Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Electoral systems, political career paths and legislative behavior: evidence from South Korea's mixed-member system

By Jun Hae-Won and Simon Hix

Abstract

A growing literature looks at how the design of the electoral system shapes the voting behavior of politicians in parliaments. Existing research tends to confirm that in mixed-member systems the politicians elected in the single-member districts are more likely to vote against their parties than the politicians elected on the party lists. However, we find that in South Korea, the members of the Korean National Assembly who were elected on PR lists are more likely to vote against their party leadership than the members elected in single-member districts (SMDs). This counterintuitive behavior stems from the particular structure of candidate selection and politicians' career paths. This suggests that any theory of how electoral systems shape individual parliamentary behavior needs to look beyond the opportunities provided by the electoral rules for voters to reward or punish individual politicians (as opposed to parties), to the structure of candidate selection inside parties and the related career paths of politicians

Topics: JQ Political institutions Asia
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Year: 2010
DOI identifier: 10.1017/S1468109910000058
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.lse.ac.uk:30633
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2003). Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil, Cambridge: doi
  2. (2002). C o x ,K a r e na n dL e nS c h o p p a(
  3. (2007). Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting’, doi
  4. (2005). Daily and Korean Party Studies Association
  5. (2006). Electoral Incentives in Mixed Member Systems: Party, Posts, and Zombie Politicians in Japan’, doi
  6. (2002). Electoral Influences on Legislative Behavior in Mixed-Member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada’, doi
  7. (2004). Electoral Institutions and Legislative Behavior: Explaining Voting Defection in the European Parliament’, doi
  8. (2007). Incentives in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: General Election Laws, Candidate Selection Procedures, and Cameral Rules’, doi
  9. (1999). Incentives to Cultivate a Party Vote in Candidate-Centric Electoral Systems: Evidence from Brazil’, doi
  10. (1995). Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas’, doi
  11. (2008). Legislative Voting and Accountability, Cambridge: doi
  12. (2005). Looking for Locals: Voter Information Demands and Personal Vote-Earning Attributes of Legislators Under Proportional Representation’, doi
  13. (2005). Mixed Electoral Systems: Contamination and Its Consequences,N e wY o r k :P a l g r a v e . Haspel,Moshe,ThomasF.Remington,andStevenS.Smith(1998),‘ElectoralInstitutionsandPartyCohesion in the Russian Duma’,
  14. (2002). Plurality Rule, Proportional Representation, doi
  15. (1996). Term Limits and Legislative Representation, Cambridge: doi
  16. (2007). The Rejected, the Dejected and the Ejected: Explaining Government Rebels in the 2001–2005 doi
  17. (2000). Voters and Their Representatives: Electoral Institutions and Delegation in Parliamentary Democracies’, doi
  18. (1993). Where’s the Party?’, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.