The Evolution of New Party Systems: Voter Learning and Electoral Systems
| Author | Nasos Roussias |
| Published date | 01 August 2022 |
| Date | 01 August 2022 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211014394 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211014394
Political Studies Review
2022, Vol. 20(3) 410 –432
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/14789299211014394
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
The Evolution of New Party
Systems: Voter Learning
and Electoral Systems
Nasos Roussias
Abstract
How do new party systems evolve over time? This article argues that party system evolution
requires the solution of coordination problems that voters face in early elections; this happens
through a learning mechanism. Elections reveal information to voters, who update their beliefs
about party viability and the distribution of voters’ preferences and adjust their behaviour. The
institutional setting, however, strongly conditions the pace of learning. Restrictive electoral
systems (single-member district) accelerate learning through the harsh penalties they impose
on miscoordination, while permissive ones (proportional representation) prolong it. Testing the
argument on a district-level dataset in new democracies provides ample support; voters learn
to cast fewer wasted votes over time and this happens faster in single-member district systems.
The findings point to a trade-off between consolidation and representation; while party system
evolution is facilitated by restrictive electoral systems, the presence of distinct social groups in the
political arena is better served by permissive ones.
Keywords
voter learning, party system evolution, strategic coordination, wasted votes, electoral systems
Accepted: 12 April 2021
With the expansion of democratic regimes since the end of the Second World War, mil-
lions of people were called to participate in a previously unknown procedure to them,
elections. The lack of experience with elections has profound effects on voting decisions
and may lead to coordination problems. Figure 1 illustrates such a coordination failure,
looking at the mean wasted votes levels over five consecutive elections in new and old
democracies.1 Two things stand out: first, wasted votes are much higher in new democra-
cies; second, while wasted votes remain stable in old democracies, they decline in new
ones. Why do we observe such drastic changes in wasted votes in new democracies?
What explains the significant variation in the rate of changes in wasted votes over time?
This article addresses these questions, examining the evolution of new party systems
through the lens of voter behaviour, proposing an institutional theory of learning.
Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Sheffield, UK
Corresponding author:
Nasos Roussias, University of Sheffield, Elmfield Building, Northumberland Road, Sheffield, S10 2TU, UK.
Email: a.roussias@sheffield.ac.uk
1014394PSW0010.1177/14789299211014394Political Studies ReviewRoussias
research-article2021
Article
Roussias 411
The recent experiences with democratization in Eastern Europe and other regions of
the world have shown that the consolidation of new party systems is neither automatic nor
ubiquitous (Bielasiak, 2002; Birch, 2003; Mainwaring and Zoco, 2007). Among the most
important factors for party system evolution is the information available to parties and
voters. Significant information scarcities exist; typically, in the early elections of new
democracies, voters do not know what parties stand for or how much support they have.
Parties on the other hand have little information about voter preferences; on top of this,
neither parties nor voters have a clear understanding of how the electoral system func-
tions or how it conditions the strategic environment in which elections take place.
Given these information scarcities, voter behaviour is severely hindered in early elec-
tions; among other things, new party systems are characterized by extreme volatility
(Bielasiak, 2002; Birch, 2003; Kuenzi and Lambright, 2001; Roberts and Wibbels, 1999),
high numbers of parties (Filippov et al., 1999; Golder and Wantchekon, 2004) and fre-
quent electoral law changes. However, while scholars have paid attention to this issue
(Bernhard and Karakoç, 2011; Crisp et al., 2012; Lago and Martínez i Coma, 2012;
Mishler and Rose, 2007; Raymond et al., 2016; Reich, 2004; Riera, 2013; Selb, 2012;
Tavits, 2005; Tavits and Annus, 2006), we do not have a clear understanding of the dura-
tion and the causes of these characteristics.
This article proposes an account that can explain divergent paths towards party system
consolidation. It argues that for party system evolution to take place, voters have to go
through a learning period; several elections may be necessary to gather the necessary
information and experience that allows them to optimize their strategic behaviour.
Crucially, the pace of learning depends on the electoral system; restrictive ones force vot-
ers to update their behaviour faster than permissive electoral settings and facilitate party
system evolution.
23.5 23.6
21.0
17.3
11.1
8.87.98.08.0
9.8
0 5 10 15 20 25
1234512345
New DemocraciesOld Democracies
% Wasted Votes
District Level Data
Elapsed Elections
Mean Wasted Votes
Figure 1. Wasted votes in transitional and established democracies.
To continue reading
Request your trial