IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v16y2004i4p483-515.html

Party Competition and Coalition Formation

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Giannetti

    (University of Bologna, gianett@spbo.unibo.it)

  • Itai Sened

    (Department of Political Science and Center for New Institutional Social Sciences at Washington University in St Louis, sened@artsci.wustl.edu)

Abstract

Formal theory has often been criticized for shying away from empirical testing, which brought some to wonder about its empirical relevance altogether. Theorists, on their side, often responded by accusing much of the empirical work in political science as being devoid of any theoretical guidance. This paper argues that part of the problem is due to the problematic fit between traditional quantitative research and abstract theoretical models. Here, we illustrate how one could bridge the gap by connecting the ever puzzling realities of Italian parliamentary politics with a theoretical model of multiparty parliamentary systems. The empirics of Italian politics raise more questions than answers and the theoretical model we apply seems awfully complex and frustratingly abstract. With the use of relatively simple visual tools, we believe that we help make some sense of the complex realities of Italian politics and, in the process, demonstrate the empirical relevance of the theoretical model we chose to apply.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Giannetti & Itai Sened, 2004. "Party Competition and Coalition Formation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(4), pages 483-515, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:16:y:2004:i:4:p:483-515
    DOI: 10.1177/0951629804046151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629804046151
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951629804046151?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mershon, Carol, 1996. "The Costs of Coalition: Coalition Theories and Italian Governments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 90(3), pages 534-554, September.
    2. Enelow,James M. & Hinich,Melvin J., 1984. "The Spatial Theory of Voting," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521275156.
    3. repec:cup:apsrev:v:64:y:1970:i:02:p:426-448_12 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ganghof, Steffen & Manow, Philip, 2005. "Mechanismen der Politik: Strategische Interaktion im deutschen Regierungssystem," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 54, number 54.
    2. Luigi Curini & Paolo Martelli, 2009. "Electoral Systems and Government Stability: A Simulation of 2006 Italian Policy Space," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 3(3), pages 305-322, October.
    3. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    4. Jonathan Pool, 1992. "The Multilingual Election Problem," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 31-52, January.
    5. Joseph Gershtenson, 2004. "Ideological Centrism and the Electoral Fortunes of U.S. Senate Candidates," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(2), pages 497-508, June.
    6. Mikael Gilljam, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: I," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-12, January.
    7. Kirchgassner, Gebhard, 2000. "Probabilistic Voting and Equilibrium: An Impossibility Result," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 103(1-2), pages 35-48, April.
    8. Partha Gangopadhyay & Shyam Nath, 2001. "Bargaining, Coalitions and Local Expenditure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(13), pages 2379-2391, December.
    9. Charles H. Stewart III, 1991. "The Politics of Tax Reform in the 1980s," NBER Chapters, in: Politics and Economics in the Eighties, pages 143-174, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Hervé Crès & M. Utku Ünver, 2010. "Ideology and Existence of 50%-Majority Equilibria in Multidimensional Spatial Voting Models," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 431-444, October.
    11. Ladha, Krishna K., 1995. "Information pooling through majority-rule voting: Condorcet's jury theorem with correlated votes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-372, May.
    12. Witterblad, Mikael, 2008. "Essays on Redistribution and Local Public Expenditures," Umeå Economic Studies 731, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    13. Torsten J. Selck, 2005. "Improving the Explanatory Power of Bargaining Models," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 371-375, July.
    14. Sadiraj, V. & Tuinstra, J. & Winden, F. van, 2005. "On the size of the winning set in the presence of interest groups," CeNDEF Working Papers 05-08, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance.
    15. Midori Hirokawa, 2003. "The Possibility of Issue‐Specific Decisions on Multiple Social Choice Issues," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 86-100, March.
    16. Eijffinger, Sylvester & Mahieu, Ronald & Raes, Louis, 2018. "Inferring hawks and doves from voting records," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 107-120.
    17. Bernard Steunenberg, 2010. "Is big brother watching? Commission oversight of the national implementation of EU directives," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 359-380, September.
    18. Catherine E. de Vries, 2010. "EU Issue Voting: Asset or Liability?," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 89-117, March.
    19. Amihai Glazer & Bernard Grofman, 1988. "Limitations of the spatial model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 161-167, August.
    20. David Austen‐Smith, 1991. "Rational Consumers And Irrational Voters: A Review Essay On Black Hole Tariffs And Endogenous Policy Theory, By Stephen Magee, William Brock And Leslie Young, Cambridge University Press 1989," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 73-92, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:16:y:2004:i:4:p:483-515. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.