Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
SP baner

Vol. 48 No. 1 (2020)

Political institutions

Single-mandate Constituencies and Quality Representation: An example of the Application of Qualitative Comparative Analysis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35757/STP.2020.48.1.07
Submitted: June 24, 2020
Published: March 30, 2020

Abstract

This article attempts to make an empirical verification of the impact the electoral law on shaping the expectations of voters towards elected representatives. The analysis was conducted using data collected under the project entitled ‘The impact of electoral rules on the quality of local democracy in Poland’, whose fundamental premise was to take advantage of the situation arising after the amendment to the Electoral Code in 2011, as a result of which different electoral regulations were in force in the 2014 local government elections in various similar cities. Therefore, it was possible to verify a number of statements functioning in public space regarding issues, such as the positive impact of single-mandate constituencies on the quality of democracy (in particular, on the quality of democracy at the local level).
The purpose of the analysis was to try to find regularities in changes in perceiving the role of councillors that may have occurred as a result of different electoral regulations. To this end, we used the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) methodology, which allows the study of relationships between sets and the interpretation of these relationships in terms of necessity and sufficiency.
The results suggest that the introduction of the majority system in a number of cities in the 2014 local government elections did not lead to the formation of a coherent model of political representation at the city council level, which would be qualitatively different from the representation model characteristic for cities with a proportional electoral system.

References

  1. Burke, Edmund. 1774. „Speech to the Electors of Bristol”, w: The Founders’ Constitution.
  2. Egner, Björn, David Sweeting, Pieter-Jan Klok, red. 2013. Local Councillors in Europe. Urban and Regional Research International, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783658018566.
  3. Emmenegger, Patrick, Dominik Schraff, André Walter. 2014. „QCA, the Truth Table Analysis and Large-N Survey Data: The Benefits of Calibration and the Importance of Robustness Tests”, COMPASSS Working Papers 2014 (79), http://www.compasss.org/wpseries/EmmeneggerSchraffWalter2014.pdf.
  4. Etzioni, Amitai. 1968. The Active Society: A Theory of Societal and Political Processes. New York: The Free Press.
  5. Fasolt, Constantin. 1991. „Quod Omnes Tangit Ab Omnibus Approbari Debet: The Words and the Meaning”, w: In Iure Veritas: Studies in Canon Law in Memory of Schafer Williams, red. Steven B. Bowman and Blanche E. Cody. University of Cincinnati, College of Law.
  6. Gendźwiłł, Adam. 2015. „Jakiego systemu wyborczego chcą Polacy?” Komunikat z badań CBOS, nr 94.
  7. Gerrits, Lasse, Stefan Verweij. 2013. „Critical Realism as a Meta-Framework for Understanding the Relationships between Complexity and Qualitative Comparative Analysis”, Journal of Critical Realism 12 (2): 166–82, https://doi.org/10.117/rea.12.2.p663527490513071.
  8. Huber, John D., G. Bingham Powell. 1994. „Congruence Between Citizens and Policymakers in Two Visions of Liberal Democracy”, World Politics 46 (3): 291–326. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950684.
  9. Jasiewicz-Betkiewicz, Agnieszka, Mikołaj Cześnik, Michał Kotnarowski, Michał Wenzel, Marta Żerkowska-Balas. 2017. „Co tam panie w polityce? Struktura potocznej wiedzy politycznej Polaków”, Kultura i Społeczeństwo, nr 2, s. 31–51.
  10. Kamiński, Marek M. 2016. Ordynacje Większościowe i JOW-y. Kompendium reformatora ordynacji wyborczej, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
  11. Kwiatkowska, Agnieszka, Mikołaj Cześnik. 2020, w druku. „Electoral law, political knowledge and voter turnout – complex liaisons”, Polish Sociological Review.
  12. Markowski, Radosław, Ben Stanley. 2019. „Poczucie politycznego sprawstwa: o determinantach i korelatach zjawiska”, Studia Polityczne 47(3): 12–34.
  13. May, John D. 1978. „Defining Democracy: A Bid for Coherence and Consensus”, Political Studies 26 (1): 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1978.tb01516.x.
  14. Meuer, Johannes, Christian Rupietta. 2017. „A Review of Integrated QCA and Statistical Analyses”, Quality & Quantity 51 (5): 2063–83, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0397-z.
  15. Miller, Warren E., Donald E. Stokes. 1963. „Constituency Influence in Congress”, The American Political Science Review 57 (1): 45–56, https://doi.org/10.2307/1952717.
  16. Oana, Ioana-Elena, Carsten Q. Schneider. 2018. „SetMethods: An Add-on R Package for Advanced QCA”, The R Journal 10 (1): 507–33.
  17. Pitkin, Hanna F. 1967. The Concept of Representation, University of California Press.
  18. Ragin, Charles C. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, University of California Press, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1pnx57.
  19. —. 1994. Constructing Social Research: The Unity and Diversity of Method, Thousand Oaks, Calif: Pine Forge Press.
  20. —. 2000. Fuzzy-Set Social Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. —. 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=432281.
  22. Rehfeld, Andrew. 2005. The Concept of Constituency: Political Representation, Democratic Legitimacy, and Institutional Design, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511509674.
  23. —. 2009. „Representation Rethought: On Trustees, Delegates, and Gyroscopes in the Study of Political Representation and Democracy”, American Political Science Review 103 (2): 214–30, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055409090261.
  24. Schneider, Carsten, Barbara Vis, i Kendra Koivu. 2019. “Set-Analytic Approaches, Especially Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA).” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3333474. Rochester: Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3333474.
  25. Schneider, Carsten, Claudius Wagemann. 2012. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Strategies for Social Inquiry, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  26. Thompson, Richard F. 2001. „Politicl Representation”, w: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, red. Neil J. Smelser i Paul B. Baltes, Amsterdam–New York: Elsevier.
  27. Wagemann, Claudius, Carsten Schneider. 2007. „Standards of Good Practice in Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Fuzzy-Sets”, COMPASSS Working Papers 2007 (51), http://www.compasss.org/wpseries/WagemannSchneider2007.pdf.
  28. Waśkiewicz, Andrzej. 2012. Paradoksy idei reprezentacji politycznej, wyd. 1, Archiwum Warszawskiej Szkoły Historii Idei Studia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
  29. Wessels, Bernhard. 2007. „Political Representation and Democracy”, w: The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, red. Russell J. Dalton, Hans Dieter Klingemann, Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199270125.001.0001.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.