Patterns of accountability and representation: Why the executive-parties dimension cannot explain democratic performance
Author(s) -
Steffen Ganghof,
Sebastian Eppner
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
politics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.855
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 1467-9256
pISSN - 0263-3957
DOI - 10.1177/0263395717710566
Subject(s) - accountability , conceptualization , dimension (graph theory) , representation (politics) , democracy , presidential system , political science , turnout , positive economics , public administration , sociology , economics , law , computer science , politics , mathematics , voting , artificial intelligence , pure mathematics
Arend Lijphart uses an average of five standardized variables – the executive-parties dimension (EPD) – to describe patterns of democracy and explain differences in democracies’ performance. The article suggests ways to improve the descriptive part of the project. It argues that the EPD maps different approaches to achieving accountability and representation, rather than differences in consensus. This re-conceptualization leads to a more coherent and valid measurement. It is also argued that more systematic adjustments are needed for differences in constitutional structures (presidentialism and bicameralism). The article presents data on a revised EPD and its components for 36 democracies in the period from 1981 to 2010. As to the explanatory part of the project, we contend that the EPD often hinders adequate causal analysis rather than facilitating it. We show this by re-analysing democracies’ performance with respect to turnout and capital punishment.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom