French Politics

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 121–143 | Cite as

Evolution of New Parties: From Electoral Outsiders to Downsian Players — Evidence from the French Greens

  • Jae-Jae Spoon
Article

Abstract

This paper challenges the conventional wisdom about New Left parties in Europe. I show that institutional context influences party behavior by analyzing the strategic decisions of the French Green Party, Les Verts, from 1997 to 2002. I demonstrate that in order for the Greens to compete with the larger, more established, parties, they must recognize the demands of the institutional context and act accordingly. In doing so, they have become a Downsian party, whose goal is winning seats in parliament. Two implications of this study are that these decisions have important consequences both for the outcome of the pending election and for the future of the party as a viable competitor in the French political space. Importantly, the findings can be more generally applied to understanding new party behavior across Europe.

Keywords

electoral systems pre-election alliances Les Verts new parties party change party strategy 

References

  1. Blais, A. and Indridason, I. (2007) ‘Making candidates count: the logic of electoral alliances in two-round legislative elections’, Journal of Politics 69: 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burchell, J. (2002) The Evolution of Green Politics: Development and Change within European Green Parties, London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  3. CIDSP (2002a) French Legislative Election Results, 1993–2002 (CIDSP version), Grenoble: CIDSP.Google Scholar
  4. CIDSP (2002b) French Presidential Election Results, 1995 and 2002 (CIDSP version), Grenoble: CIDSP.Google Scholar
  5. CEVIPOF, CIDSP, and CECOP (2003) French Electoral Panel, 2002, (CIDSP version), Grenoble: CIDSP.Google Scholar
  6. Cox, G.W. (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cox, G.W. (1999) ‘Electoral rules and electoral coordination’, Annual Review of Political Science 2: 145–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dalton, R.J. (1990) ‘The Challenge of New Movements’, in R.J. Dalton and M. Kuechler (eds.) Challenging the Political Order: New Social and Political Movements in Western Democracies, Oxford: Polity Press, pp. 3–21.Google Scholar
  9. Dalton, R.J. (2002) Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies (3rd edn.). New York: Seven Bridges Press.Google Scholar
  10. Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  11. Duverger, M. (1954) Political Parties, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Gallagher, M., Laver, M. and Mair, P. (2006) Representative Government in Modern Europe (4th edn.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  13. Golder, S.N. (2006) ‘Pre-electoral coalition formation in parliamentary democracies’, British Journal of Political Science 36: 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. INSEE (2002) Circonscriptions Législatives: Tableaux Analyses du Recensement de la Population 1999 (CD-ROM), Paris: INSEE.Google Scholar
  16. Kitschelt, H. (1989) The Logics of Party Formation: Ecological Politics in Belgium and West Germany, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Laakso, M. and Taagepera, R. (1979) ‘Effective number of parties: a measure with application to West Europe’, Comparative Political Studies 12: 3–27.Google Scholar
  18. Liao, T.F. (1994) Interpreting Probability Models: Logit, Probit, and Other Generalized Linear Models, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lijphart, A. (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945–1990, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Long, J.S. and Freese, J. (2003) Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata, College Station: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  21. Maddala, G.S. (1983) Limited-Dependent Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mayer, N. (2002) Ces Français qui Votent FN, Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  23. Oppenhuis, E., van der Eijk, C. and Franklin, M. (1996) ‘The Party Context: Outcomes’, in C. van der Eijk and M. Franklin et al. (eds.) Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 287–305.Google Scholar
  24. Perrineau, P. (1998) Le Symptôme Le Pen: Radiographie des Électeurs du Front National, Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  25. Pierce, R. (1995) Choosing the Chief: Presidential Elections in France and the United States, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Przeworski, A. and Sprague, J. (1986) Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. Schain, M. (2000) ‘The National Front and the Legislative Elections of 1997’, in M.S. Lewis-Beck (ed.) How France Votes, New York: Seven Bridges Press, pp. 69–86.Google Scholar
  28. Schlesinger, J.A. (1991) Political Parties and the Winning of Office, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  29. Schlesinger, J.A. and Schlesinger, M.S. (1990) ‘The reaffirmation of a multiparty system in France’, American Political Science Review 84: 1077–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schlesinger, J.A. and Schlesinger, M.S. (2000) ‘The Stability of the French Party System: The Enduring Impact of the Two-Ballot Electoral Rules’, in M.S. Lewis Beck (ed.) How France Votes, New York: Seven Bridges Press, pp. 130–152.Google Scholar
  31. Sjöblom, G. (1968) Party Strategies in Multiparty Systems, Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  32. Strøm, K. (1990) ‘A behavioral theory of competitive political parties’, American Journal of Political Science 34: 565–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Strøm, K. and Müller, W.C. (2000) ‘Political Parties and Hard Choices’, in K. Strøm and W.C. Müller (eds.) Policy, Office, or Votes: How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
  34. Taagepera, R. and Shugart, M. (1989) Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Tsebelis, G. (1990) Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics, Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  36. van der Eijk, C., Franklin, M. and Marsh, M. (1996) ‘What voters teach us about Europe-wide elections: what Europe-wide elections teach us about voters’, Electoral Studies 15: 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. van der Eijk, C., Schoenbach, K., Schmitt, H, Semetko H., van der Brug, W., Franklin, M., Holmberg, S., Mannheimer, R., Thomassen, J. and Wessels, B. (2002) 1999 European Election Study (Steinmetz Archive version) Amsterdam: Steinmetz Archive.Google Scholar
  38. Wittman, D.A. (1973) ‘Parties as utility maximizers’, American Political Science Review 67: 490–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jae-Jae Spoon
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations