Duverger's law postulates that single-member plurality electoral systems lead to two-party systems. Existing scholarship regards India as an exception to this law at national level, but not at district level. This study tests the latter hypothesis through analysis of a comprehensive dataset covering Indian parliamentary elections in the period 1952—2004. The results show that a large number of Indian districts do not conform to the Duvergerian norm of two-party competition, and that there is no consistent movement towards the Duvergerian equilibrium. Furthermore, inter-region and inter-state variations in the size of district-level party systems make it difficult to generalize about the application of Duverger's law to the Indian case. The study concludes that a narrow focus on electoral rules is inadequate, and that a more comprehensive set of explanatory variables is needed to explain the size of the Indian party system even at the district level.
Baltagi, Badi H. (1995) Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. Chichester: Wiley.
2.
Chhibber, Pradeep and Ken Kollman ( 1998) `Party Aggregation and the Number of Parties in India and the United States', American Political Science Review92: 329—42.
3.
Chhibber, Pradeep and Ken Kollman ( 2004) The Formation of National Party Systems: Federalism and Party Competition in Canada, Great Britain, India and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Chhibber, Pradeep and Geetha Murali ( 2006) `Duvergian Dynamics in the Indian States', Party Politics12(1): 5—34.
5.
Cox, Gary (1994) `Strategic Voting Equilibria Under the Single Nontransferable Vote', American Political Science Review88: 608—21.
6.
Cox, Gary (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Cox, Gary (1999) `Electoral Rules and Electoral Coordination', Annual Review of Political Science2: 145—61.
8.
CSDS data unit.Centre for Study of Developing Societies. New Delhi.
9.
Duverger, Maurice (1954) Political Parties. New York : Wiley.
10.
Election Commission of India.Reports on the Parliamentary Elections (various years).
11.
Fey, Mark (1997) `Stability and Coordination in Duverger's Law: A Formal Model of Preelection Polls and Strategic Voting', American Political Science Review91: 135—47.
12.
Gaines, Brian (1997) `Where to Count Parties', Electoral Studies16: 49—58.
13.
Gaines, Brian (1999) `Duverger's Law and the Meaning of Canadian Exceptionalism ', Comparative Political Studies32: 835—61.
14.
Gaines, Brian (2000) `From Duverger to Cox and Beyond', Japanese Journal of Political Science1: 151—6.
15.
Grofman, Bernard et al. (2004) `Comparing and Contrasting the Uses of Two Graphical Tools for Displaying Patterns of Multiparty Competition: Nagayama Diagrams and Simplex Representations', Party Politics10: 273—99.
16.
Laakso, Markku and Rein Taagepera ( 1979) `“Effective” number of Parties: A Measure with Application to Western Europe', Comparative Political Studies12: 3—27.
17.
Lijphart, Arend (1984) Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Governments in Twenty-one Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18.
Lijphart, Arend (1990) `The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws 1945—85 ', American Political Science Review84: 481—96.
19.
Lijphart, Arend (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
Mueller, Dennis (2003) Public Choice III. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
21.
Nagayama, Masao (1997) `Shousenkyoku no kako to genzai' (`The Present and Future of Single-Member Districts'). Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Japan Political Science Association , 4—6 September (cited in Reed, 2001 and Grofman et al., 2004).
22.
Palfrey, Thomas (1989) `A Mathematical Proof of Duverger's Law', in P. Ordeshook (ed.) Models of Strategic Choice in Politics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
23.
Rae, Douglas (1971) The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
24.
Reed, Steven (1990) `Structure and Behavior: Extending Duverger's law to the Japanese Case', British Journal of Political Science29: 335—56.
25.
Reed, Steven (2001) `Duverger's Law is Working in Italy', Comparative Political Studies34: 312—27.
26.
Riker, William (1976) `The Number of Political Parties', Comparative Political Studies9: 93—106.
27.
Riker, William (1982) `The Two-Party System and Duverger's Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science', American Political Science Review76: 753—66.
28.
Riker, William (1986) The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
29.
Rudolph, Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph (1987) In Pursuit of Lakshmi: The Political Economy of the Indian State. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Sartori, Giovanni (1976) Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
Sartori, Giovanni (1986) `The Influence of Electoral Systems: Faulty Laws or Faulty Method?' in Bernard Grofman and Arend Lijphart (eds) Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. New York: Agathon Press.
32.
Sridharan, E. (1997) `Duverger's Law and Its Reformulations and the Evolution of the Indian Party System', IRIS India Working Paper. University of Maryland at College Park.
33.
Taagepera, Rein (1997) `Effective Number of Parties for Incomplete Data' , Electoral Studies16: 145—51.
34.
Taagepera, Rein (2004) `Extension of the Nagayama Triangle for Visualization of Party Strengths', Party Politics10: 301—6.
35.
Taagepera, Rein and Bernard Grofman (1985) `Rethinking Duverger's Law: Predicting the Effective Number of Parties in Plurality and PR Systems — Parties Minus Issues Equals One', European Journal of Political Research13: 341 —52.
36.
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew Shugart (1989) Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37.
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew Shugart (1993) `Predicting the Number of Parties: A Quantitative Model of Duverger's Mechanical Effect', American Political Science Review87: 455 —64.
38.
Wildavsky, Aron (1959) `A Methodological Critique of Duverger's Political Parties', Journal of Politics21: 303—18.
