Plurality systems[ edit ] Countries using first-past-the-post for legislatures.
Electoral Systems and Conflict in Divided Societies Ben Reilly and Andrew Reynolds 1 This work examines whether the choice of an electoral system in a culturally plural society can affect the potential for future violent conflict.
We find that it can, but that there is no single electoral system that is likely to be best for all divided societies.
We distinguish four basic strategies of electoral system design. The optimal choice for peacefully managing conflict depends on several identifiable factors specific to the country, including the way and degree to which ethnicity is politicized, the intensity of conflict, and the demographic and geographic distribution of ethnic groups.
In addition, the electoral system that is most appropriate for initially ending internal conflict may not be the best one for longer-term conflict management. In short, while electoral systems can be powerful levers for shaping the content and practice of politics in divided societies, their design is highly sensitive to context.
Consideration of the relationship between these variables and the operation of different electoral systems enables the development of contingent generalizations that can assist policy makers in the field of electoral system design. The National Academies Press.
The third, again derived from Western experience, is that the types of electoral systems used in the West can be successfully transplanted to the developing world. A final assumption is that stable democracies need to be based on a system of individual rights rather than group rights.
This work, to varying degrees, calls all of these assumptions into question. Realistic diagnosis of key social-structural issues is a necessary precondition to designing a successful system.
In practice, there is little evidence of such diagnosis at work in the historical record. Moreover, the choice of an electoral system involves tradeoffs among a number of desirable attributes. Thus, the role of local actors, who can draw both on international experience and on their knowledge of domestic conditions and priorities, is key.
Institutions, Conflict Management, and Democracy The study of political institutions is integral to the study of democratization because institutions constitute and sustain democracies: Perhaps most important for newly democratizing countries is the way that institutions shape the choices available to political actors.
Thus his influential conclusion, central to the spirit of this paper, was a recognition that democratic government, rather than oligarchy or authoritarianism, presented by far the Page Share Cite Suggested Citation: Because they structure behavior into stable, predictable, and recurrent patterns, institutionalized systems are less volatile and more enduring, and so are institutionalized democracies.
Regardless of how they perform economically, democracies that have more coherent and effective political institutions will be more likely to perform well politically in maintaining not only political order but also a rule of law, thus ensuring civil liberties, checking the abuse of power, and providing meaningful representation, competition, choice, and accountability.
Over the long run well-institutionalized democracies are also more likely to produce workable, sustainable, and effective economic and social policies because they have more effective and stable structures for representing interests and they are more likely to produce working congressional majorities or coalitions that can adopt and sustain policies.
Lastly, iv democracies that have capable, coherent democratic institutions are better able to limit military involvement in politics and assert civilian control over the military Institutions and Democratization in the Developing World While accepting that throughout the developing world the societal constraints on democracy are considerable, such constraints still leave room for conscious political strategies which may further or hamper successful democratization.
As a result, institutions work not just at the margins, but are central to the structuring of stability, particularly in ethnically heterogeneous societies. Scarritt and Mozaffar push the critical role of institutions even further by arguing that distinct institutional arrangements not only distinguish democracies, but also invest governments with different abilities to manage conflicts, and thus that the survival of third-wave democracies under extremely adverse conditions often hinges on these institutional differences Institutional design takes on an enhanced role in newly democratizing and divided societies because, in the absence of other structures, politics becomes the primary mode of communication between divergent social forces.
In any society, groups collections of individuals who identify some sort of mutual bond talk to each other—sometimes about resolving Page Share Cite Suggested Citation: In the pluralist democracies of the West, there are a variety of channels of communication open through which to carry on these conversations.
Individuals from different cultures and perspectives can communicate with each other through the institutions of civil society via the press, social and sporting clubs, residence associations, church groups, labor unions, and so on.
They become the most prominent, and often the only, channel of communication between disparate groups. Such societies do not yet have the mixed institutions which characterize a broad civil society.ELECTORAL SYSTEMS AND STABILITY IN DIVIDED SOCIETIES Jay Crush University of Kent School of Politics and International Relations Master of the Arts in Politics May 1 Democracy is about regulating the ‘access to power’ and the benefits this entails (Horowitz , 18).
In time, the system gradually became, as some political scientists have labeled it, an "electoral authoritarianism", in that the party resorted to any means necessary, except that of the dissolution of the constitutional and electoral system itself, to remain in power. An electoral system is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined.
Political electoral systems are organized by governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, non-profit organisations and informal organisations.
role of a credible and efficient electoral management system in guaranteeing democratic stability. In this regard, the policy meeting sought to generate and share lessons and good practices on the management of elections in divided societies to ensure electoral peace and stability.
ELECTORAL SYSTEMS FOR DIVIDED SOCIETIES Benjamin Reilly W electoral systems are most appropriate for divided societies.
Two schools of thought predominate. The scholarly orthodoxy has can help new or transitional democracies achieve stability. This broad approach to conflict management has been dubbed.
systems-and-stability-in-divided-societies. Nigerian Democracy and Electoral Process since Amalgamation: Lessons from a Turbulent Past*. initiativeblog.com 27 | Page.