Does accountability matter? How electoral systems affect conflict initiation

Lance Y Hunter, Joseph W. Robbins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Recent work on conflict suggests that electoral systems impact foreign policy-making in important ways; however, the discipline has reached different conclusions regarding how different types of electoral systems affect conflict initiation. In this study we contend that legislators are more accountable individually in candidate-centred electoral systems which impacts a state’s decision to initiate interstate conflict. We test our argument using a time-series cross-sectional analysis of 54 democracies from 1975 to 2001. The results provide strong support for the hypothesis that candidate-centred electoral systems result in less conflict initiation than party-centric systems due to higher levels of individual accountability for legislative members.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)219-243
Number of pages25
JournalConflict, Security and Development
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 3 2016

Fingerprint

electoral system
responsibility
candidacy
party system
foreign policy
time series
democracy

Keywords

  • Accountability
  • candidate-centred Systems
  • conflict initiation
  • democracy
  • electoral systems
  • party-centred systems

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Does accountability matter? How electoral systems affect conflict initiation. / Hunter, Lance Y; Robbins, Joseph W.

In: Conflict, Security and Development, Vol. 16, No. 3, 03.05.2016, p. 219-243.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{dba29e781fec4411b9c44bee69daaee8,
title = "Does accountability matter? How electoral systems affect conflict initiation",
abstract = "Recent work on conflict suggests that electoral systems impact foreign policy-making in important ways; however, the discipline has reached different conclusions regarding how different types of electoral systems affect conflict initiation. In this study we contend that legislators are more accountable individually in candidate-centred electoral systems which impacts a state’s decision to initiate interstate conflict. We test our argument using a time-series cross-sectional analysis of 54 democracies from 1975 to 2001. The results provide strong support for the hypothesis that candidate-centred electoral systems result in less conflict initiation than party-centric systems due to higher levels of individual accountability for legislative members.",
keywords = "Accountability, candidate-centred Systems, conflict initiation, democracy, electoral systems, party-centred systems",
author = "Hunter, {Lance Y} and Robbins, {Joseph W.}",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/14678802.2016.1179450",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "219--243",
journal = "Conflict, Security and Development",
issn = "1467-8802",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does accountability matter? How electoral systems affect conflict initiation

AU - Hunter, Lance Y

AU - Robbins, Joseph W.

PY - 2016/5/3

Y1 - 2016/5/3

N2 - Recent work on conflict suggests that electoral systems impact foreign policy-making in important ways; however, the discipline has reached different conclusions regarding how different types of electoral systems affect conflict initiation. In this study we contend that legislators are more accountable individually in candidate-centred electoral systems which impacts a state’s decision to initiate interstate conflict. We test our argument using a time-series cross-sectional analysis of 54 democracies from 1975 to 2001. The results provide strong support for the hypothesis that candidate-centred electoral systems result in less conflict initiation than party-centric systems due to higher levels of individual accountability for legislative members.

AB - Recent work on conflict suggests that electoral systems impact foreign policy-making in important ways; however, the discipline has reached different conclusions regarding how different types of electoral systems affect conflict initiation. In this study we contend that legislators are more accountable individually in candidate-centred electoral systems which impacts a state’s decision to initiate interstate conflict. We test our argument using a time-series cross-sectional analysis of 54 democracies from 1975 to 2001. The results provide strong support for the hypothesis that candidate-centred electoral systems result in less conflict initiation than party-centric systems due to higher levels of individual accountability for legislative members.

KW - Accountability

KW - candidate-centred Systems

KW - conflict initiation

KW - democracy

KW - electoral systems

KW - party-centred systems

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84975266448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84975266448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14678802.2016.1179450

DO - 10.1080/14678802.2016.1179450

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84975266448

VL - 16

SP - 219

EP - 243

JO - Conflict, Security and Development

JF - Conflict, Security and Development

SN - 1467-8802

IS - 3

ER -