Hierarchy, stratarchy and party politics denationalization.

Transcription

1 Hierarchy, stratarchy and party politics denationalization. Procedures of candidate selection in the Italian parties ( ) Enrico Calossi, European University Institute Eugenio Pizzimenti, Università di Pisa Paper presented at the 2013 EUDO Dissemination Conference: Elections in Europe in Times of Crisis. Fiesole, November 2013

2 Aim of the paper To verify to what extent Italian parties have followed patterns of organizational change towards more decentralized/stratarchical party models; Focus on the procedures of candidate selection (compared to other 8 organizational variables)

3 Literature Party organizational change (Panebianco 1982; Katz, Mair 1994; 1995; Carty 2004; Bolleyer 2011); Party decentralization (Deschouwer 2003; Hopkin 2003; Van Biezen, Hopkin 2006; Fabre 2010; Allern, Saglie 2012; Ignazi et al. 2013); Organization theory (Scott 1995; 2012); New-institutionalism (Powell, Di Maggio 1983; 2000; Lanzalaco 1995; Greenwood, Hinings 1996; Hall, Taylor 1996; Powell 1998; Schmidt 2010);

4 A new-institutional approach to organizational change Organizational change as the result of both systemic and endogenous factors FUNCTIONAL FIELD INSTITUTIONAL REGIMES TECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTS RATIONAL MYTHS O1 O2 O3 O4 O5

5 The determinants of Organizational Change OC = DINS+DINC+DSFF OC = Organizational Change DINS = Degree of Organizational Institutionalization; DINC = Degree of Incorporation; DSFF = Degree of Structuring of the Functional Field

6 The Italian Case Formal Institutional Regimes: regionalization of politics and policies (institutional reforms driven by the EU and the collapse of s.c. First Republic); How did new parties (scarcely institutionalized) adapt their organizations to changing institutional regimes? Did they undergo any process of decentralization/stratarchization, in time?

7 Purpose Through the analysis of the formal profile of political parties i.e. party statutes we seek to see which is 1) the degree of autonomy of the regional levels from the national level and 2) the involvement of the regional levels in performing functions at the national level 10 variables, coming from 5 party functions performed at national and regional levels: 1. Selecting the party candidates for elections; 2. Selecting the party leader; 3. Composition of the party executive; 4. Amending the party statute; 5. Deciding the electoral campaign strategy.

8 Method (1/2) Operationalization Value 1: A decision is taken by a party organ, exclusively composed by members of the regional level. Value 2: A decision is taken by a party organ, formed partly by regional members with voting rights Value 3: A decision is taken by a party organ, formed partly by regional members without voting rights Value 4: A decision is taken by a party organ, where regional members are only invited or consulted Value 5: A decision is taken by a party organ, exclusively composed by members of the national level.

9 Method (2/2) Example: Selecting National Candidates (SNC) 1. By a national party organ, formed exclusively by regional members; 2. By a national party organ, formed by regional party members with voting right; 3. By a national party organ, formed by regional party members without voting right; 4. By a national party organ, after consulting regional party members; 5. By national party organ, where regional party members are not present;

10 What do we expect? If the stratarchization hypothesis is true we should find: high degrees of autonomy of regional levels from national levels (average values inclining to 1) low degrees of involvement of regional levels in performing functions at the national levels (average values close to 5).

11 Explicative Typology on Party Organisation Low degree of Autonomy of regional levels (values close to 5) High degree of Autonomy of regional levels (values close to 1) High degree of Involvement of regionallevelsin nat. functions (values close to 1) Low degree of Involvement of regionallevelsin nat. functions (values close to 5) Integrated parties Hierarchical parties (centralized parties) Decentralized parties(federation of regional parties) Stratarchical parties

12 Aggregated Results (for all parties) Involvement For what concerns the Involvement of regional members at the national level, the mean of variables is 2.86, instead of an expected value close to 5. Selection of candidates for national elections (SNC) is the only variable which presents a value in line with the stratarchical model. Involvement MV SNL 2,81 SNC 3,69 NEO 2,81 ANS 2,19 NCS 2,81

13 Aggregated Results (for all parties) Autonomy The average values of variables along the dimension autonomy are closer to 5 rather than to the expected 1. This does not confirm the hypothesis of stratarchy. Autonomy MV SRL 3,69 REO 2,50 SRC 2,81 ARS 3,94 RCS 2,63

14 Disaggregated Results by parties LN 1998 LN 2012 AN 1995 AN 2006 FI 1998 FI 2004 PDL 2009 PDL 2011 Involv ement 2 2 2,8 2,8 2,4 2,4 2,6 3,2 Auton omy 3 2,4 4,2 3,6 4,4 4,4 4 4 PRC 1996 PRC 2011 PDS 1991 DS 2005 PPI 1995 DL 2006 PD 2008 PD 2010 Involv ement 3, , Auton omy 1,8 1,8 1, ,2 3,8 3,8

15 Conclusion: Positioning of Italian Parties along the Involvement/Autonomy Dimensions Autonomy Involvement