Lidia Núñez López - Profile on Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Conference Papers by Lidia Núñez López

Political parties have for a long time been considered as essential for the functioning of democr... more Political parties have for a long time been considered as essential for the functioning of democratic government. But nowadays, representative democracy seems to be in crisis in Western political systems. Voter turnout is decreasing, levels of political trust are fading, and citizens’ dissatisfaction with the current system is growing. In order to remedy these issues, political actors have implemented reforms aimed at democratic innovation –e.g. electoral reforms, more frequent use of referenda, experiments with deliberative democracy etc. If a growing attention has been given to the consequences of these changes, our paper is dedicated to take a step back. This paper concentrates on the determinants of democratic innovations, and particularly, on the role of party ideology. The paper argues that the willingness to implement democratic innovations differs across parties depending on their ideological placement in the left-right spectrum. The central hypothesis states that parties at the extremes are more willing to implement democratic innovations than centrist parties. At the empirical level, the paper relies on the analysis of 50 parties across 15 European democracies, using data collected through the PARTIREP Comparative MP Survey.

Most legislative studies based on roll-call voting analysis describe European parliamentary parti... more Most legislative studies based on roll-call voting analysis describe European parliamentary parties as highly unified actors. However, this unity in voting behavior does not mean that parliamentary parties are homogeneous entities: ‘pre-floor’ disagreements can be frequent, and MPs might display varying degrees of party loyalty. This paper views party agreement and party loyalty as two dimensions of cohesion, and investigates party cohesion across fifteen European national legislatures on the basis of the cross-national PARTIREP MP Survey. First, the paper shows that, while roll-call voting analyses give a picture of highly united parliamentary parties, these European parliamentary parties in fact vary quite a lot according to their degree of cohesion. Second, the paper investigates some of the factors that might explain these variations. On the one hand, the paper deals with the impact of electoral rules (electoral formula, ballot structure and candidate selection methods). On the other hand, the paper examines the role of ideology in determining the frequency of MP-party disagreement and MPs’ attitudes of (non)loyalty. These observations help to understand what produces parliamentary parties’ varying levels of agreement and loyalty and how institutional and sociological factors can affect distinctly each dimension of cohesion. In this way, the paper provides new insights into the study of legislative party dynamics.

Books by Lidia Núñez López

This book examines recent developments in political science research. What are the new influences... more This book examines recent developments in political science research. What are the new influences to which the discipline opens itself up? Is political science research converging towards a single model or splitting into different streams? What are the new challenges at the beginning of the 21st century? By addressing these questions, this collection of essays discusses three interrelated topics: the relationship between political science and the problems of politics, the relationship between political science and other fields of research, and the transformation of the profession. In so doing, this volume traces the major trends in contemporary political science research since the end of the Cold War.

As part of this approach, the authors rely on the academic journals as a field of investigation. Each of the eight chapters focuses on a different journal, including the American Journal of Political Science, West European Politics, the British Political Science Review, Security Studies, the Journal of Common Market Studies, International Security, Electoral Studies and the Revue française de science politique.

The book is intended to scholars with an interest in the historiography of political science, the epistemology of knowledge, the sociology of the profession as well as the evolution of the field in terms of research agendas, theoretical approaches and methodological debates.

Papers by Lidia Núñez López

Cette thèse de doctorat a été numérisée par l'Université libre de Bruxelles. L'auteur qui s'oppos... more Cette thèse de doctorat a été numérisée par l'Université libre de Bruxelles. L'auteur qui s'opposerait à sa mise en ligne dans DI-fusion est invité à prendre contact avec l'Université (

The study of political parties and parliaments has for a long time been dominated by a central as... more The study of political parties and parliaments has for a long time been dominated by a central assumption: parties act as homogenous and unified actors. But recently, scholars have opened the ‘black-box’ of parties and have given growing attention to intra-party dynamics. During the last decade, legislative scholars have examined the extent to which and the reasons why parliamentarians would vote against their party line, and have found that such ‘rebellions’ were quite rare in European legislatures. Yet the reasons for such unity remain obscured: do parties arrived in parliament as cohesive blocks, or are MPs disciplined by institutional constraints? This paper addresses the issue of cohesion within European parliamentary parties regardless of voting unity scores, by examining parliamentarians’ frequency of disagreement with their party on the basis of the Comparative PARTIREP MP Survey database. In this way, the paper shows that European parliamentary parties in fact vary quite im...

Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliame... more Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliamentary parties has therefore attracted a lot of attention. A frequent assumption states that party cohesion stems from party agreement measured as the homogeneity of preferences among MPs. This paper argues that the two concepts –agreement and homogeneity– cover different realities, and shows that the relationship between them is not as straightforward as often suggested. The paper contends that party ideology works as a mediator between the heterogeneity of preferences and intra-party disagreement. The analysis is based on attitudinal data collected among 840 MPs from 15 European national assemblies and is computed at the aggregate –party– level. The results bring new perspectives on the relationship between ideology, homogeneity of preferences and agreement within parliamentary parties.

Electoral Studies, 2018

A vast literature shows that voting for the winning party in elections boosts satisfaction with d... more A vast literature shows that voting for the winning party in elections boosts satisfaction with democracy. But in many list PR systems, voters do not only vote for a party, they can also vote for candidates within parties. Yet, we know very little about how such votes affect voters' satisfaction with democracy. In this paper, we analyse pre-and post-election panel survey data from Belgium, in which we asked respondents to report their vote choice for parties and for candidates. The main finding is that casting a preference vote for a winning candidate makes little difference, as party-list voters are those with the largest increase in satisfaction with democracy. Such a finding is very important as reforms that increase voters' opportunities to vote for candidates within list have multiplied recently, and many of these 1 Acknowledgements: Previous versions of the paper have been presented

Since the beginning of the 2008 economic crisis, we have seen the emergence of important debates ... more Since the beginning of the 2008 economic crisis, we have seen the emergence of important debates on the need to reorganize democracy and several discussions about institutional reforms. In this research we look into the relationship between electoral volatility and the introduction of electoral system changes. In a context of spread citizens´ dissatisfaction, voters have different ways to express their discontent in the polls. They may vote for other established mainstream parties or they may opt for new non-mainstream parties. According to our argument, it is only in the latter case that ruling parties would really feel threatened and would face incentives to initiate institutional reform. In order to analyze empirically these mechanisms, we have used data from the project 'Electoral System Changes in Europe' (ESCE) and studied the conditions under which electoral reforms affecting the proportionality of the system (formula, assembly size and threshold) have been enacted in 31 European countries between 1945 and 2012. We observe that the entry of new parties is more meaningful to explain how electoral instability may help to explain the emergence of reforms. Reformers are likely to opt for reforms making the system less inclusive when they are confronted to a real threat from new emerging parties challenging them. Under such circumstances, they will try to contain their challengers by making it harder for them to gain parliamentary representation.

People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town... more People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town hall debates, for example. But in fact these kinds of democratic innovation are rare. Caroline Close and Lidia Nunez explain how parties in power have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are, particularly given how risky referendums can be (as David Cameron knows only too well).

Party elites’ support for democratic innovations: the role of ideology

Changing Democracy? Why Inertia is Winning Over Innovation

Representation, 2016

There is a widespread belief that in order to cure the so-called crisis of democracy, citizens’ i... more There is a widespread belief that in order to cure the so-called crisis of democracy, citizens’ involvement in decision-making processes needs to be fostered. However, despite the fact that there is a move towards more inclusive institutions in Europe, changes implementing democratic innovations at the national level remain rare. Why are democratic innovations not implemented more often? In this article, we provide explanations on why inertia seems to win over change through an analysis of party elites’ willingness to enact democratic innovations across 15 European democracies, by using the PartiRep Comparative MP Survey. This research concentrates on party-level factors: party age, time in government and party ideology. Findings suggest that institutional inertia is partially rooted on the fact that party elites’ support for democratic innovations is heavily related to anti-establishment parties, to left-wing parties and to parties with limited access to power.

Preferences and agreement in legislative parties: testing the causal chain

The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2017

ABSTRACT This research note focuses on two specific dimensions of legislative cohesion: the homog... more ABSTRACT This research note focuses on two specific dimensions of legislative cohesion: the homogeneity of preferences within a party and party agreement. Although these two dimensions have often been considered as synonyms, it is argued that these two concepts refer to different realities. The authors therefore develop distinct measurements for these two concepts. The authors then examine their statistical relationship, putting to the test the widespread assumption that heterogeneous preferences increase the probability of disagreement. The authors do so by testing the effect of different measures of a member of parliament’s ideological distance to her/his party on her/his self-reported frequency of disagreement with her/his party. It is demonstrated that the causal chain linking both concepts is only verified in the case of a conscious ideological distance. The results have crucial theoretical and methodological implications for future research on party cohesion and party unity.

Party Cohesion in European Legislatures: Cross-Country and Cross-Party Comparisons

Preferences and agreement in legislative parties: testing the causal chain

This research note focuses on two specific dimensions of legislative cohesion: the homogeneity of... more This research note focuses on two specific dimensions of legislative cohesion: the homogeneity of preferences within a party and party agreement. Although these two dimensions have often been considered as synonyms, it is argued that these two concepts refer to different realities. The authors therefore develop distinct measurements for these two concepts. The authors then examine their statistical relationship, putting to the test the widespread assumption that heterogeneous preferences increase the probability of disagreement. The authors do so by testing the effect of different measures of a member of parliament’s ideological distance to her/his party on her/his self-reported frequency of disagreement with her/his party. It is demonstrated that the causal chain linking both concepts is only verified in the case of a conscious ideological distance. The results have crucial theoretical and methodological implications for future research on party cohesion and party unity.

Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliame... more Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliamentary parties has therefore attracted a lot of attention. A frequent assumption states that party cohesion stems from party agreement measured as the
homogeneity of preferences among MPs. This paper argues that the two concepts –agreement and homogeneity– cover different realities, and shows that the relationship between them is not as straightforward as often suggested. The paper
contends that party ideology works as a mediator between the heterogeneity of preferences and intra-party disagreement. The analysis is based on attitudinal data collected among 840 MPs from 15 European national assemblies and is computed at
the aggregate –party– level. The results bring new perspectives on the relationship between ideology, homogeneity of preferences and agreement within parliamentary parties.

Blog articles by Lidia Núñez López

People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town... more People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town hall debates, for example. But in fact these kinds of democratic innovation are rare. Caroline Close and Lidia Núñez explain how parties in power have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are, particularly given how risky referendums can be (as David Cameron knows only too well).

Electoral Studies, 2018

Party elites’ support for democratic innovations: the role of ideology

Changing Democracy? Why Inertia is Winning Over Innovation

Representation, 2016

Preferences and agreement in legislative parties: testing the causal chain

The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2017

Party Cohesion in European Legislatures: Cross-Country and Cross-Party Comparisons

Preferences and agreement in legislative parties: testing the causal chain

Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliame... more Party cohesion is a central issue in legislative studies. The way cohesion is reached in parliamentary parties has therefore attracted a lot of attention. A frequent assumption states that party cohesion stems from party agreement measured as the
homogeneity of preferences among MPs. This paper argues that the two concepts –agreement and homogeneity– cover different realities, and shows that the relationship between them is not as straightforward as often suggested. The paper
contends that party ideology works as a mediator between the heterogeneity of preferences and intra-party disagreement. The analysis is based on attitudinal data collected among 840 MPs from 15 European national assemblies and is computed at
the aggregate –party– level. The results bring new perspectives on the relationship between ideology, homogeneity of preferences and agreement within parliamentary parties.

People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town... more People want more say in the democratic process – by voting in referendums and taking part in town hall debates, for example. But in fact these kinds of democratic innovation are rare. Caroline Close and Lidia Núñez explain how parties in power have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are, particularly given how risky referendums can be (as David Cameron knows only too well).