Die Parteiensysteme neuer Demokratien in Ostasien: Merkmale, Typen und Institutionalisierungsgrad

Aufsätze
First Online:
  • 389 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Der Beitrag analysiert die Parteiensysteme in fünf jungen ostasiatischen Demokratien. Er gibt einen Überblick über deren Merkmale, Formationen und Institutionalisierungsgrade. Dabei werden unterschiedliche Typen von Parteiensystemen aktuell und im Zeitverlauf bestimmt. Es wird gezeigt, dass der Institutionalisierungsgrad der Parteiensysteme unterschiedlich, im internationalen Vergleich jedoch überwiegend gering ist. Darauf aufbauend werden potentielle Erklärungen für die aufgezeigten Eigenschaften der Parteiensysteme diskutiert. Die Ausführungen legen die Annahme nahe, dass unterschiedliche Eigenschaften der Parteiensysteme auf einen Mix sozialstruktureller und institutioneller Faktoren zurückzuführen sind. Ferner deuten die Befunde darauf hin, dass die Bedeutung der Parteiensysteminstitutionalisierung für die Konsolidierung der Demokratie relativiert werden muss.

Schlüsselwörter

Parteiensysteme Institutionalisierung Demokratisierung Ostasien 

Abstract

This article analyzes the party systems in five young East Asian democracies. It outlines their characteristics, formations, and extent of institutionalization. Furthermore, it distinguishes between different types of party systems at the present time and in the course of time. It shows that the extent of institutionalization differs among these nations but is predominantly low in most of them. Furthermore, the article will discuss potential explanations for the properties of the party systems described here. The analysis in turn suggests that the different formations and levels of institutionalization of party systems in the region can be ascribed to a combination of socio-structural and institutional factors. These findings also indicate that the significance of party system institutionalization for the consolidation of democracy must be qualified.

Keywords

Party systems Institutionalization Democratization East Asia 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Literatur

  1. Bartolini, Stefano und Peter Mair. 1995. Identità, Competition, and Electoral Availability: The Stabilization of European Electorates, 1885-1985. Cambridge: CUPGoogle Scholar
  2. Barton, Greg. 2006. Islam and Democratic Transition in Indonesia. In: Cheng, Tun-Jen and Deborah A. Brown (eds.). Religious Organizations and Democratization. Case Studies from Contemporary Asia. Armonk/London: M.E. Sharpe. 221-241Google Scholar
  3. Basedau, Matthias. 2007. Do Party Systems Matter for Democracy? A Comparative Study of 28 Sub-Saharan Countries. In: Basedau, Matthias, Gero Erdmann und Andreas Mehler (eds.). Votes, Money and Violence. Political Parties and Elections in Sub-Saharan Africa. Scottsville: kzn-Press. 105-144Google Scholar
  4. Basedau, Matthias, Alexander Stroh und Gero Erdmann. 2006. Die Institutionalisierung von politischen Parteien im subsaharischen Afrika. Ein Messversuch am Beispiel des anglophonen Afrika. Arbeitspapier für die Konferenz: Die Institutionalisierung politischer Parteien in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika. Empirische Befund und externe Einwirkungsmöglichkeiten, 6-7. Juni 2006.BerlinGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertelsmann Stiftung (Hrsg.). 2005/8. Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2006/2008. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann StiftungGoogle Scholar
  6. Betz, Joachim, Gero Erdmann und Patrick Köllner (Hrsg.). 2004. Die gesellschaftliche Verankerung politischer Parteien. Formale und informelle Dimensionen im internationalen Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Google Scholar
  7. Bünte, Marco. 2006. Hybride Regime in Südostasien: Genese, Gestalt und Entwicklungsdynamik. In: Pickel, Gert et. al (Hrsg.). Demokratisierungsprozesse im internationalen Vergleich. Wiesbaden. 173-195Google Scholar
  8. CEC (Central Election Commission of Taiwan). 2008. Zusammenfassung der dritten und vierten Auszählung der Wahl zum 7. Legislativyuan (in Chinesisch), http://www.cec.gov.tw/files//20080115163801_0970115-9.pdf (07.02.2008)Google Scholar
  9. Choi, Jungug. 2001. Philippine Democracies Old and New. Elections, Term Limits, and Party Systems. In: Asian Survey (41). 488-501Google Scholar
  10. Chu, Yun-han und Jih-wen Lin. 2001. Political Development in 20th-Century Taiwan: State-Building, Regime Transformation and the Construction of National Identity. In: The China Quarterly (165). 102-130. Google Scholar
  11. Chu, Yun-han, Min-hua Huang und Yu-tzung Chang. 2007. Quality of Democracy and Regime Legitimacy in East Asia. Paper presented at the East Asia Barometer Conference on „Why Asians Support Democracy and Why Not?“ August 9-12 2007. TaipeiGoogle Scholar
  12. Co, Edna E. A. 2005. Philippine Democracy Assessment. Free and Fair Elections and the Democratic Role of Political Parties. Manila: FESGoogle Scholar
  13. Croissant, Aurel und Daniel J. Pojar. 2006. The Parliamentary Election in Thailand, February 2005. In: Electoral Studies (25). 84-191Google Scholar
  14. Croissant, Aurel. 1997. Genese, Funktion und Gestalt von Parteiensystemen in jungen asiatischen Demokratien. In: Merkel, Wolfgang und Eberhard Sandschneider (Hrsg.). Systemwechsel 3. Die Rolle der Parteien. Opladen: Leske+Budrich. 293-337Google Scholar
  15. Croissant, Aurel. 2002. Von der Transition zur defekten Demokratie. Demokratische Entwicklung in den Philippinen, Südkorea und Thailand. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher VerlagGoogle Scholar
  16. Croissant, Aurel. 2004. From Transition to Defective Democracy. Mapping Asian Democratization. In: Democratization (11). 156-179Google Scholar
  17. Croissant, Aurel. 2005. Zivilgesellschaft in jungen Demokratien. Beispiele aus Ostasien. In: Betz, Joachim und Wolfgang Hein (Hrsg.). Neues Jahrbuch Dritte Welt 2005. Zivilgesellschaft. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 190-208Google Scholar
  18. Croissant, Aurel. 2006. Conclusion: Electoral Politics in Southeast Asia“. In: ders., und Beate Martin (eds.). Between Consolidation and Crisis. Elections and Democracy in Five Nations in Southeast Asia. Münster: LIT-Verlag. 329-385Google Scholar
  19. Dalton, Russell J. und Aiji Tanaka. 2007. The Patterns of Party Polarization in East Asia. In: Journal of East Asian Studies (7). 203-225Google Scholar
  20. Dalton, Russell J. und Steven Weldon. 2007. Partisanship and Party System Institutionalization. In: Party Politics (13). 179-196. Google Scholar
  21. Dalton, Russell J., Yun-han Chu and Doh Chull Shin. 2007. Introduction: Parties, Party Choice, and Partisanship in East Asia. In: Journal of East Asian Studies (7). 177-185Google Scholar
  22. Duverger, Maurice. 1959. Die politischen Parteien. Tübingen: J.C.B. MohrGoogle Scholar
  23. ECT (Election Commission of Thailand). 2006. Die Ergebnisse der Wahl der Abgeordneten zum Repräsentantenhaus von 2005 (in Thai). Bangkok: CET. Google Scholar
  24. Eith, Ulrich. 2008. Gesellschaftliche Konflikte und politischer Wettbewerb - Möglichkeiten und Grenzen eines überregionalen Vergleichs. In: Grabow, Karsten und Patrick Köllner (Hrsg.). Parteien und ihre Wähler. Sankt Augustin und Berlin: KAS. 23-35Google Scholar
  25. Gallagher, Michael. 1991. Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems. In: Electoral Studies (10). 33-51Google Scholar
  26. Gunther, Richard und Larry Diamond. 2003. Types and Functions of Parties. In: dies. (eds.). Political Parties and Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 3-39. Google Scholar
  27. Gunther, Richard, José Ramón Montero und Hans-Jürgen Puhle (eds.). 2007. Democracy, Intermediation, and Voting on Four Continents. Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  28. Hermawan, Yulius P. 2007. Political Parties and Elections in Post-Authoritarian Indonesia. In: Hadiwinata, Bob S. and Christoph Schuck (eds.). Democracy in Indonesia. The Challenge of Consolidation. Baden-Baden: Nomos. 201-219Google Scholar
  29. Hsieh, John Fuh-Sheng und David Newman. 2002. Introduction. In: dies. (eds.): How Asia Votes. New York und London: Chatham House. 1-18Google Scholar
  30. Huntington, Samuel A. 1968. Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven, Conn: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Hutchcroft, Paul D. and Joel Rocamora. 2003. Strong Demands and Weak Institutions: The Origins and Evolution of the Democratic Deficit in the Philippines. In: Journal of East Asian Studies (3). 259-292Google Scholar
  32. Im, Hyug-Baeg. 2004. Faltering Democratic Consolidation in South Korea: Democracy at The End of the Three Kims’ Era. In: Democratization (11). 179-198Google Scholar
  33. IFES. 2003. National Public Opinion Survey 2003. Indonesia. www.ifes.org/publication/ba79a656edad4438b23f039af30fed49/Republic_of_Indonesia_National_Survey_2003.pdf (02.01.2008)Google Scholar
  34. International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES). 2005. Public Opinion Survey Indonesia 2005. http://www.ifes.org/publication/c1e0d6e8e9d01f98a84bfe46966b3b4f/2005survey%20report_eng.pdf (02.01.2008)Google Scholar
  35. Jones, Mark P. 2007. Political Parties and Party Systems in Latin America. Paper prepared for the Symposium „Prospects for Democracy in Latin America“. University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, April 5-6, 2007. Google Scholar
  36. Katz, Richard S. und William Crotty. 2006. Introduction. In: dies. (eds.). Handbook of Party Politics. London: Sage. 1-5Google Scholar
  37. Kuenzi, Michelle und Gina Lambright. 2001. Party System Institutionalization in 30 African Countries. In: Party Politics (7). 437-468Google Scholar
  38. Köllner, Patrick. 2004. Die gesellschaftliche Verankerung politischer Parteien in Südkorea. In: Betz, Joachim, Gero Erdmann und Patrick Köllner (Hrsg.). Die gesellschaftliche Verankerung politischer Parteien. Formale und informelle Dimensionen im internationalen Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. 119-139Google Scholar
  39. Laakso, Markku und Rein Taagepera. 1979. „Effective“ Number of Parties: A measure with application to West Europe. In: Comparative Political Studies (12). 3-27Google Scholar
  40. Ladner, Andreas. 2004. Typologien und Wandel: Die kantonalen Parteiensysteme im letzten Drittel des 20. Jahrhunderts. In: Swiss Political Science Review (10). 3-32Google Scholar
  41. Landé, Carl H..1996. Post-Marcos Politics: A Geographical and Statistical Analysis of the 1992 Presidential election. Singapore: ISEASGoogle Scholar
  42. Lane, Jan-Erik und Svante O. Ersson. 19912. Politics and Society in Western Europe. London: SageGoogle Scholar
  43. Lee, Aie-Rie. 2007. Value Cleavages, Issues, and Partisanship in East Asia. In: Journal of East Asian Studies (7). 251-275Google Scholar
  44. Lijphart , Arend. 1994. Electoral Systems and Party Systems. Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  45. Linz Juan J. und Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore und London: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  46. Linz, Juan J. 1994. Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does It Make a Difference? In: ders. und Arturo Valenzuela (eds.). The Failure of Presidential Democracy. Baltimore und London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 1-72Google Scholar
  47. Lipset, Seymor M. und Stein Rokkan. 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: The Free Press. Google Scholar
  48. LSI (Lembaga Survei Indonesia). 2007. Three Years of Political Parties: The problems of Voter’s Aspiration Representation. Jakarta: LSIGoogle Scholar
  49. Mainwaring, Scott und Edurne Zoco. 2007. Politicial Sequences and the Stabilization of Interparty Competition: Electoral Volatility in Old and New Democracies. In: Party Politics (13). 155-178Google Scholar
  50. Mainwaring, Scott und Mariano Torcal. 2006. Party System Institutionalization and Party System Theory after the Third Wave of Democratization. In: Katz, Richard S. and William Crotty (eds.). Handbook of Party Politics. London. Sage. 204-227Google Scholar
  51. Mainwaring, Scott und Matthew S. Shugart. 1997. Conclusion: Presidentialism and the Party System. In: dies. (eds.). Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge: CUP. 394-440Google Scholar
  52. Mainwaring, Scott und Scully, Timothy R..1995: Party Systems in Latin America. In: dies., (eds.). Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1-34Google Scholar
  53. Mainwaring, Scott. 1998: Party Systems in the Third Wave. In: Journal of Democracy (3). 67-81Google Scholar
  54. Mainwaring, Scott. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
  55. Mair, Peter. 1997. Party System Change. Approaches and Interpretations. Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  56. Manacsa, Rodelio Cruz und Alexander C. Tan. 2005. Manufacturing Parties: Re-examining the Transient Nature of Philippine Political Parties. In: Party Politics (11). 748-765Google Scholar
  57. McAllister, Ian. 2007. Social Structure and Party Support in East Asian Democracies. In: Journal of East Asian Studies (7). 225-251Google Scholar
  58. McCargo, Duncan und Surin Masirikrod. 1997. Thailand’s Political Parties: Real, autthentic and actual. In: Hewison, Kevin (ed.): Political Change in Thailand: Democracy and Participation. London: Routledge. 132-149. Google Scholar
  59. Merkel, Wolfgang. 1996. Theorien der Transformation: Die demokratische Konsolidierung postautoritärer Gesellschaften. In: Politische Vierteljahresschrift-Sonderheft (25). 30-59. Google Scholar
  60. Merkel, Wolfgang. 1997. Parteien und Parteiensysteme im Transformationsprozeß: ein interregionaler Vergleich. In: ders. und Eberhard Sandschneider (Hrsg.). Systemwechsel 3. Parteien im Transformationsprozeß. Opladen: Leske+Budrich. 337-373Google Scholar
  61. Moon, Woojin. 2005. Decomposition of Regional Voting in South Korea: Ideological Conflicts and Regional Interests. In: Party Politics (11). 579-599Google Scholar
  62. Bosco, Anna und Leonardo Morlino (eds.). 2006. Party Change in Southern Europe. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  63. Murray, David. 1996. Angels and Devils: Thai Politics from February 1991 to September 1992 – A Struggle for Democracy?. Bangkok: White Orchid PressGoogle Scholar
  64. Niedermayer, Oskar. 1997. Das gesamtdeutsche Parteiensystem. In: Gabriel, Oscar W., Oskar Niedermayer und Richard Stöss (Hrsg.). Parteiendemokratie in Deutschland. Bonn: BpB. 106-130Google Scholar
  65. Nohlen, Dieter, Florian Grotz und Christof Hartmann (eds.). 2001. Elections in the Asia Pacific. A Data Handbook, Vol. II. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar
  66. Nohlen, Dieter. 20003. Wahlrecht und Parteiensystem. Opladen: Leske+BudrichGoogle Scholar
  67. Norris, Pippa. 2002. Electoral Reform and Fragmented Multipartyism. The mechanical and psychological effects of electoral systems on party systems. Paper for the International Conference Political Reform in Brazil in Comparative Perspective, June 27-28, 2002. Ipanema, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  68. Ockey, James. 2003. Change and Continuity in the Thai Political Party System. In: Asian Survey 43 (4). 663-80. Google Scholar
  69. Ockey, James. 2005. Variations on a Theme: Societal Cleavages and Party Orientations. Through Multiple Transitions in Thailand. In: Party Politics 11 (6). 728–747Google Scholar
  70. Park, Chong-min und Jaechul Lee. 2007. Are Associations the Schools of Democracy Across Asia? Asian Barometer Working Paper Series No. 38. TaipeiGoogle Scholar
  71. Pedersen, Morgens N.. 1979. The Dynamics of European Party Systems: Changing Patterns of Electoral Volatility. In: European Journal of Political Research (7). 1-26Google Scholar
  72. Pempel, T. J. 1990. Introduction. In: Pempel, T.J. (ed.). Uncommon Democracies: The One-Party Dominant Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1-32Google Scholar
  73. Pennings, Paul und Jan- Erik Lane. 1998. Introduction. In: dies., (Hrsg.). Comparing Party System Change. London: Routledge. 1-19Google Scholar
  74. Rae, Douglass W. 1967. The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  75. Randall, Vicky. 2006. Political Parties and Social Structure in the Developing World. In: Katz, Richard S. und William Crotty (eds.). Handbook of Party Politics. London: Sage. 387-396Google Scholar
  76. Reilly, Benjamin. 2006. Democracy and Diversity: Political Engineering in the Asia-Pacific. Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  77. Reilly, Benjamin. 2007. Electoral Systems and Party Systems in East Asia. In: Journal of East Asian Studies 7(2). 185-202. Google Scholar
  78. Reilly, Benjamin. 2008. Democratization and Electoral Reform in the Asia-Pacific. Is There an Asian Model? In: Comparative Political Studies (im Druck). Google Scholar
  79. Rose, Richard, William Mishler, Yun-han und Neil Munro. 2003. Asian Values, Post-Communist Legacies, and Generic Influences on Political Trust: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis. Paper presented at the East Asia Barometer Conference on „How East Asians View Democracy: The Region in Global Perspective.“ Dec.8-9, 2003. TaipeiGoogle Scholar
  80. Rüland, Jürgen, Clemens Jürgenmeyer, Michael H. Nelson und Patrick Ziegenhein. 2005. Parliaments and Political Change in Asia. Singapore: ISEASGoogle Scholar
  81. Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: CUPGoogle Scholar
  82. Scalapino, Robert A.. 1997. A Tale of Three Systems. In: Journal of Democracy 8(3). 150-155Google Scholar
  83. Schattschneider, Elmer E. 2003 [1942]. Party Government: American Government in Action. New York: Transaction PublishersGoogle Scholar
  84. Schubert, Gunter. 1994. Taiwan - die chinesische Alternative - Demokratisierung in einem ostasiatischen Schwellenland (1986-1993). Hamburg: IfAGoogle Scholar
  85. Seo, Kyoung Kyo. 2004. „The Third Wave“ and Non-liberal Democracies. In: International Area Review 7(1). 63-92Google Scholar
  86. Shugart, Matthew S. und John M. Carey. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies. Constitutional and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge: CUPGoogle Scholar
  87. Shugart, Matthew S. und Martin P. Wattenberg. 2001. Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: A Definition and Typology. In: dies. (eds.). Mixed-Member Electoral Systems. The Best of Both Worlds?. Oxford: OUP. 9-25. Google Scholar
  88. Siaroff, Alan. 2000. Comparative European Party Systems. An Analysis of Parliamentary Elections Since 1945. New York und London: SageGoogle Scholar
  89. Siripan Nogsuan. 2006. Party Elites in the Business Conglomerate Model of Thai Political Parties. In: Niyom Rathamarit (ed.). Eyes on Thai Democracy. National and Local Issues. KPI Yearbook 3 (2004-2005). Bangkok: King Prajadhipok’s Institute. 103-137. Google Scholar
  90. Stockton, Hans. 2001. Political Parties, Party Systems, and Democracy in East Asia. Lessons From Latin America. In: Comparative Political Studies (34). 94-119. Google Scholar
  91. Tan, Alexander C. 2005. Emerging Party Systems: An Introduction. In: Party Politics (11). 651-653Google Scholar
  92. Tan, Paige Johnson. 2006. Indonesia Seven Years after Soeharto: Party System Institutionalization in a New Democracy. In: Contemporary Southeast Asia 28(1). 88-114Google Scholar
  93. Teehankee, Julio. 2006. Consolidation or Crisis of Clientelistic Democracy? The 2004 Synchronized Elections in the Philippines. In: Croissant, Aurel und Beate Martin (eds.). Between Consolidation and Crisis. Elections and Democracy in Five Nations in Southeast Asia. Münster: Lit Verlag. 215-277Google Scholar
  94. Ufen, Andreas. 2007. Political Party and Party System Institutionalization in Southeast Asia: A Comparison of Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand. GIGA Working Papers No. 44. Hamburg: GIGAGoogle Scholar
  95. Ufen, Andreas. 2008. Gesellschaftliche Konfliktlinien und Wählermobilisierung in Südostasien. In: Grabow, Karsten und Patrick Köllner (Hrsg.). Parteien und ihre Wähler. Sankt Augustin und Berlin: KAS. 103-123Google Scholar
  96. Ware, Alan. 1996. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: OUPGoogle Scholar
  97. Wolinetz, Steven. 2006. Party Systems and Party System Types. In: Katz, Richard S. und William Crotty (eds.). Handbook of Party Politics. London: Sage. 51-63Google Scholar
  98. von Beyme, Klaus. 1997. Parteien im Prozeß der demokratischen Konsolidierung. In: Merkel, Wolfgang und Eberhard Sandschneider (Hrsg.). Systemwechsel 3. Parteien im Transformationsprozeß. Opladen: Leske+Budrich. 23-57Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für Politische WissenschaftRuprecht-Karls-Universität HeidelbergHeidelbergDeutschland

Personalised recommendations