb, P.D. and Poguntke, T. (2005), ‘The presidentialization of contemporary democratic politics: evidence, causes, and consequences’, in T. Poguntke and P.D. Webb (eds), The Presidentialization of Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 336–356.Google Scholar
Webb., P.D. and Poguntke, T. (2013), ‘The presidentialization of politics thesis defended’, Parliamentary Affairs 66(3): 646–654.Google Scholar
Webb., P.D., Poguntke, T. and Kolodny, R. (2012), ‘The presidentialization of party leadership and party government in the democratic world’, Comparative Political Leadership 77: 77–98.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Martocchia Diodati et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Martocchia Diodati et al. supplementary material(File)
File 114.6 KB