The entry and success of new parties has become a regular event in modern democracies. From the emergence of green to protest parties, new movements have entered the electoral arena. This article addresses one of the less studied aspects of new parties: the dynamic process of party exit and entry into politics. The article argues that changes to the party system, produced by the collapse of a political party, can lead to the successful entrance of new parties in the next election. The premise is that one party’s loss is a future one’s gain. The empirical results provide strong evidence that the size of the policy space created by a party collapse has a substantial impact on the level of new party’s success.
AdamsJClarkMEzrowL. (2006) Are niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of Western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976–1998. American Journal of Political Science50(3): 513–529.
2.
BartelsLM (2002) Beyond the running tally: partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior24(2): 117–150.
3.
BenoitKLaverM (2006) Party Policy in Modern Democracies. Routledge, London.
4.
BöhmeltTEzrowLLehrerR. (2016) Party policy diffusion. American Political Science Review110(2): 397–410.
5.
BormannNCGolderM (2013) Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946–2011. Electoral Studies32(2): 360–369. Replication Data.
6.
CarrerasM (2012) The rise of outsiders in Latin America, 1980–2010: an institutionalist perspective. Comparative Political Studies45(12): 1451–1482.
7.
CastlesFGMairP (1984) Left–right political scales: some ‘expert’ judgments. European Journal of Political Research12(1): 73–88.
8.
CoxGW (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
DöringHManowP (2012) Parliament and government composition database (ParlGov): an infrastructure for empirical information on parties, elections and governments in modern democracies, vol. 12/10, 15 October 2012.
10.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper & Row, New York.
11.
DuchRMStevensonRT (2008) The Economic Vote: How Political and Economic Institutions Condition Election Results. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
DuvergerM (1959) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Methuen, London, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
13.
EzrowLHomolaJTavitsM (2014) When extremism pays: policy positions, voter certainty, and party support in postcommunist Europe. The Journal of Politics76: 535–547.
14.
EzrowLVriesCDSteenbergenM. (2011) Mean voter representation and partisan constituency representation: do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters?Party Politics17(3): 275–301.
15.
GilardiF (2010) Who learns from what in policy diffusion processes?American Journal of Political Science54(3): 650–666.
16.
GilardiF (2013) Transnational diffusion: norms, ideas and policies, 2nd ed. In: CarlsnaesWRisseTSimmonsBA (eds) Handbook of international relations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pp. 453–477.
17.
GreenDPPalmquistBSchicklerE (2004) Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. London: Yale University Press.
18.
HarmelRRobertsonJD (1985) Formation and success of new parties: a cross-national analysis. International Political Science Review/Revue internationale de science politique6(4): 501–523.
19.
HuberJInglehartR (1995) Expert interpretations of party space and party locations in 42 societies. Party Politics1(1): 73–111.
20.
HugS (2001) Altering Party Systems: Strategic Behavior and the Emergence of New Political Parties in Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
21.
IyengarSSoodGLelkesY (2012) Affect, not ideology: a social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly76(3): 405–431.
22.
KitscheltHP (1988). Left-libertarian parties: explaining innovation in competitive party systems. World Politics40(2): 194–234.
23.
LagoIMartínezF (2011) Why new parties?Party Politics17(1): 3–20.
24.
LaverMSchilperoordM (2007) Spatial models of political competition with endogenous political parties. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences362(1485): 1711–1721.
25.
MaierJ (2011) The impact of political scandals on political support: an experimental test of two theories. International Political Science Review32(3): 283–302.
26.
MainwaringSScullyTR (1995) Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
27.
MeguidBM (2005) Competition between unequals: the role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success. American Political Science Review99: 347–359.
28.
MeguidBM (2008) Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
OsborneMJSlivinskiA (1996) A model of political competition with citizen-candidates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics111(1): 65–96.
30.
RobertsonDB (1976) A Theory of Party Competition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
31.
RohrschneiderR (1993) New party versus old left realignments: environmental attitudes, party policies, and partisan affiliations in four West European countries. The Journal of Politics55(3): 682–701.
32.
SpoonJJKlüverH (2014) Do parties respond? How electoral context influences party responsiveness. Electoral Studies35: 48–60.
33.
TajfelHBilligMGBundyRP. (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology1(2): 149–178.
34.
TavitsM (2006) Party system change: testing a model of new party entry. Party Politics12(1): 99–119.
35.
TavitsM (2007) Principle vs. pragmatism: policy shifts and political competition. American Journal of Political Science51(1): 151–165.
36.
TavitsM (2008) Party systems in the making: the emergence and success of new parties in new democracies. British Journal of Political Science38(1): 113–133.
37.
van BiezenIRashkovaER (2014) Deterring new party entry? The impact of state regulation on the permeability of party systems. Party Politics20(6): 890–903.
38.
VolkensALehmannPMatthießT. (2015) The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2015a. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.
39.
Zachary ElkinsBS (2005) On waves, clusters, and diffusion: a conceptual framework. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science598: 33–51.
40.
ZonsG (2013) The influence of programmatic diversity on the formation of new political parties. Party Politics21(6): 919–929.
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.
