Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Critical CitizensGlobal Support for Democratic Government$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Pippa Norris

Print publication date: 1999

Print ISBN-13: 9780198295686

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003

DOI: 10.1093/0198295685.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 09 December 2019

Institutional Explanations for Political Support

Institutional Explanations for Political Support

Chapter:
(p.217) 11 Institutional Explanations for Political Support
Source:
Critical Citizens
Author(s):

Pippa Norris (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/0198295685.003.0011

Substantial cross‐national variations have been demonstrated in political support/institutional confidence; the aim of this chapter is to investigate why these major differences between countries exist. It identifies at least three separate schools of thought seeking to explain this phenomenon: the role of cultural values, government performance, and political institutions. Comparisons are made among a broad range of political systems, drawing on the 1981–4, 1990–1 and 1995–7 World Values Surveys, the Latinobarometer and the Eurobarometer, and various support hypotheses are advanced (support for the party in government; dependence on level of democratization; differences between presidential and parliamentary systems (executive structure); variation with party system; differences between federal and unitary state structures; and variation with electoral system) and tested. The findings indicate that institutional confidence is most likely to be highest in parliamentary democracies characterized by plurality electoral systems, two‐party or moderate multi‐party systems, and unitary states, and that these relationships are confirmed even after controlling for differences in levels of economic development and post‐material values; social background and education are also related to institutional confidence, while the influence of socioeconomic status and gender are very modest. The results replicate one of the main theoretical principles of Anderson and Guillory (1997)—that winners express more confidence in the system than losers, and they also show that majoritarian institutions tend to produce greater institutional confidence than consociational arrangements.

Keywords:   consociational institutions, cultural values, democracies, education, electoral system, executive structure, federal vs unitary state structure, gender, government institutions, government performance, institutional confidence, level of democratization, majoritarian institutions, multi‐party systems, parliamentary democracies, party in government, party system, plurality electoral systems, political institutions, political support, political systems, presidential vs parliamentary systems, social background, socioeconomic status, state structure, two‐party systems, unitary states

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .