Personalization of parliamentary behaviour is an underexposed aspect of the broader personalization phenomenon. It is the aim of this article to first clarify the concept of personalization in the parliamentary arena, followed by a systematic investigation of the extent to which and under which circumstances this phenomenon takes place in the Belgian context. We develop four indicators that can be used to measure parliamentary personalization over time and across countries: a rise in the use of individual parliamentary instruments, an increase in single-authored initiatives for activities that could also be conducted collectively, a larger concentration of visible parliamentary activities and an increase in party switching. Our analysis based on an original data set of parliamentary activity in the Belgian House of Representatives (1995–2014) reveals that for none of these indicators a trend of personalization could be noted.
AartsKBlaisA (2011) The relative impact of positive and negative leader evaluations on vote choice. In: AartsKBlaisASchmittH (eds) Political Leaders and Democratic Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 165–186.
2.
AartsKBlaisASchmittH (2011) Political Leaders and Democratic Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
AldrichJ (1995) Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago.
4.
AndréADepauwSShugartMS, et al. (2015) Party nomination strategies in flexible-list systems: Do preference votes matter?Party Politics23(5): 589–600.
5.
AndréAWautersBPiletJ-B (2012) It’s not only about lists: explaining preference voting in Belgium. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties22: 293–313.
6.
BailerS (2017) To use the whip or not: whether and when party group leaders use disciplinary measures to achieve voting unity. International Political Science Review39(2): 163–177.
7.
BalmasMRahatGSheaferT, et al. (2014) Two routes to personalized politics: centralized and decentralized personalization. Party Politics20: 37–51.
8.
BaumannMDebusMMüllerJ (2015) Personal characteristics of MPs and legislative behavior in moral policymaking. Legislative Studies Quarterly40: 179–210.
9.
BochslerD (2010) Measuring party nationalisation: a new Gini-based indicator that corrects for the number of units. Electoral Studies29: 155–168.
10.
BräuningerTBrunnerMDäublerT (2012) Personal vote-seeking in flexible list systems: how electoral incentives shape Belgian MPs’ bill initiation behaviour. European Journal of Political Research51: 607–645.
11.
BrunnerM (2012) Parliaments and Legislative Activity: Motivations for Bill Introduction. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
12.
CainBFerejohnJFiorinaM (1987) The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
13.
CareyJMShugartMS (1995) Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: a rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies14: 417–439.
14.
ChiruM (2018) Exploring the role of decentralized personalization for legislative behaviour and constituency representation. In: CrossWKatzRPruysersS (eds) The Personalization of Democratic Politics and the Challenge for Political Parties. London: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 143–161.
15.
CoxGWMcCubbinsMD (1993) Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.
16.
CrispBFOlivellaSMaleckiM, et al. (2013) Vote-earning strategies in flexible list systems: seats at the price of unity. Electoral Studies32: 658–669.
17.
CrossWBlaisA (2012) Who selects the party leader?Party Politics18: 127–150.
18.
DäublerTBräuningerTBrunnerM (2016) Is personal vote-seeking behavior effective?Legislative Studies Quarterly41: 419–444.
19.
De WinterL (1997) Intra-parliamentary and extra-parliamentary role attitudes and behaviour of Belgian MPs. In: MüllerWCSaalfeldT (eds) Members of Parliament in Western Europe. Roles and behaviour. London: Frank Cass, pp. 128–154.
20.
De WinterL (2005) Belgium: empowering voters or party elites? In: GallagherMMitchellP (eds) The Politics of Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 417–432.
21.
De WinterLDumontP (2003) Belgium: delegation and accountability under partitocratic rule. In: StrømKMüllerWCBergmanT (eds) Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 253–280.
22.
DepauwS (2005) Rebellen in Het Parlement: Fractiecohesie in de Kamer van volksvertegenwoordigers (1991-1995). Leuven: Leuven University Press.
23.
DepauwSMartinS (2009) Legislative party discipline and cohesion in comparative perspective. In: GiannettiDLaverM (eds) Intra-party Politics and Coalition Governments. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 103–120.
24.
DeschouwerK (2009) The Politics of Belgium: Governing a Divided Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
DumontPDe WinterL (2006) Do Belgian parties undermine the democratic chain of delegation?West European Politics29: 957–976.
26.
GarziaD (2012) Party and leader effects in parliamentary elections: towards a reassessment. Politics32: 175–185.
27.
GiniC (1921) Measurement of inequality of incomes. The Economic Journal31: 124–126.
28.
HazanRYRahatG (2010) Democracy within Parties: Candidate Selection Methods and their Political Consequences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29.
HeidarKKooleR (2000) Parliamentary Party Groups in European Democracies: Political Parties Behind Closed Doors. London: Routledge.
30.
JonesMPMainwaringS (2003) The nationalisation of parties and party systems: an empirical measure and an application to the Americas. Party Politics9: 139–166.
31.
KarvonenL (2010) The personalisation of Politics: A Study of Parliamentary Democracies. Colchester: Ecpr Press.
32.
KriesiH (2012) Personalization of national election campaigns. Party Politics18: 825–844.
33.
LancasterTDPattersonWD (1990) Comparative pork barrel politics: perceptions from the West German Bundestag. Comparative Political Studies22: 458–477.
34.
LouwerseTOtjesS (2016) Personalised parliamentary behaviour without electoral incentives: the case of the Netherlands. West European Politics39: 778–799.
35.
LupiaA (2003) Delegation and its Perils. In: StromKMüllerWBergmanT (eds) Delegation and accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 33–54.
36.
MairP (2008) The challenge to party government. West European Politics31: 211–234.
37.
MarshM (2007) Candidates or parties? Objects of electoral choice in Ireland. Party Politics13: 500–527.
38.
MartinS (2011) Parliamentary questions, the behaviour of legislators, and the function of legislatures: an introduction. The Journal of Legislative Studies17: 259–270.
39.
McAllisterI (2007) The Personalization of Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
McDermottML (2009) Voting for myself: candidate and voter group associations over time. Electoral Studies28: 606–614.
41.
NortonP (1993) Does Parliament Matter?New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
42.
O’BrienDZShomerY (2013) A cross-national analysis of party switching. Legislative Studies Quarterly38: 111–141.
43.
PedersenHH (2015) Extraverted trustees and conscientious delegates. The influence of personality on representative roles of Danish MPs. Unpublished paper, University of Aarhus.
44.
PiletJ-BCrossW (2014) The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies: A Comparative Study. London: Routledge.
45.
PitkinHF (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
46.
PoguntkeTWebbPD (2007) The Presidentialization of Politics: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47.
PutG-JSmuldersJMaddensB (2014) Een Analyse Van Het Profiel Van De Vlaamse Verkozenen Bij De Kamerverkiezingen Van 1987 tot en met 2014. Leuven: KU Leuven.
48.
RahatGKenigO (2018) From Party Politics to Personalized Politics? Party Change and Political Personalization in Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
RahatGSheaferT (2007) The Personalization(s) of Politics: Israel, 1949–2003. Political Communication24: 65–80.
50.
RenwickAPiletJ-B (2016) Faces on the Ballot: The Personalization of Electoral Systems in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51.
RozenbergOMartinS (2011) Questioning parliamentary questions. The Journal of Legislative Studies17: 394–404.
52.
RussoFWibergM (2010) Parliamentary questioning in 17 European parliaments: some steps towards comparison. The Journal of Legislative Studies16: 215–232.
53.
SaalfeldTStrømK (2014) Political parties and legislators. In: MartinSSaalfeldTStrømK (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Legislative Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 371–398.
54.
SerbanR (2017) Questioning Prime Ministers: a survey of procedures in 32 parliamentary democracies. PSA Parliaments Group.
55.
ShugartMSValdiniMESuominenK (2005) Looking for locals: voter information demands and personal vote-earning attributes of legislators under proportional representation. American Journal of Political Science49: 437–449.
56.
SiebererU (2006) Party unity in parliamentary democracies: a comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies12: 150–178.
57.
StromKMüllerWC (2009) Parliamentary democracy, agency problems and party politics. In: GiannettiDBenoitK (eds) Intra-party Politics and Coalition Governments. Oxon: Routledge, pp. 25–50.
58.
StromKMüllerWBergmanT (2003) Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59.
TavitsM (2009) The making of mavericks: local loyalties and party defection. Comparative Political Studies42: 793–815.
60.
TavitsM. (2010) Effect of local ties on electoral success and parliamentary behaviour: the case of Estonia. Party Politics16: 215–235.
61.
ThomassenJ (1994) Empirical research into political representation: failing democracy or failing models. In: JenningsMKMannTE (eds) Elections at Home and Abroad. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 237–265.
62.
Van AelstP (2014) Wie bepaalt het verkiezingsnieuws: partijen of personen? In: DevosC (ed) België #2014. Een politieke geschiedenis van morgen. Gent: Borgerhoff & Lamberigts, pp. 173–192.
63.
Van AelstPSheaferTStanyerJ (2012) The personalization of mediated political communication: a review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism13: 203–220.
64.
Van HauwaertSMJanssenC (2017) Pathways to Power: The Political Representation of Citizens of Immigrant Origin in Belgium (BE-PATHWAYS). Cologne: GESIS Data Archive.
65.
VolpiE (2019) Ideology and party switching: a comparison of 12 West European countries. Parliamentary Affairs72: 1–20.
66.
WattenbergMP (1991) The Rise of Candidate-centered Politics: Presidential Elections of the 1980s. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
67.
WautersBThijssenPVan AelstP, et al. (2018) Centralized personalization at the expense of decentralized personalization. the decline of preferential voting in Belgium (2003-2014). Party Politics24: 511–523.
68.
WilsonRKYoungCD (1997) Cosponsorship in the U. S. Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly22: 25–43.
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.
