Paul Chaisty

Rethinking the ‘presidentialism debate’: conceptualizing coalitional politics in cross-regional perspective

The democratization literature has increased our understanding of the role of institutional variables in the study of democratic sustainability. Debates about the dangers of presidentialism have been central to this body of research. In more recent times the presidentialism literature has focused on the capacity of presidents to overcome the conflict-inducing nature of the separation of powers through successful coalition formation. This review article moves this research agenda forward by examining how presidents build legislative coalitions in different regional contexts. Based on the extant analysis of presidential systems in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Union, the article develops the idea that presidents use a toolbox of five key tools when constructing legislative coalitions: agenda power, budgetary authority, cabinet management, partisan powers, and informal institutions. We find that presidents typically utilize more than one tool when they act; that the combinations of tools they employ affects the usage and strength of other parts of the presidential toolkit; and that the choice of tools can create negative consequences for the wider political system. Our findings reveal the limitations of the univariate bias of much of the early presidentialism literature and the need for greater cross-regional research into the effects of presidential rule.

Attitudes towards the environment: are post-Communist societies (still) different?

The causal processes that shape the emergence of environmental attitudes in post-Communist Europe are examined. We describe the widening gap in environmental policy orientations between West and East, and then cite two factors to explain the lower support for environmentalism in this region: first, citizens still evaluate environmental issues through a distinctive ideological lens carried over from the Communist era; and, second, they do not connect environmental issues to other (more salient) economic and political questions in a consistent way. Using the three waves of the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) environmental module, these questions are explored with individual-level and multilevel models. It is concluded that the post-Communist effect is unlikely to disappear until environmental issues comprise a component of citizens’ ideological orientations and the programmes of political parties.

The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on Russian Political Attitudes

Attempting to explain falling support for United Russia in the December 2011 parliamentary elections and the subsequent anti-regime protests, commentators stressed the global financial crisiss triggering effect. This article reassesses the political effects of the financial crisis. An original set of 2009 survey data is used to examine the financial crisiss impact on support for Russias rulers; popular assessments of government efficacy during the crisis; and popular evaluations of Russian democracy. The influence of the 2008-2009 economic turmoil on political unrest in 2011 is considered. The question of whether the financial crisis politicized individuals from different employment sectors and social classes in distinctive ways is also considered.

Party Cohesion and Policy-Making in Russia

Most commentators agree that a consolidated party system has not emerged in Russia since the collapse of communism. At the same time, Russian parties within parliament have become more cohesive. Recent analysis of Russian legislative politics has concentrated on the electoral foundations of party cohesion, but the results are mixed. Alternative explanations of cohesion that focus on the policy-shaping incentives commanded by parties have received less attention. This article attempts to fill the gap by assessing the evidence for party effects on policy at different stages of the legislative process. Focusing on legislative results in the sphere of economic policy, party effects in two venues of legislative decision-making are examined: the Duma Council and legislative committees. The article contends that the provision of policy benefits provides a weak explanation for party cohesion in Russia. Other explanations, such as presidential strategy and intra-party arrangements, are proposed as alternative avenues of research.

Forward to democracy or back to authoritarianism? The attitudinal bases of mass support for the Russian election protests of 2011-2012

Two UK-based political scientists present the results of an original survey they conducted in Russia soon after the presidential elections of 2012. The survey examines the interaction between mass attitudes toward the causal triggers of protest during the 2011–2012 electoral cycle and underlying political attitudes regarding the preferred alternatives to a hybrid regime (both more democratic and more authoritarian). They find that supporters of the protests were not stronger advocates of a democratic transition; on the contrary, they were more likely to support authoritarian leadership and ethno-nationalism. This finding leads to a discussion of whether one of the major constraints on elite-mass mobilization in Russia is the authoritarian direction such mobilization might entail.

Coalitional presidentialism and legislative control in post-Soviet Ukraine

Two political scientists explore the significance of pro-presidential legislative coalitions in Ukrainian politics since 2000. They draw on an original survey of MPs and cabinet data to engage with the extant analysis of coalitional politics in Ukraine. Using the framework of “coalitional presidentialism,” which was first developed in the study of Latin American presidential systems, they find evidence to suggest that legislative coalitions are a meaningful feature of Ukrainian legislative life, and point to the tools that presidents use to maintain them.

Members and leaders in Russian party organisations

The 2001 law ‘On Political Parties’ and subsequent amendments had the potential to change the relationship within Russian parties between members and leaders. Formally, this legislation strengthened the role of members within parties, but little is known about its de facto effects. In this article, the impact of legislative constraints on member–leader relations is assessed with data from three ‘faces’ [Katz and Mair 1994, p. 4]. of Russian parties: their membership, leadership bureaucracy, and political leadership. The findings of this analysis suggest that party legislation has not significantly constrained the power of leaders, and that other explanations for organisational developments that focus on electoral dynamics have some merit, especially during the more competitive electoral environment of the 1990s and early 2000s.

The Influence of Sectoral and Regional Economic Interests on Russian Legislative Behavior: The Case of State Duma Voting on Production Sharing Agreements Legislation

A political scientist examines legislation on production sharing agreements. Through the analysis of contested roll call voting on this issue during Russias first three Dumas (1995-2001), the period when legislation was first enacted and lobbying was allegedly at its height, the degree to which a distinct and coherent set of economic interests influenced voting is estimated. The question of whether there were systematic linkages between economic interests—sectoral (private business and state) and regional—and the voting behavior of Duma deputies is considered. Research results are used to discuss the Russian parliaments capacity to articulate and integrate interests in ways that further the public good.

Defending the Institutional Status Quo: Communist Leadership of the Second Russian State Duma, 1996-99

The 1995 Russian parliamentary elections returned a State Duma dominated by an alliance of the Communist Party (CPRF) and the Agrarian (APG) and Popular Power (PP) groupings, whose combined number fell just four votes short of an overall majority. Such a powerful voting bloc might have been expected to undo the power-sharing principles on which the First Duma (1994�95) operated. Rather than challenge the status quo, however, the CPRF defended it on several occasions. In this paper, I argue that existing arrangements held benefits for the CPRF and its leftist allies. In the absence of a stable, disciplined majority, the Dumas rules gave leftist deputies the incentives and flexibility to organize collectively.

Citizens’ Attitudes towards Institutional Change in Contexts of Political Turbulence: Support for Regional Decentralisation in Ukraine:

Most studies of public opinion regarding constitutional change focus on ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in consolidated democracies, but in comparative terms most institutional change takes place in unstable political contexts. We contend that mass preferences towards institutional choices are likely to differ significantly in turbulent contexts as compared to stable polities. In this article, we consider the issue of public preferences towards proposals for regional decentralisation in the context of post-Soviet Ukraine, a society that has been in the throes of political change for the last decade. Using surveys conducted in war-torn Ukraine in 2014, we find that under conditions of political uncertainty, the institutional preferences of citizens are connected to group identities and ideological orientations rather than instrumental concerns.