Does Proportional Representation or Majoritarian Systems have greater Partisan Attachment?

Does Proportional Representation or Majoritarian Systems have greater Partisan Attachment?

Literature Review

Brockington (1) conducted a study that revealed a mixed relationship between electoral representation and proportional representation. The results of the survey by Brockington followed an observation that large parties increase the complexity of decision making. On the contrary, the coalition government significantly reduces representation. Mainly, a detailed analysis of disproportionality, coalition structures, and the number of parties in various governments shows the bimodal interaction. Through the study, Brockington also observed that large parties improve the propensity of an individual to vote. From the study, it is evident that proportional representation is an excellent method of political governance. However, the exact mechanism through which the technique works is poorly understood. Also, specific variation across space and time exists in proportional representation political approaches. Despite the detailed study by Brockington, the research has a limitation of several gaps, which can be addressed through more conclusive studies.

In a separate study, Blais and Bodet investigate the impact of proportional representation on the congruence between citizens and policymakers. The findings of the survey by Blais and Bodet are consistent with that of Brockington, as described in the previous chapter. Blais and Bodet (12) applied the use of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems data. The research revealed that proportional representation allows for the creation of several political parties, which improves the chances of the formation of a coalition government. However, the coalition makes the policymakers to focus on governance while ignoring the electorate. On the other hand, the proportional representation, the large numbers of parties formed are less centric. Thus, proportional representation has a contradictory impact on the relationship between the electorate and the policymakers, and this calls for further studies.

Lockwood and Kronke carried out a study on electoral systems and how citizens hold their governments accountable. Unlike the proportional representation, the majoritarian system forms the government from a single party. Therefore, the minority groups in the government are poorly represented. Despite the sparse representation, this form of governance shows proper stability compared to the proportional type. Lockwood and Kronke (8) show that the connection between the policymakers and the citizens is well defined, closer, and clearer compared to the proportional representation. It is these advantages that make the government structure stable.

Hypothesis

Proportional representation and majoritarian systems have a greater partisan attachment.

The hypothesis statement generated above is based on the data from the literature review. A combination of all the materials analyzed in the previous section shows consistency in findings. Despite the contradictory nature of the impact of proportional representation on the citizens, there is a noticeable improvement in the government models. Similarly, majoritarian systems improve the confidence in the government, as shown in the literature review. However, the subsequent sections of this document focus on current data on the selected countries to approve or disapprove the hypothesis.

Case Selection

Sierra Leone, Uganda, Mauritius and Morocco are selected to answer the study question. The countries are chosen based on the data available on the AfroBarometer metric. Sierra Lione and Uganda have the highest proportion of individuals responding “yes” to the need for a democratic government system. On the other hand, Mauritius and Morocco have the highest percentage of people answering “no” to the same question. Therefore a combination of the two sets of countries with differing responses is essential in reducing bias while maximizing the validity of the result of the study. The type also informs the selection of the four countries of political systems in the nations. Sierra Leone and Uganda apply the proportional representation systems while Mauritius and Morocco use the majoritarian approach to governance. Besides, Sierra Lione and Uganda are presidential systems; Morocco is a monarchy while Mauritius is parliamentary. Choosing counties with these significant differences improves the reliability and generalizability of the study conclusions.

Research Design

This research applied meta-analysis study design. The approach involves the collection of data published by various authors and analyzing them. In this case, AfroBarometer acted as the primary data source. The question on the preference of democracy over any other form of government structure was used to obtain the relevant response. After the collection of the raw data, two main dependent variables were established: those who support democracy and those against the practice. This was done through data coding. Primarily, obtaining the difference between the total sample and the people who support democracy helped in ascertaining the proportion which does not support it.

Results

Table of Proportions Supporting Democracy

Calculation of Odds Ratio

Odds ratios for Majoritarian System

Odds Ratio =  =  = 1.334

The odds ratio of more than one, as shown in the calculation above, implies that there is a positive association of democracy and partisan attachment. People living in countries with majoritarian political systems have a likelihood to support the government systems in such African countries.

Odds Ratio for Proportional Representation

Odds Ratio =  =  = 1.272

Similarly, the odds ratio of 1.272 is above one. Therefore, the individuals living in countries with proportional representation political systems are more likely to support the government. While there is a minute difference in the odds ratio observed between the majoritarian and proportional systems of governments, the differences are so insignificant. Therefore, it can be concluded that the odds ratio in the two political systems is more than one and has the same implication.

Validation of Hypothesis Statement

The results above show that the data obtained from the AfroBarometer supports the hypothesis statement. Therefore, it is correct to state that proportional representation and majoritarian systems have a greater partisan attachment.

Discussion

Despite the differences in the government structures across various nations, proportional representation and majoritarian systems have a greater partisan attachment. The observation is attributable to the benefits that the citizens gain from such political systems. In the proportional representation system, the opinions of the citizens are articulated in higher levels of the government. On the other hand, the majoritarian policies observed in Mauritius and Morocco show stability, which is attractive to the citizens. Notably, the two approaches to governance discourage dictatorship and the weaknesses associated with it. Therefore, it is these benefits related to the two government system, which leads to partisan attachment, as observed in the data analyzed in the previous section of the research paper.