Pathologies Or Progress Evaluating The Effects Of Divided Government And Party Volatility

A vast body of literature emphasizes that successful political development relies on stable and united political parties that underpin clear and responsive policymaking. By this perspective, divided government and party volatility represent pathologies that imperil political accountability and development. Indeed, studies contend that divided government - where different parties control the executive and legislative branches of government - lead to policy deadlock while party volatility - characterized by frequent party splits, solo switches, mergers, dissolutions or the establishment of new parties - confounds representation and accountability. Clearly, each on its own is seen as a considerable threat to political performance and democratic development; the confluence of the two points virtually to an inevitable political doom. The collection of six papers here follow from a workshop on 'Governability Across Regime Types', convened by the School of Social and Political Studies, University of Edinburgh, on 24 October 2007 to evaluate the effects of divided government and party volatility. Our research is methodologically broad as we seek to arrive at conclusions with generalizable and comparative implications. Thus, our papers use large-N data vis-à-vis issues of democratic stability in divided government and semi-presidential systems. We also adopt small-N comparative studies with in-depth qualitative methodology that analyze the stability of minority or divided government and how party volatility influences party performance and government stability.