Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:44:41.630Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coalition Governments, Party Switching, and the Rise and Decline of Parties: Changing Japanese Party Politics since 1993

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2008

JUNKO KATO  and
YUTO KANNON
JUNKO KATO
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Law and Politics, The University of Tokyo
YUTO KANNON
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since 1993, coalition governments have replaced the 38-year-long, one-party dominance of the Liberal Democratic Party (the LDP) in Japan. Except for one year, from 1993 to 1994, the LDP has remained a key party in successive governing coalitions, but the dynamics of party competition has been completely transformed since the period of the LDP's dominance. Although the LDP has survived to form a variety of coalitions ranging from a minority to an over-sized majority, since 1998 the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) has continued to counter the LDP governments. The transformation of party systems in Japan accompanies the party switching of legislators and the mergers, breakups, extinctions, and formations of parties. In this regard, the Japanese case provides an interesting example to show how parties attempt to change the dynamics of policy competition by switching and reorganizing. Parties also attempt to shift their policy positions to attract public support and to gain a competitive edge in government formation. Using expert survey data about the policy positions of parties, this study explicates the dynamics involved in the reorganization of parties and the formation of governments.

Type
Research Article
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , December 2008 , pp. 341 - 365
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Benoit, Kenneth and Laver, Michael (2006), Party Policy in Modern Democracies, New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, Ian (2000), ‘Expert Judgments of Party Policy Positions: Uses and Limitations in Political Research’, European Journal of Political Science, 37: 103–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, Francis G. and Mair, Peter (1984), ‘Left–Right Political Scales: Some “Expert” Judgments’, European Journal of Political Science, 12: 73–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper & Law.Google Scholar
Duverger, Maurice (1954), Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Huber, John D. and Inglehart, Ronald (1995), ‘Expert Interpretations of Party Space Locations in 42 Societies’, Party Politics, 1 (1): 73–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, Michael (1998), ‘Electoral Reforms in Japan and New Zealand’, Leviathan, 22: 56–79.Google Scholar
Kato, Junko and Kannon, Yuto (2008), ‘Nihon no Seito no Kyosokukan no Henka – Seito Saihenki no Senmonka Chosa (1996∼2005 nen) niyoru Bunseki [Dynamic Change in Policy Space: The Analysis of the Expert Survey Data]’, in Shiroyama, H. and Ogushi, K. (eds), Seisaku Kakushin no Riron [Theory of Policy Innovation], The University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
Kato, Junko and Yamamoto, Kentaro (forthcoming), ‘Competition for Power: Party Switching as a Means of Changing Party Systems in Japan’, in Carol Mershon and William Heller eds. forthcoming in 2009 Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laver, Michael (ed.) (2001), Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors, Routledge/ECPR Studies in European Political Science, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael and Benoit, Kenneth (2005), ‘Estimating Party Positions: Japan in Comparative Context’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 6 (2): 187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laver, Michael and Benoit, Kenneth (2006), ‘Party System Change: Evidence of Changing Policy Spaces’, Paper prepared for the International Political Science Association meeting, Tokyo, 12 July.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael and Hunt, W. Ben (1992), Policy and Party Competition, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter (2001), ‘Searching for the Positions of Political Actors’, in Laver, Michael (ed.), Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors, London: Routledge, pp. 10–30.Google Scholar
Marks, Gary and Steenbergen, Marco (2004), Marks/Steenbergen Party Dataset, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, available from:http://www.unc.edu/~gwmarks/data.htm.Google Scholar
McKelvey, R. D (1976), ‘Intransitiveness in Multidimensional Voting Models and Some Implications for Agenda Control’, Journal of Economic Theory, 12: 472–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni (1976), Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis, New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew Soberg (2001), ‘“Extreme” Electoral Systems and Appeal of Mixed-Member Alternative’, in Shugart, Matthew Soberg and Wattenberg, Martin P., Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: The Best of Both Worlds, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar