IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsaxx/v33y2017i2p145-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing Duvergerʼs law: strategic voting in Mongolian elections, 1996–2004

Author

Listed:
  • Pavel Maškarinec

Abstract

Recent empirical research on voting in single-member districts, based on extensive data-sets of election results, has demonstrated the general (although not universal) validity of Duverger’s law (i.e. that the average outcome under plurality rule is generally consistent with two-party competition). This article tests Duverger’s law through analysis of a data-set covering Mongolian parliamentary elections in the period of 1996–2004. The results show consistent, but not linear, movement towards the Duvergerian equilibrium in Mongolia, with large part of the districts conforming to the Duvergerian norm of two-party competition. Duverger treated his law merely as an important tendency but insisted that social forces are the main determinants of the number of political parties. The main factor that limited Mongolian voters’ rationality, and created problems with their strategic ability to distinguish and abandon hopeless candidates, was weak institutionalization of the Mongolian party system. Finally, I prove that the emergence of bipolar party politics was not an immediate process and will continue over a series of elections, supporting the so-called “learning hypothesis.”

Suggested Citation

  • Pavel Maškarinec, 2017. "Testing Duvergerʼs law: strategic voting in Mongolian elections, 1996–2004," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 145-160, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsaxx:v:33:y:2017:i:2:p:145-160
    DOI: 10.1080/1060586X.2015.1119553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1060586X.2015.1119553
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1060586X.2015.1119553?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rpsaxx:v:33:y:2017:i:2:p:145-160. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rpsa .

    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.