:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:蜜月期選舉時程與衣尾效應:法國半總統制下總統與國會選舉之分析
書刊名:東吳政治學報
作者:郝培芝 引用關係
作者(外文):Hao, Pei-chih
出版日期:2014
卷期:32:2
頁次:頁1-64
主題關鍵詞:半總統制蜜月期選舉分裂投票體制性投票法國第五共和體制Semi-presidentialismCoattail effectRegime votingUnified governmentThe Fifth French Republic
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(6) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:6
  • 共同引用共同引用:70
  • 點閱點閱:34
既有研究對於選舉時程的影響分析,基本觀點認為蜜月期選舉時程有利於新任總統所屬政黨的國會選舉,並有利於大黨,且會降低有效政黨數目,主要關鍵在於總統選舉對國會選舉具有衣尾效應,既有文獻對於衣尾效應如何產生之分析與實際驗證相對較為缺乏。本文主旨在於探討半總統制下蜜月期選舉時程的政治影響,嘗試分析衣尾效應的選票結構,以檢驗總統選舉與國會選舉之間的關係。本文將蜜月期選舉時程視為主要制度變因,認為蜜月期選舉時程會影響選民的投票行為,進而影響政黨結構,選民投票結構會導致政黨得票結構的兩大黨化,進而型塑一致性政府。並以法國為主要個案,區分法國四種選民(大黨選民,中間游離選民,體制性投票選民以及小黨選民)的投票結構,個別檢驗分析總統選舉如何影響國會選舉的關鍵因素,以及對總體選舉結果的影響,以建構衣尾效應產生的內在結構與政治影響。本文發現法國蜜月期衣尾效應主要來自於幾種選票結構的共同組合結果:(1)兩大政黨選民:忠誠度較高,在總統選舉後會因政黨認同因素繼續支持原先政黨的國會選舉,且投票率高,進而導致有利於兩大黨的選舉結果;(2)中間及游離選民:總統選舉後舉行國會選舉,會大幅降低國會投票率,國會選舉時選民棄權比例相當高,特別是中間選民及游離選民會參與總統選舉但在國會選舉時棄權不投票,且在國會選舉時個人認同因素增加,國會選舉往兩大黨候選人集中;(3)體制性投票選民:法國存有偏好一致性政府或偏好分立政府的選民,這些選民會依據其體制偏好持續地進行投票,並依據總統結果而進行策略性投票,法國體制性選民亦為中間選民但傾向支持一致性政府;(4)蜜月期選舉時程不利第三黨:第三黨總統的衣尾效應非常低,總統第一輪得票率與國會得票率落差極大,且國會當選席次大幅下滑。蜜月期選舉制度對法國政黨體制的影響主要呈現於政黨兩大黨化與集中化,政黨得票率與當選席次落差大,特別是兩大政黨當選席次往往高於當選率,特別是有利於總統獲勝之國會政黨。相對而言,第三政黨則呈現低度代表,當選席次往往低於當選率,應驗蜜月期選舉時程不利第三大黨之推論,此一結論與Shugart和Carey認為蜜月期選舉時程有利第三大黨之論證有所不同。
According to studies on the effects of electoral cycles, the fundamental perspective argues that honeymoon elections benefit the parliamentary election to the party of the newly elected president, while lowering the effective number of parties. The key is the presidential election has a coattail effect on parliamentary elections. However, in the literature, this coattail effect has lacked analysis and empirical validation. This paper aims to probe into the political effect of electoral cycles of honeymoon election in the semi-presidential system, and analyze the ballot structure of the coattail effect, in order to validate the relationship between a presidential election and a parliamentary election. This paper uses France as a case study. The case study reveals that the coattail effect of a honeymoon election in France is mainly from the combination of several ballot structures: (1) Voters of two major parties: These voters are more loyal. After a presidential election, due to party identification, voters tend to continue supporting the parliamentary election of the original party with a high voting rate, thus positively influencing the electoral outcomes of two parties. (2) Median and swing voters: A parliamentary election held after a presidential election will significantly lower the parliamentary voting rate. Median and swing voters will participate in the presidential election, however, they abstain from parliamentary voting in parliamentary election. Individuals' identification factors increase and voting in the parliamentary election is centralized to the candidates of two major parties. (3) Regime voters: Currently, in France, there are two regime voters, voters who prefer a unified government or a divided government. They continue voting according to their preference for the regime type and undertake strategic voting according to presidential outcomes. The result indicates that French regime voters tend to support unified government. (4) Electoral cycles of a honeymoon election do not benefit minor parties: The coattail effect of the president of a minor party is extremely low. The gap between voting rates of the first round of a presidential election and a parliamentary election is significant. Parliamentary seats decrease significantly. The impacts of honeymoon elections on the French political system are mainly presented in the bipartisation and the centralization of political parties. There is a large gap between the percentage of vote obtained and elected seats rate, especially the elected seats rate of the two major political parties are often higher than the other parties. In contrast, the third largest party shows a low degree of representatives of elected seats. The honeymoon election is relatively unfavorable to the third largest party. This conclusion is also different from the argument of Shugart and Carey who think honeymoon elections are favorable to the third largest party.
期刊論文
1.Fiorina, Morris P.(1992)。An Era of Divided Government。Political Science Quaterly,107(3),387-410。  new window
2.Kedar, Orit(2005)。When moderate voters prefer extreme parties: Policy balancing in parliamentary elections。American Political Science Review,99(2),185-199。  new window
3.Mondark, Jeffery J.、McCurley, Carl(1994)。Cognitive Efficiency and the Congressional Vote: The Psychology of Coattail Voting。Political Research Quarterly,47(1),151-175。  new window
4.Sauger, Nicolas(2007)。The French Legislative and Presidential Elections of 2007。West European Politics,30(5),1166-1175。  new window
5.Sigelman, Lee、Wahlbeck, Paul J.、Buell, Emmett H. Jr.(1997)。Vote Choice and the Preference for Divided Government: Lessons of 1992。American Journal of Political Science,41(3),879-894。  new window
6.Blais, André、Loewen, Peter John(2009)。The French Electoral System and its Effects。West European Politics,32(2),345-359。  new window
7.Burden, B. C.(2009)。Candidate-driven Ticket Splitting in the 2000 Japanese Elections。Electoral Studies,28(1),33-40。  new window
8.Campbell, James E.(1986)。Predicting Seat Gains from Presidential Coattails。American Journal of Political Sciences,30(1),165-183。  new window
9.Colliard, Jean-Claude(2007)。Une confirmation de l’evolution presidentialist de l’Executif。Revue politique et parlementaire,1045,7-11。  new window
10.Dolez, B.(2004)。A la recherche de l’abstentionnisme électoral. Actualité d’une vieille question。Revue française de Science politique,54,669-680。  new window
11.Dolez, Bernard、Laurent, Annie(2010)。Strategic Voting in a Semi-presidential System with a Two-ballot Electoral System: The 2007 French Legislative Election。French Politics,8(1),1-20。  new window
12.Dupoirier, E.、Sauger, N.(2010)。Four Rounds in a Row: Interactive Effects among Legislative and Presidential Election Outcomes in France。French Politics,8(1),21-41。  new window
13.Filippov, Mikhail(1999)。Party Fragmentation and Presidential Elections in Post-Communist Democracies。Constitutional Political Economy,10,3-26。  new window
14.Hogan, Robert E.(2005)。Gubernatorial Coattail Effects in State Legislative Elections。American Journal of Political Sciences,58(4),587-597。  new window
15.Li, Richard P. Y.(1976)。A Dynamic Comparative Analysis of Presidential and House Elections。American Journal of Political Sciences,20(4),671-691。  new window
16.Marsh, M.(2007)。Candidates or Parties? Objective of Electoral Choice in Ireland。Party Politics,13(4),500-527。  new window
17.Mondak, Jeffery J.(1990)。Determinants of Coattail Voting。Politicl Behavior,12(3),265-288。  new window
18.Ponceyri, Robert(2007)。La Cinquieme Republique au risque de l’hyperpresidentialisme。Revue politique et parlementaire,1044,212-225。  new window
19.Vedel, Georges(2001)。Le quinquennat contre les risques de cohabitation。Les Cahiers Français,300,16-18。  new window
20.Mozaffar, Shaeen、Scarrit, James R.、Glalich, Glen(2003)。Electoral Institutions, Ethnopolitical Cleavages and Party Systems in Africa’s Emerging Democracies。American Political Science Review,97(3),379-390。  new window
21.Gschwend, Thomas、Leuffen, Dirk(2005)。Divided we stand - Unified we govern? cohabitation and regime voting in the 2002 French elections。British Journal of Political Science,35(4),691-712。  new window
22.陳宏銘、蔡榮祥(20080600)。選舉時程對政府組成型態的牽引力:半總統制經驗之探討。東吳政治學報,26(2),117-180。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.吳玉山(20110300)。半總統制:全球發展與研究議程。政治科學論叢,47,1-32。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.林繼文(20050924)。憲政設計的選制基礎。「從制度變遷看憲政改革:背景、程序與影響」學術研討會,中央研究院政治學研究所籌備處(舉辦) (會議日期: 2005/09/24)。臺北:中央研究院。  延伸查詢new window
2.李鳳玉(20111125)。半總統制下政黨投入總統大選的誘因。歐美憲政制度與變革研討會,(會議日期: 民國100年11月25日)。臺北:中央研究院歐美研究所。  延伸查詢new window
3.李鳳玉(20130525)。蜜月期選舉時程的效應:總統制與半總統的比較。國會與政府體制學術研討會。臺北:東吳大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.周育仁(20120317)。總統立委合併選舉對我國憲政體制運作之影響。第三屆半總統制與民主學術研討會。臺北:臺北大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Foillard, Philippe(2008)。Droit constitutionnel et institutions politique。Paris:Paradigme。  new window
2.Fiorina, Morris(1996)。Divided Government。New York:Macmillan。  new window
3.Campbell, Angus(1954)。The Voter Decide。Evanston, Illinois:Row, Peterson and Company。  new window
4.Duverger, Maurice(1951)。Les Partis Politiques。Paris:Armand Colin。  new window
5.Grunberg, G.、Haegel, F.(2007)。La France vers le Bipartisme? La presidentialisation du PS et de l’UMP。Paris:Presses de Scirnces Po, Collection Nouveaux Débats。  new window
6.King, Anthony(2002)。Leadership, Personalities and the Outcomes of Democratic Elections。Oxford:Oxford University Press。  new window
7.Mainwaring, Scott P.(1999)。Rethinking Party System in the Third Wave of Democratization。Stanford:Stanford University Press。  new window
8.Ministère de l’intérieur(2002)。Le Panel Electoral Français。Paris:CEVIPOF。  new window
9.Cox, Gary W.(1997)。Making Votes Count。Cambridge。  new window
10.Lipset, Seymour、Rokkan, Stein(1967)。Party Systems and Voter Alignment。New York:Free Press。  new window
11.Shugart, Matthew S.、Carey, John M.(1992)。Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamic。Cambridge:Cambridge University Press。  new window
12.Lijphard, Arend、Aitkin, Don(1994)。Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-seven Democracies, 1945-1990。Oxford University Press。  new window
13.Sartori, Giovanni(1997)。Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry into Structures, Incentives and Outcomes。New York, NY:New York University Press。  new window
14.Downs, Anthony J.(1957)。An Economic Theory of Democracy。New York:Harper and Row。  new window
15.Ware, Alan(1996)。Political Parties and Party Systems。Oxford University Press。  new window
16.Mueller, Dennis C.(1989)。Public Choice II: A Revised Edition of Public Choice。Cambridge University Press。  new window
17.Campbell, Angus、Converse, Philip E.、Miller, Warren E.、Stokes, Donald E.(1960)。The American Voter。The University of Chicago Press。  new window
其他
1.Journal officiel de la République française(2014)。Bulletin Officiel,http://www.journal-officiel.gouv.fr, 2014/07/17。  new window
2.Ministère de l’intérieur(2014)。Résultats des élections présidentielles 2002, 2007, 2012 and Résultats des élections legislatives 2002, 2007, 2012,http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Elections/Les-resultats, 2014/07/17。  new window
3.Parlement européen,Résultats des élections européennes(2014)。Résultats des élections,http://www.resultats-elections2014.eu/fr/election-results-2014.html, 2014/07/17。  new window
4.Sofres(2007)。Sondage Sofres des 17-18 Janvier 2007,http://fr.ask. com/web?qsrc=1&o=23545&l=sem&qo=serpSearchTopBox&q=sondages+sofres+des+17-18+Janvier+2007, 2014/07/17。  new window
圖書論文
1.黃紀、王德育(2009)。2008年立委選舉對總統選舉的影響:鐘擺效應?西瓜效應?。2008年總統選舉:論二次政黨輪替之關鍵選舉。臺北:五南出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.Bowler, S.、Grofman, B.(2000)。Introductions: STV as an embedded institution。Elections in Australia, Ireland and Malta Under the Single Transferable Vote: Reflections on an Embedded Institution。Michigan:University of Michigan Press。  new window
3.陳宏銘、蔡榮祥(2012)。選舉時程對政府組成型態的牽引力:半總統制經驗之探討。權力在哪裡?從多個角度看半總統制。臺北:五南出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.Gschwend, T.、Leuffen, D.(2004)。Stuck between Rock and a Hard Place: Electoral Dilemmas and Turout in the 2002 French Legislative Elections。The French Voter: Before and After the 2002 Election。New York:Palgrave Macmillan。  new window
5.Sauger, Nicolas(2009)。The French Party System: Fifty Years of Change。The Fifth Republic at Fifty。London:Palgrave。  new window
6.Linz, Juan J.(1994)。Democracy, Presidential or Parliamentary: Does It Make a Difference?。The Failure of Presidential Democracy。Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press。  new window
7.林繼文(2006)。政府體制、選舉制度與政黨體系 : 一個配套論的分析。憲政改革:背景、運作與影響。五南。  延伸查詢new window
8.Duverger, Maurice(1986)。Duverger's Law: Forty Years Later。Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences。New York:Agathon Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE