Refine
Year of publication
- 2022 (3)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- partisan theory (2)
- COVID-19 pandemic (1)
- Left–right dimension (1)
- Parties (1)
- Party systems (1)
- Political ideology (1)
- Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI) (1)
- consensus and efficiency (1)
- decision making of governments (1)
- democratic decision making (1)
- lockdowns (1)
- sustainable policy performance (1)
- veto player theory (1)
Institute
Publisher
- SAGE Publications (1)
- Springer Nature (1)
- Wiley (1)
This article gives an initial overview of the explanatory power of established approaches in comparative political science of various lockdown strategies in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic in 35 democracies. In a macro-comparative statistical analysis of the first wave of the pandemic, I test partisan and veto player theories. I distinguish two phases of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, which show distinct patterns of political impacts. In the first phase of implementing lockdown strategies, central governments were relatively uncontested and partisan theory has strong explanatory power. In the second phase of lifting lockdowns, party differences lose relevance, but veto players have a strong influence during this time. The analysis shows that political science theories are useful for analysing political processes not only under normal conditions but also in extreme social crises. Moreover, it provides deeper insights into the democratic decision-making process of advanced democracies in exceptional situations.
The extent to which the left–right dimension still structures party systems in highly developed, industrialized democracies is a contested field in comparative politics. Most studies in this area take the position that a stable and universal left–right dimension is either still the most important game in town or has become obsolete and replaced by other policy dimensions. Although country-specific studies focusing on voters’ left–right self-placement discover different meanings of left and right that vary between countries and change over time, few macro-comparative studies focusing on parties or governments take this aspect into account. Using a left–right concept for party politics from the PIP project on Parties, Institutions and Preferences that distinguishes an ideological core derived from political theory, as well as country- and time-specific issues uncovered through empirical analysis, the article demonstrates fundamental differences in the relevance and meaning of left and right by analyzing 34 party systems from 1945 to 2020. The article shows that the thesis of the decline of the left and right is premature. An important aspect for the continued high relevance of the left–right dimension is the fact that left and right changes their meaning by including controversial issues such as European integration, migration and environmental degradation.
We use the Bertelsmann Foundation's Sustainable Government Indicators (SGI) to find out how executive efficiency and consensus capacity influence sustainable policy performance. Although those two concepts are often seen as opposites, we show that this is not the case and that they can actually complement each other: separately as well as together, an efficient executive and consensus capacity support more sustainable policy performance. However, government efficiency is a double-edged sword. Depending on the policy positions governments take, outcomes vary. In this respect, efficient government structures are an amplifier of policy outcomes. In the case of sustainable policy performance, left-leaning governments increase sustainable policy performance, while right-leaning governments do not.