Existing scholarship offers few answers to fundamental questions about the mortality of political parties in established party systems. Linking party research to the organization literature, we conceptualize two types of party death, dissolution and merger, reflecting distinct theoretical rationales. They underpin a new framework on party organizational mortality theorizing three sets of factors: those shaping mortality generally and those shaping dissolution or merger death exclusively. We test this framework on a new data set covering the complete life cycles of 184 parties that entered 21 consolidated party systems over the last five decades, resorting to multilevel competing risks models to estimate the impact of party and country characteristics on the hazards of both types of death. Our findings not only show that dissolution and merger death are driven by distinct factors, but also that they represent separate logics not intrinsically related at either the party or systemic level.
AdamsJ.ClarkM.EzrowL.GlasgowG. (2006). Are Niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and electoral consequences of Western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976-1998. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 513-529.
3.
ArtD. (2011). Inside the radical right: The development of anti-immigrant parties in Western Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BaumJ.ShipilovA. V. (2006). Ecological approaches to organizations. In CleggS.HardyC.LawrenceT.NordW. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organization studies (pp. 55-110). London, England: Sage.
5.
BeyensS.LucardieP.DeschouwerK. (2016). The life and death of new political parties in the low countries. West European Politics, 39, 257-277.
6.
BolleyerN. (2013). New parties in old party systems: Persistence and decline in seventeen democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
7.
BolleyerN.IbenskasR.KeithD. (2016). The survival and termination of party mergers in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 55, 642-659.
8.
BornschierS. (2009). Cleavage politics in old and new democracies. Living Reviews in Democracy, 1, 1-13.
9.
Box-SteffensmeierJ. M.JonesB. S. (1997). Time is of the essence: Event history models in political science. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 1414-1461.
10.
CareyJ. M.HixS. (2013). District magnitude and representation of the majority’s preferences: A comment and reinterpretation. Public Choice, 154, 139-148.
11.
CarrollG. R. (1984). Organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 71-93.
12.
Casal BértoaF. (2016, May10). The database on WHO governs in Europe and beyond. Retrieved from http://whogoverns.eu
13.
Casal BértoaF.SpirovaM. (2017). Parties between thresholds: State subsidies and party behavior in post-communist democracies. Party Politics. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1354068817710221
14.
ChibaD.MartinL. M.StevensonR. T. (2015). A copula approach to the problem of selection bias in models of government survival. Political Analysis, 23, 42-58.
15.
CoakleyJ. (2010). The rise and fall of minor parties in Ireland. Irish Political Studies, 25, 503-538.
16.
DaltonR. J.FarrellD.McAllisterI. (2012). Political parties and democratic linkage: How parties organize democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
DaltonR. J.WattenbergM. P. (2002). Parties without partisans: Political change in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
18.
de LangeS. L.ArtD. (2011). Fortuyn versus wilders: An agency-based approach to radical right party building. West European Politics, 34, 122-149.
19.
DeschouwerK. (2003). Political parties in multi-layered systems. European Urban and Regional Studies, 10, 213-226.
20.
DeschouwerK. (2008). New parties in government: In power for the first time. London, England: Routledge.
21.
FukumotoK. (2009). Systematically dependent competing risks and strategic retirement. American Journal of Political Science, 53, 740-754.
22.
GordonS. C. (2002). Stochastic dependence in competing risks. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 200-217.
23.
Grzymala-BusseA. (2006). Authoritarian determinants of democratic party competition: The communist successor parties in East Central Europe. Party Politics, 12, 415-437.
24.
HannanM. (1988). Organizational population dynamics and social change. European Sociological Review, 4, 95-109.
25.
HarmelR. (2005). Party organizational linkage: Parties without firm social roots? In LutherK. R.Müller-RommelF. (Eds.), Political parties in the New Europe: Political and analytical challenges (pp. 43-62). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
26.
HarmelR.SvåsandL. (1993). Party leadership and party institutionalisation: Three phases of development. West European Politics, 16, 67-88.
27.
HaughtonT.Deegan-KrauseK. (2015). Hurricane season: Systems of instability in central and East European party politics. East European Politics and Societies, 29, 61-80.
28.
IbenskasR. (2016). Marriages of convenience: Explaining party mergers in Europe. Journal of Politics, 78, 1-14.
29.
JackmanS. (2009). Bayesian analysis for the social sciences. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
30.
KitscheltH. (1990). New social movements and the decline of party organization. In DaltonR.KuechlerM. (Eds.), Challenging the political order (pp. 179-208). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
31.
KrouwelA.LucardiP. (2008). Waiting in the wings: New parties in the Netherlands. Acta Politica, 43, 278-307.
32.
LaneJ.ErssonS. (1999). Politics and society in Western Europe. London, England: Sage.
33.
LaPalombaraJ. (2007). Reflections on political parties and political development, four decades later. Party Politics, 13, 141-154.
34.
LeesC.HoughD.KeithD. (2010). Towards an analytical framework for party mergers: Operationalising the cases of the German left party and the Dutch green left. West European Politics, 33, 1299-1317.
35.
LipsetS.RokkanS. (1967). Party systems and voter alignments: Cross-national perspectives. New York, NY: The Free Press.
36.
LoweryD. (2007). Why do organized interests Lobby? A multi-goal, multi-context theory of lobbying. Polity, 39, 29-54.
37.
LucardieP. (2000). Prophets, purifiers and prolocutors, towards a theory on the emergence of new parties. Party Politics, 6, 175-185.
38.
LupuN. (2015). Political parties and party systems. In GandhiJ.Ruiz-RunoR. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of comparative political institutions (pp. 128-144). London, England: Routledge.
39.
MackC. S. (2010). When political parties die: A cross-national analysis of disalignment and realignment. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
40.
MainwaringS. P.TorcalM. (2006). Party system institutionalization and party system theory after the third wave of democratization. In KatzR.CrottyW. (Eds.), Handbook of party politics (pp. 204-227). London, England: Sage.
41.
MarlandA.FlanaganT. (2015). From opposition to government: Party merger as a step on the road to power. Parliamentary Affairs, 68, 272-290.
42.
MayhewD. R. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43.
MeguidB. M. (2005). Competition between unequals: The role of mainstream party strategy in Niche party success. American Political Science Review, 99, 347-359.
44.
MuddeC. (2007). Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45.
MustilloT. (2009). Modeling new party performance: A conceptual and methodological approach for volatile party systems. Political Analysis, 17, 311-332.
46.
NassmacherK. (2009). The funding of party competition: Political finance in 25 democracies. Frankfurt, Germany: Nomos.
47.
PanebiancoA. (1988). Political parties: Organization and power. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48.
PedersenM. (1982). Towards a new typology of party lifespans and minor parties. Scandinavian Political Studies, 5, 1-16.
49.
RandallV.SvåsandL. (2002). Party institutionalization in new democracies. Party Politics, 8, 5-29.
50.
RoseR.MackieT. T. (1988). Do parties persist or fail? The big trade-off facing organizations. In LawsonK.MerklP. (Eds.), When parties fail (pp. 533-558). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51.
RovnyJ.EdwardsE. E. (2012). Struggle over dimensionality. Party competition in western and eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 26, 56-74.
52.
SartoriG. (1976). Parties and systems: A framework for analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
53.
SartoriG. (2005). Party types, organisation and functions. West European Politics, 28, 5-32.
54.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
55.
SinghJ. V.LumsdenC. J. (1990). Theory and research in organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 161-195.
56.
SpirovaM. (2007). Political parties in post-communist societies: Formation, persistence, and change. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
57.
SpoonJ. (2009). Holding their own: Explaining the persistence of green parties in France and the UK. Party Politics, 15, 615-634.
58.
SpoonJ. (2011). Political party survival of small parties in Europe. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
59.
SteeleF.GoldsteinH.BrowneW. (2004). A general multilevel multistate competing risks model for event history data, with an application to a study of contraceptive use dynamics. Journal of Statistical Modelling, 4, 145-159.
60.
StinchcombeA. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In MarchJ. (Ed.), The handbook of organizations (pp. 142-193). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
61.
StrømK.MüllerW. C. (2009). Parliamentary democracy, agency problems and party politics. In GiannettiD.BenoitK. (Eds.), Intra-party politics and coalition governments in parliamentary democracies (pp. 25-49). London, England: Routledge.
62.
TaagaperaR. (2002). Nationwide threshold of representation. Electoral Studies, 21, 383-401.
63.
TavitsM. (2013). Post-communist democracies and party organization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64.
WaddingtonJ.KahmannM.HoffmannJ. (2005). A comparison of the trade union merger process in Britain and Germany: Joining forces?London, England: Routledge.
65.
WareA. (2009). The dynamics of two-party politics: Party structures and the management of competition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
66.
ZaldM. N.AshR. (1966). Social movement organizations: Growth, decay and change. Social Forces, 44, 327-341.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
