TY - JOUR
T1 - Malapportionment and democracy
T2 - A curvilinear relationship
AU - Ong, Kian Ming
AU - Kasuya, Yuko
AU - Mori, Kota
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers, Lisa Blaydes, Danel Brinks, Jason Brownlee, Lim Hong Hai, Masaaki Higashijima, Yusaku Horiuchi, Donald Horowitz, Yuta Kamahara, Thomas Pepinsky, Anoop Sadanandan, and David Siroky for their comments on earlier drafts. We also thank Staffan Lindberg, Ellen Lust-Okar, Henry Okole, Ben Reilly, Jun Saito, Chen Yen Shan, Lazareena Thaveethu, and Richard Vengroff for their help on some of the constituency-level data. All errors and omissions are our own. This research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (26285032).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2017/10
Y1 - 2017/10
N2 - This article examines electoral malapportionment by illuminating the relationship between malapportionment level and democracy. Although a seminal study rejects this relationship, we argue that a logical and empirically significant relationship exists, which is curvilinear and is based on a framework focusing on incumbent politicians' incentives and the constraints they face regarding malapportionment. Malapportionment is lowest in established democracies and electoral authoritarian regimes with an overwhelmingly strong incumbent; it is relatively high in new democracies and authoritarian regimes with robust opposition forces. The seminal study's null finding is due to the mismatch between theoretical mechanisms and choice of democracy indices. Employing an original cross-national dataset, we conduct regression analyses; the results support our claims. Furthermore, on controlling the degree of democracy, the single-member district system's effects become insignificant. Australia, Belarus, the Gambia, Japan, Malaysia, Tunisia, and the United States illustrate the political logic underlying curvilinear relations at democracy's various levels.
AB - This article examines electoral malapportionment by illuminating the relationship between malapportionment level and democracy. Although a seminal study rejects this relationship, we argue that a logical and empirically significant relationship exists, which is curvilinear and is based on a framework focusing on incumbent politicians' incentives and the constraints they face regarding malapportionment. Malapportionment is lowest in established democracies and electoral authoritarian regimes with an overwhelmingly strong incumbent; it is relatively high in new democracies and authoritarian regimes with robust opposition forces. The seminal study's null finding is due to the mismatch between theoretical mechanisms and choice of democracy indices. Employing an original cross-national dataset, we conduct regression analyses; the results support our claims. Furthermore, on controlling the degree of democracy, the single-member district system's effects become insignificant. Australia, Belarus, the Gambia, Japan, Malaysia, Tunisia, and the United States illustrate the political logic underlying curvilinear relations at democracy's various levels.
KW - Authoritarian regimes
KW - Delimitation
KW - Democracy
KW - Electoral systems
KW - Malapportionment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024112863&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024112863&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.electstud.2017.06.004
DO - 10.1016/j.electstud.2017.06.004
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85024112863
SN - 0261-3794
VL - 49
SP - 118
EP - 127
JO - Electoral Studies
JF - Electoral Studies
ER -