Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ganghof, Steffen
Data de Publicação: 2019
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239
Resumo: This article analyses salient trade-offs in the design of democracy. It grounds this analysis in a distinction between two basic models of democracy: simple and complex majoritarianism. These models differ not only in their electoral and party systems, but also in the style of coalition-building. Simple majoritarianism concentrates executive power in a single majority party; complex majoritarianism envisions the formation of shifting, issue-specific coalitions among multiple parties whose programs differ across multiple conflict dimensions. The latter pattern of coalition formation is very difficult to create and sustain under pure parliamentary government. A separation of powers between executive and legislature can facilitate such a pattern, while also achieving central goals of simple majoritarianism: identifiable cabinet alternatives before the election and stable cabinets afterward. The separation of powers can thus balance simple and complex majoritarianism in ways that are unavailable under parliamentarism. The article also compares the presidential and semi-parliamentary versions of the separation of powers. It argues that the latter has important advantages, e.g., when it comes to resolving inter-branch deadlock, as it avoids the concentration of executive power in a single human being.
id RCAP_108e83d186b6f9dc4c691cb8383c37d7
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/2239
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimalityelectoral systems; parliamentary government; presidential government; semi-parliamentary governmentThis article analyses salient trade-offs in the design of democracy. It grounds this analysis in a distinction between two basic models of democracy: simple and complex majoritarianism. These models differ not only in their electoral and party systems, but also in the style of coalition-building. Simple majoritarianism concentrates executive power in a single majority party; complex majoritarianism envisions the formation of shifting, issue-specific coalitions among multiple parties whose programs differ across multiple conflict dimensions. The latter pattern of coalition formation is very difficult to create and sustain under pure parliamentary government. A separation of powers between executive and legislature can facilitate such a pattern, while also achieving central goals of simple majoritarianism: identifiable cabinet alternatives before the election and stable cabinets afterward. The separation of powers can thus balance simple and complex majoritarianism in ways that are unavailable under parliamentarism. The article also compares the presidential and semi-parliamentary versions of the separation of powers. It argues that the latter has important advantages, e.g., when it comes to resolving inter-branch deadlock, as it avoids the concentration of executive power in a single human being.Cogitatio2019-11-25info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/2239Politics and Governance; Vol 7, No 4 (2019): Trade-Offs in the Political Realm: How Important Are Trade-Offs in Politics?; 243-2532183-2463reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2239https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2239/2239Copyright (c) 2019 Steffen Ganghofhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGanghof, Steffen2022-12-22T15:16:48Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/2239Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:22:30.653501Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
title Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
spellingShingle Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
Ganghof, Steffen
electoral systems; parliamentary government; presidential government; semi-parliamentary government
title_short Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
title_full Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
title_fullStr Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
title_full_unstemmed Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
title_sort Designing Democratic Constitutions: The Search for Optimality
author Ganghof, Steffen
author_facet Ganghof, Steffen
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ganghof, Steffen
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv electoral systems; parliamentary government; presidential government; semi-parliamentary government
topic electoral systems; parliamentary government; presidential government; semi-parliamentary government
description This article analyses salient trade-offs in the design of democracy. It grounds this analysis in a distinction between two basic models of democracy: simple and complex majoritarianism. These models differ not only in their electoral and party systems, but also in the style of coalition-building. Simple majoritarianism concentrates executive power in a single majority party; complex majoritarianism envisions the formation of shifting, issue-specific coalitions among multiple parties whose programs differ across multiple conflict dimensions. The latter pattern of coalition formation is very difficult to create and sustain under pure parliamentary government. A separation of powers between executive and legislature can facilitate such a pattern, while also achieving central goals of simple majoritarianism: identifiable cabinet alternatives before the election and stable cabinets afterward. The separation of powers can thus balance simple and complex majoritarianism in ways that are unavailable under parliamentarism. The article also compares the presidential and semi-parliamentary versions of the separation of powers. It argues that the latter has important advantages, e.g., when it comes to resolving inter-branch deadlock, as it avoids the concentration of executive power in a single human being.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-11-25
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/2239
url https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/2239
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2239
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2239
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2239/2239
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Steffen Ganghof
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Steffen Ganghof
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Politics and Governance; Vol 7, No 4 (2019): Trade-Offs in the Political Realm: How Important Are Trade-Offs in Politics?; 243-253
2183-2463
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130671048818688