Electoral and Party Systems in Central/Eastern Europe

Guiding Questions

• What patterns are observed in Central/Eastern European electoral systems?

• What patterns are observed in Central/Eastern European party systems?

• What does populism look like in Central/Eastern Europe?

• Have political parties become successfully consolidated in Central/Eastern Europe?

Elections Under Communism

• Birch (2018):

  • ECE countries in the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires held elections in the late 19th century. These elections often featured weighted votes that overrepresented the aristocracy, limiting broader participation.

  • During the Interwar era, states held elections with varying levels of quality. The rise of Nazi-allied regimes further undermined democratic processes.

  • Elections were regularly held during the communist era with turnout exceeding 90% due to significant social pressure. These elections were more about demonstrating unity and compliance than offering genuine choice.

• Elections under communism served to "manufacture consent," as most did not allow non-communist candidates to contest elections. This ensured the ruling communist party maintained power without competition.

• Some "opening up" occurred towards the end of the communist era, but participation was still limited to communists and their allies. These reforms were largely cosmetic and did not introduce meaningful electoral freedom.

• The region has a long history of voting. However, "free, fair, and credible" elections did not occur until after the 1989 revolutions, marking a significant shift towards genuine democratic practices.

Institutional Accounts and Electoral Systems

• Birch (2018):

  • Choosing the “right” electoral system triggered debate during (and after) the transition from communism. Different electoral systems were considered for their potential impacts on political representation and stability.

  • Electoral systems translate vote shares into seats in the allocation of political offices, determining how public preferences are converted into political power.

  • They shape party systems, partisan composition, representation, and coalition formation, influencing the overall structure and dynamics of the political landscape.

  • Types include plurality (SMD) and proportional (PR), each with distinct advantages and disadvantages.

  • Some "mixed" systems exist, combining elements of both plurality and proportional representation to balance fairness and efficiency.

Plurality Systems

• Birch (2018):

  • Also referred to as single-member district (SMD), majoritarian, or "first past the post." This system is straightforward but can lead to disproportionate outcomes.

  • One candidate is elected per district (district magnitude = 1). The candidate with the most votes in each district wins, regardless of whether they secure a majority.

  • Whoever gets the most votes wins. This simple rule can result in a winner-take-all scenario, often favoring larger parties.

  • Redistricting is critical in shaping representation; gerrymandering can reduce electoral turnover. Gerrymandering involves manipulating district boundaries to benefit one party over another, undermining fair representation.

  • Generally manufactures a majority for the largest parties by denying representation to smaller parties. This can lead to a less diverse and representative legislature.

  • Reduces fairness to boost efficiency, prioritizing decisiveness and clear outcomes over proportional representation of all viewpoints.

Proportional Representation

• Birch (2018):

  • Various types exist (e.g., closed list, open list, STV). These variations offer different levels of voter influence over candidate selection.

  • Under list PR, candidates are elected by party list in multi-member districts (district magnitude > 1). Voters typically choose a party rather than individual candidates.

  • Parties rank candidates prior to the election and receive a seat share proportional to their vote percentage, as long as they “jump the threshold.” This ensures representation is closely aligned with popular vote.

  • Threshold: minimum vote required to win a seat. Thresholds are designed to prevent excessive party fragmentation in the legislature.

  • Candidates at the top of the list are more likely to be elected, giving party leaders significant influence over who enters parliament.

  • List PR can strengthen party discipline, as candidates are dependent on the party for their position on the list.

  • Allows for more proportionate outcomes, ensuring that smaller parties and diverse viewpoints are represented in the legislature.

  • Boosts fairness over efficiency, emphasizing inclusivity and representation of a wide range of political perspectives.

Explaining Electoral Systems in Central/Eastern Europe

• Birch (2018):

  • Post-transition, few systems adopted SMD. The preference was for systems that could ensure broader representation and prevent the dominance of a single party.

  • PR was the overwhelming choice, particularly list PR over STV, similar to Western Europe, reflecting a desire for inclusive and multiparty systems.

  • Since the transition, electoral reforms have been observed throughout the region. These reforms aim to fine-tune the balance between representation, stability, and government effectiveness.

  • Reform of thresholds, shifting constituency sizes, and/or shifts to mixed systems have occurred, usually to reduce the effective number of political parties. These changes often seek to consolidate the party system and prevent fragmentation.

• Emphasis on PR due to a desire to:

  • Ensure multiparty systems, preventing any single party from monopolizing power.

  • Solidify parties, encouraging the development of stable and enduring political organizations.

  • Force parties to campaign on national issues, promoting broader policy debates rather than localized concerns.

  • Corruption is more likely if elections are localized, as local elections can be more vulnerable to undue influence and clientelism.

  • Avoid issues associated with SMD redistricting, that is, avoid gerrymandering, ensuring fair and impartial electoral boundaries.

• Observe similarities AND differences in the relationship between electoral systems and party systems in Western Europe and Eastern/Central Europe. These comparisons provide insights into the unique challenges and dynamics of democratization in the region.

Similarities with Western Europe

• Birch (2018); Enyedi and Deegan-Krause (2018):

  • Multiparty systems exist throughout the region, linked to permissive electoral systems and the presence of several social divisions (i.e., cleavages). These systems enable diverse political viewpoints to be represented in the legislature.

  • The left-right dimension is the most politically salient, shaping much of the political discourse and party alignments.

  • The authoritarian-postmaterialist cleavage is also salient but with more emphasis on the authoritarian side in ECE, reflecting historical experiences and cultural values.

  • The demarcation-integration cleavage is growing in salience, driven by debates over national identity, sovereignty, and European integration.

  • Turnout is lower in less developed regions, indicating disparities in political engagement and access to information.

Differences with Western Europe

• Birch (2018); Sikk (2018); Enyedi and Deegan-Krause (2018):

  • Turnout is lower in ECE than in Western Europe, possibly due to disillusionment with politics, weaker civic engagement, or other socio-economic factors.

  • Higher electoral volatility and party fragmentation exist:

  • Electoral volatility: voters shift parties between elections, indicating weak voter attachment to parties. This can lead to unpredictable election outcomes and coalition instability.

  • Party fragmentation: a higher effective number of parties indicates that many voters are drawn to new parties. This can complicate coalition formation and policy implementation.

  • Higher cabinet instability than in Western Europe, reflecting the challenges of maintaining stable governing coalitions in fragmented party systems.

Differences with Western Europe (Continued)

• Birch (2018); Sikk (2018); Enyedi and Deegan-Krause (2018):

  • "Flash parties" are more prevalent in ECE, running on an "anti-corruption" platform, often linked to authoritarian populism or liberal populism. These parties can quickly gain and lose support based on specific events or charismatic leaders.

  • Campaign funding is often not an issue; parties with wealthy benefactors are not as stigmatized. This can create an uneven playing field and raise concerns about undue influence.

  • Corruption scandals are more frequent, linked to state exploitation during privatization. These scandals erode public trust in political institutions and processes.

Political Parties in Eastern/Central Europe

• Birch (2018); Sikk (2018):

  • At its essence, the story about party systems in ECE is a story about political parties lacking a social base. Parties struggle to establish deep roots within society and build lasting relationships with voters.

  • Parties are more “embedded” within society in the West, with stronger ties to social groups, interest organizations, and civil society.

  • Explanations for why parties are not “embedded” within ECE include:

  • Parties were not allowed to form before the collapse in most cases. This lack of historical development has hindered the formation of strong party identities.

  • Most current parties have a very limited history, lacking the institutional memory and experience of established parties in the West.

  • Parties typically formed DURING or AFTER the first elections; they did not lead demonstrations against the previous regimes as social movements “carried the baton.” Citizens “connected” to social movements, not parties. This has resulted in weaker party identification among voters.

Political Parties in Eastern/Central Europe (Continued)

• Sikk (2018):

  • Party families are the typical way to classify political parties in democracies. This classification helps to understand the ideological orientations and policy platforms of different parties.

  • The same party families exist as in the West, but with varying levels of strength. Some party families are well-established, while others are still developing.

  • ECE parties are often grouped by:

  • Former communists: MOST have shifted to social democracy (associated with the center-left). This reflects a change in ideology and policy orientation after the end of communism.

  • Post-communist parties: linked to anti-communist movements, include liberals, conservatives, agrarians, and Christian Democrats (associated with the center-right). These parties represent a diverse range of political viewpoints.

  • SOME populist radical right parties and ethnic minority parties would also be included. These parties appeal to specific segments of the population based on identity or grievances.

  • New parties: include greens AND remaining populist radical right and liberal populist parties. Many new parties are