Draft Syllabus, December 16, 2016: Subject to Change
Party System Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse
Government 2241/DPI 337
Spring 2017
Class #33088
Thursday 4 to 6 pm
Scott Mainwaring
Office: 124 Mount Auburn Street, Suite 200, Office #236
Phone: 496-4196
[email protected]
This course will examine the building, decay, and collapse of political parties and
party systems, as well as the consequences of these processes, in developing parts of
the world. In 1942, the well-known political scientist E. E. Schattschneider famously
wrote that “Political parties created modern democracy and modern democracy is
unthinkable save in terms of the parties.” When we survey the world’s democratic
and semi-democratic polities, however, outside of the advanced industrial
democracies, many have weak parties and inchoate party systems. In many
countries, once powerful parties have disappeared. In other third and fourth wave
democracies, solid parties underpin solid democracies, just as Schattschneider
expected. What accounts for successful party building and for the
institutionalization of a party system? What accounts for the collapse of major
parties and even entire party systems? Why do parties remain weak in some
democracies and semi-democracies? What are the consequences of (weak or strong)
party building for democracy and development? How does the institutionalization of
parties under authoritarian rule affect the political regime? These are some of the
questions we will grapple with.
Our primary level of analysis in this course will be party systems, but we will also spend
considerable time on parties.
Course objectives
1. Learning about a burgeoning yet still cutting-edge part of the literature on parties and
party systems
2. Working on analytical, reading, and writing skills that will be useful throughout your
professional lives
3. Working on preliminary research in this area, and hence developing your research skills
4. For HKS students, thinking about policy implications and recommendations based on the
course materials. Writing assignments will be different for HKS students.
Faculty Assistant: Juanne Zhao
[email protected]
Juanne will help with organizing the materials among other tasks.
1
Posting and Submitting Assignments. Please use Canvas to submit assignments.
Requirements and Grading. A major part of the course will be doing the reading, coming
to class well prepared, and contributing to class discussions.
You will write two take home exams (with a maximum of 10 or 12 double spaced pages
each) and one paper or proto-paper. You may coauthor the paper but not the exams with
one classmate.
The default is that each written assignment will constitute 1/3 of your grade. If you do
better on your second and third written assignments than the first, I will weight each of
them 50% more than the first exam.
I will grade the exams and, when reasonable, the papers without knowing who wrote them.
Class contributions. After I compute a grade based on your written work, I will convert to
a numerical scale (0 to 100) and then assign a grade for class contributions. Grades for
class contribution will range from below zero to +3, where +3 represents extraordinary
class contributions. This might sound trivial, but there is about a 90% chance that a +3
grade for class contributions would improve a grade below A and above F (e.g., from A- to
A).
Unexcused absences. For each unexcused absence after the first one, I will deduct one
point from this numerical scale described in the previous paragraph. If you know in
advance that you are going to be absent, please let me know.
Late Exams and Papers. I will deduct 1/3 of a grade (e.g., from A to A-) for exams and
papers that are up to 24 hours late, 2/3 of a grade for work that is one to two days late, 1
grade for work that is >48 hours late, etc., until I have returned the papers. After I have
returned the graded exams, I will not accept late exams.
The Paper or Proto-Paper. I am open to a wide range of possibilities for the paper, but it
must focus on the questions we address in this course. Here are a few illustrative
possibilities:
1) It could be an original research paper for those of you who are especially interested in
the subject matter and who have the time.
2) It could be an original research paper that builds on a previous paper. In this case, of
course, you must tell me that this is what you are doing. I will read the original paper early
in the semester to discuss how best you can build on it.
3) It could be part of an original research paper, though this part would need to stand well
on its own.
2
4) It could be a critical review of some literature, somewhat akin to a recent review I did.1
You are welcome to do any of these options or design another, but you must discuss them
with me. I would like this paper to be useful to your research goals.
I do not expect a lengthy paper; twelve to eighteen pages is about right unless you
undertake a research paper.
An extended research option. Those of you who are particularly interested in the issues
in this course could consider it as part of a two-semester sequence, the second semester of
which you would devote to independent research projects. I would be happy to work with
you in this capacity.
Office hours
Tuesday 10:30 to 11:45
Friday 1:30 to 2:45
If these hours are not convenient, I will arrange an alternative time. I have always made it a
point to be available to my students.
Books on reserve at Lamont Library
Depending on your interests and finances, you might consider purchasing some of
these books.
Jason Brownlee, Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Gustavo Flores Macías, After Neoliberalism? The Left and Economic Reform in Latin
America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Steven Levitsky, James Loxton, Brandon Van Dyck, and Jorge I. Dominguez, eds.,
Challenges of Party-Building in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2016.
Noam Lupu, Party Brands in Crisis: Partisanship, Brand Dilution, and the Breakdown
of Parties in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Robert G. Moser and Ethan Scheiner, Electoral Systems and Political Context: How the
Effects of Rules Vary Across New and Established Democracies. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2012.
“Party System Institutionalization, Party Collapse, and Party Building.” Government
and Opposition 51 No. 4 (October 2016): 691-716. Of course, this is one of many
possible examples of a critical review.
1
3
Rachel Beatty Riedl, Authoritarian Origins of Democratic Party Systems in Africa. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.*
Kenneth M. Roberts, Changing Course in Latin America: Party Systems in the
Neoliberal Era. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.*
Jason Seawright, Party System Collapse: The Roots of Crisis in Peru and Venezuela. Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 2012.
Harvard Honor Code: Members of the Harvard College community commit
themselves to producing academic work of integrity – that is, work that adheres to
the scholarly and intellectual standards of accurate attribution of sources,
appropriate collection and use of data, and transparent acknowledgement of the
contribution of others to their ideas, discoveries, interpretations, and conclusions.
Cheating on exams or problem sets, plagiarizing or misrepresenting the ideas or
language of someone else as one’s own, falsifying data, or any other instance of
academic dishonesty violates the standards of our community, as well as the
standards of the wider world of learning and affairs.
E-Reserves
I will distribute some articles electronically.
Recommended readings are mentioned only for those who have a strong interest
in a subject. I do not expect you to read these works.
January 26. Introduction to the course. This will be a shorter meeting than
subsequent classes. No reading assignment.
Part I: Concept and measurement of party system institutionalization
February 2. What is party system institutionalization? Why might it be a useful
concept? How can we measure it? What are its consequences?
Goals for this week:
Introduce the notion of party system institutionalization (PSI).
Discuss measurement of party system institutionalization.
Begin consideration of the consequences of PSI.
Scott Mainwaring, Fernando Bizzarro Neto, and Ana Petrova, “Reconceptualizing
Party System Institutionalization.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., Party Systems in Latin
We will read either Riedl or Roberts, depending on the preferences of the students
in the course. Accordingly, you might hold off on purchasing for now.
* We will read either Riedl or Roberts, depending on the preferences of the students
in the course. Accordingly, you might hold off on purchasing for now.
*
4
America: Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse. New York: Cambridge University
Press, forthcoming.
Scott Mainwaring, “Party System Institutionalization in Contemporary Latin
America.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., Party Systems in Latin America:
Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse. New York: Cambridge University Press,
forthcoming.
Scott Mainwaring, “Party System Institutionalization, Predictability, and
Democracy.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., Party Systems in Latin America:
Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse. New York: Cambridge University Press,
forthcoming.
Allen Hicken and Erik Martinez Kuhonta, “Introduction: Rethinking Party System
Institutionalization in Asia.” In Hicken and Kuhonta, Party System
Institutionalization in Asia: Democracies, Autocracies, and the Shadows of the Past.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Part II. Party System Institutionalization, Democracy, and Development
February 9. Why is PSI important? Why is party institutionalization
important? Consequences for democracy and development
Steven Levitsky, “Peru: The Institutionalization of Politics without Parties.”
In Scott Mainwaring, ed., Latin American Party Systems: Institutionalization, Decay, and
Collapse. New York: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.
Noam Lupu and Rachel Beatty Riedl, “Political Parties and Uncertainty in Developing
Democracies.” Comparative Political Studies 46 No. 11: 1339-1365.
Joel Simmons, The Politics of Technological Progress: Parties, Time Horizons, and Long-Term
Development. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Page #s TBA.
February 16. Consequences: Institutionalization, policy stability, and
economic growth
Gustavo Flores Macías, After Neoliberalism? The Left and Economic Reform in Latin
America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. We will skip one of the country
chapters (4, 5, or 6), depending on student preferences.
Fernando Bizzarro Neto et al., paper on party institutionalization and economic growth.
February 23. Consequences of weak institutionalization: Strategic voting and
electoral accountability
Robert G. Moser and Ethan Scheiner, Electoral Systems and Political Context: How the
Effects of Rules Vary Across New and Established Democracies. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2012. Skip pp. 50-66, 141-148, chapter 7.
5
Jakub Zielinski, Kazimierz M. Slomczynski, and Goldie Shabad, "Electoral Control in New
Democracies: The Perverse Incentives of Fluid Party Systems," World Politics 57 (April
2005): 365-395.
March 2. Consequences of weak and hyper-institutionalization
The first three readings focus on the impact of party strength or PSI on democracy.
Aníbal Pérez-Liñán and Scott Mainwaring, “Regime Legacies and Levels of Democracy:
Evidence from Latin America.” Comparative Politics 45 (July 2013): 379-397.
Javier Corrales, "Strong Parties, Weak Parties: Regime Change in Cuba and Venezuela in the
1950s and Today," Latin American Politics and Society 43 No. 2 (Summer 2001): 81-113.
Michael Coppedge, Strong Parties and Lame Ducks: Presidential Partyarchy and
Factionalism in Venezuela (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994), pp. 18-46.
Gustavo Flores Macías, “The Macroeconomic Consequences of Party System
Institutionalization.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., Latin American Party Systems:
Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse.
March 3. Submit a title and a one- or two-paragraph statement of your paper
for the course. Schedule a meeting to discuss your plans for your paper for
March 6-10.
Part III: Causes of collapse, erosion, party building, and institutionalization
Rather than organizing this long part of the course by theme (e.g., party system collapse,
party system institutionalization), or by region (Asia, Latin America, post-Communist
countries, Africa), I have organized it by approach (i.e. the impact of path dependence or of
brand erosion on party system institutionalization).
March 9. Long historical causes of differences in institutionalization
On average, there is a gaping difference in institutionalization between the advanced
industrial democracies and later democracies. Why? What explains successful cases of
party-building among later democracies? (Slightly lighter reading load because of the exam
due March 10).
Philippe Schmitter, “Parties Are Not What They Once Were,” in Larry Diamond and Richard
Gunther, eds., Political Parties and Democracy, pp. 67-89. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 2001.
Scott Mainwaring and Edurne Zoco, “Historical Sequences and the Stabilization of
Interparty Competition: Electoral Volatility in Old and New Democracies.” Party
Politics 13 No. 2 (March 2007): 155-178.
6
Scott Mainwaring, Carlos Gervasoni, and Annabella España, “Extra- and WithinSystem Electoral Volatility.” Party Politics, on-line version available.
Steven Levitsky, James Loxton, and Brandon Van Dyck, “Introduction: Challenges of
Party-Building in Latin America,” in Levitsky et al., Challenges of Party-Building in
Latin America, pp. 1-48.
March 10. Midterm exam due. Also, revised title and revised one or two paragraph
statement about your paper.
March 11-19. Spring break
March 23. Long historical causes: Path dependence and party system
institutionalization
Depending on your preferences, we will read either Riedl or Roberts (and Loxton).
Rachel Beatty Riedl, Authoritarian Origins of Democratic Party Systems in Africa. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
James Loxton, ”Authoritarian Successor Parties Worldwide: A Framework for
Analysis.” Unpublished paper.
Kenneth M. Roberts, Changing Course in Latin America: Party Systems in the
Neoliberal Era. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chapters 1 to 6 and Chapter
10, plus pp. 137-139, 172-173, 174-175, 225-228, 229-231, 270. In Chapters 7, 8,
and 9, read one of the country case studies for each chapter to get a sense of the
analysis.
March 30. Party system collapse: Corruption, Economic Crisis, and Gaps in
Representation
Jason Seawright, Party System Collapse: The Roots of Crisis in Peru and Venezuela. Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 2012. Skip pp. 201-241 (most of Chapter 8).
Juan Albarracín, Laura Gamboa, and Scott Mainwaring, “The Deinstitutionalization of a
Party System: Colombia.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., forthcoming volume, Latin American
Party Systems: Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse.
April 6. Brand erosion and party collapse
Noam Lupu, Party Brands in Crisis: Partisanship, Brand Dilution, and the Breakdown
of Parties in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Alisha C. Holland, “Insurgent Successor Parties: Scaling Down to Build a Party after
War.” In Levitsky et al., Challenges of Party-Building in Latin America, pp. 273-204.
April 13. Challenges of party building in third and fourth wave democracies
7
David Samuels and César Zucco Júnior, “Crafting Mass Partisanship at the Grass
Roots,” British Journal of Political Science 45 (2014): 755-775.
Grigore Pop-Eleches, “Throwing out the Bums: Protest Voting and Unorthodox
Parties after Communism.” World Politics 62 No. 1 (April 2010): 221-260.
James Loxton, “Authoritarian Successor Parties and the New Right,” in Levitsky et
al., Challenges of Party-Building in Latin America, pp. 245-272.
Scott Mainwaring, Timothy J. Power, and Fernando Bizzarro, “The Institutionalization of a
Party System: Brazil.” In Scott Mainwaring, ed., forthcoming, Latin American Party Systems:
Institutionalization, Decay, and Collapse.
Brandon Van Dyck, “The Paradox of Adversity: New Left Party Survival and Collapse
in Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina,” in Levitsky et al. Challenges of Party-Building in
Latin America, pp. 133-158.
April 20. Party institutionalization under authoritarianism
So far, the course has dealt with party and party system institutionalization under
democratic and semi-democratic regimes. We conclude with an analysis of party
institutionalization under authoritarianism.
Milan W. Svolik, The Politics of Authoritarian Rule, pp. 162-195. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Jason Brownlee, Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2007. Pages TBA.
Benjamin Smith, “Life of the Party: The Origins of Regime Breakdown and Persistence
under Single-Party Rule.” World Politics 57 (April 2005): 421-451.
April 28. Paper due by noon
May 10. Final exam due by noon
8
Two important themes that we did not cover
Institutional rules, party building, and party system institutionalization
M. Steven Fish, “Stronger Legislatures, Stronger Democracies.” Journal of Democracy 17 No.1 (January
2006): 5-20.
David J. Samuels and Matthew S. Shugart, Presidents, Parties, and Prime Ministers: How the Separation
of Powers Affects Party Organization and Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Pp.
1-21, 62-83, 90-93.
Recommended: Eduardo Pizarro Leongómez, “Giants with Feet of Clay.” In Scott Mainwaring, Ana
María Bejarano, and Eduardo Pizarro Leongómez, eds., The Crisis of Democratic Representation in the
Andes, pp. 78-99. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
Robert Moser, Unexpected Outcomes: Electoral Systems, Political Parties, and Representation in Russia.
Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2001.
Party organization and party building
Margit Tavits, Post-Communist Democracies and Party Organization. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2013.
Recommended Readings
February 2
Steven Levitsky, Transforming Labor-Based Parties in Latin America, pp. 15-31. New York: Cambridge
University Press. Excellent discussion of “institutionalization.”
Cesar Zucco Júnior, “Stability without Roots: Party System Institutionalization in Brazil.” At
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2002359
Spanish version: "Estabilidad sin raíces: La institucionalización del sistema de partidos brasileño.'' In
Mariano Torcal, ed., Los problemas de la institucionalización de los sistemas de partidos en América
Latina, Ch. 3, 2015. Anthropos/Siglo XXI.
Steffan Lindberg, “Institutionalization of Party Systems? Stability and Fluidity among Legislative
Parties in Africa’s Democracies.” Government and Opposition 42 No. 2 (2007): 215-241.
Scott Mainwaring and Timothy R. Scully, “Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America,” in Scott
Mainwaring and Timothy R. Scully, eds., Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin
America, pp. 1-34. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Scott Mainwaring and Mariano Torcal, “Party System Institutionalization and Party System Theory
after the Third Wave of Democratization,” in Richard S. Katz and William Crotty, eds., Handbook of
Political Parties, pp. 204-227.
Juan Pablo Luna and David Altman, “Uprooted but Stable: Chilean Parties and the Concept of Party
System Institutionalization.” Latin American Politics and Society 53 No. 2 (Summer 2011): 1-28.
Gábor Tóka, “Political Parties and Democratic Consolidation in East Central Europe.” University of
Strathclyde, Centre for the Study of Public Policy, Working Paper #279. Against Mainwaring and Scully
(1995), argues that party system institutionalization is not necessary for democratic consolidation.
For some indicators of party institutionalization, see Matthias Basedau and Alexander Stroh, “Measuring
Party Institutionalization: A New Research Instrument Applied to 28 African Political Parties.” GIGA (German
Institute of Global and Area Studies) Working Paper #69, April 2008. On line.
9
February 9
Daniela Campello, “¿Es importante la institucionalización de los sistemas de partidos? Ataques
especulativos y receptividad democrática en Latinoamérica.” In Mariano Torcal, ed., Sistemas de partidos
en América Latina: Causas y consecuencias de su equilibrio inestable, pp. 241-260. Barcelona:
Anthropos/Siglo XXI, 2015. Interesting article that takes a contrarian view.
Guillermo O’Donnell, “Delegative Democracy.” The Journal of Democracy 5 No. 1: 55-69. On weak institutions
(including parties) and their consequences.
Steven Levitsky and María Victoria Murillo. “Conclusion: Theorizing about Weak Institutions: Lessons
from the Argentine Case.” In Steven Levitsky and María Victoria Murillo, eds., Argentine Democracy: The
Politics of Institutional Weakness, pp. 269-289. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State Press, 2005.
On weak institutions and their consequences.
Dani Rodrik, Arvind Subramanian, and Francesco Trebbi, “Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions
over Geography and Integration in Economic Development.” Journal of Economic Growth 9 No. 2 (June
2004): 131-165. Argues that strong institutions are the most important factor in generating economic
growth.
February 16
Martín Tanaka, Democracia sin partidos: Peru, 2000-2005 (Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, 2005).
O’Dwyer, Conor. 2006. Runaway State-Building: Patronage Politics and Democratic Development.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Conor O’Dwyer and Branislav Kovalcik. “And the Last Shall Be First: Party System Institutionalization
and Second-Generation Economic Reform in Postcommunist Europe.” Studies in Comparative
International Development 41 No. 4 (Winter 2007): 3-26.
March 2
Recommended: Andreas Schedler, “Under- and Overinstitutionalization: Some Ideal Typical
Propositions Concerning Old and New Party Systems.” Kellogg Institute Working Paper #213, March
1995.
March 9
Giovanni Sartori, "Video Power." Government and Opposition 24 No. 1 (Winter 1989): 39-53. On the effects of
television on party politics. Engaging but dated.
March 23
Richard Rose, "Mobilizing Demobilized Voters in Post-Communist Societies." Party Politics 1 No. 4 (1995):
549-563.
Kathryn Stoner-Weiss, “The Limited Reach of Russia’s Party System: Underinstitutionalization in Dual
Transitions.” Politics and Society 29 No. 3 (September 2001): 385-414.
March 30
Jana Morgan, Bankrupt Representation and Party System Collapse. University Park, PA: The
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011.
April 6
10
Recommended: Frances Hagopian, Carlos Gervasoni, and Juan Andrés Moraes, “From Patronage to
Program: The Emergence of Party-Oriented Legislators in Brazil.” Comparative Political Studies 42, 3
(March 2009): 360-391.
April 13
Henry E. Hale, Why Not Parties in Russia? Democracy, Federalism, and the State. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2006. pp. 1-46, 70-71, 85-116, 133-140, 148-186, 193-215, 228-248.
John Aldrich, Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America, pp. 3-61;
277-296. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Interesting to pair with Hale’s book.
April 20
Note: The earlier paper by Allen Hicken and Erik Kuhonta is also relevant this week.
Recommended: Beatriz Magaloni, Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and Its Demise in
Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Other works related to PSI
Margit Tavits, “Party Systems in the Making: The Emergence and Success of New Parties in New
Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 38 No. 1 (2008): 113-134.
Raúl Madrid, “Ethnic Cleavages and Electoral Volatility in Latin America.” Comparative Politics 38 No.
1 (October 2005): 1-19.
Kenneth M. Roberts and Erik Wibbels, “Party Systems and Electoral Systems in Latin America: A Test
of Economic, Institutional, and Structural Explanations.” American Political Science Review 93 No. 3
(September 1999): 575-590.
11