Post materialist parties in Europe

Because the focus of the traditional political parties was still primarily on materialistic issues, the value change of the public translated into the emergence of new, single-issue, post-materialistic parties. Green Parties are an example of these new parties.

The change in values is a good explanation for the rise of Green Parties. The only problem is that it does not explain why these parties in some countries are not as successful as in others, and it certainly does not explain why in some they even fail. Therefore the issue of value change is probably not the best option.

Party strategy

The explanation of party strategy is based on the idea that parties conform their programme and organisational structure to the demands of a certain public in order to gain more votes.

According to Müller-Rommel, we can distinguish between two different types in which the green parties may be classified: pure green reformist parties, and alternative green radical parties. The reformist parties ‘do not reject free economic enterprise’ and ‘prefer to select genuine ecology issues that do not bring them deeply into conflict with the established parties’. Amongst these are the greens in Belgium, Great Britain, Ireland, Switzerland, Ireland, France, Finland and Sweden. The problem with this strategy is that, although parties do raise awareness for ecological problems, these might be incorporated by the established parties, because the ideological distance between them and the greens is not that large.

For example, Finland and Sweden are known for their environmental consciousness, and their traditional political parties have integrated these issues into their programme. Therefore, the programme of a reformist green party is not that different from theirs, and the public is more likely to vote for a more established party.

The radical greens on the other hand, ‘seek fundamental changes in social in political institutions’ Because they distance themselves from the established parties, they are more appealing to people who want to see change, and therefore gain more support. Among these are the greens in the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Austria. According to Müller-Rommel, Germany’s green party also belongs to this category, but in the past years the German Green Party has actually moved towards the centre, hoping to gain more grass roots support.  

For some Green Parties, green issues like nuclear power have been highly benefitial. The battle against nuclear power plants has been a very important issue amongst the Green Parties, and the fact that France and Germany both have a large number of these can explain the succes of the Greens in these countries.

Apart from this, the organisational structure of the Greens diverges from that of the established parties. Poguntke states that green parties try to limit the decisionmaking process to the lowest level of organization. This so-called grass roots democracy has played a very important role in the succes of green parties, and ‘has been the hallmark of Green parties ever since they slowly (and sometimes painfully) grew out of the new social movements and

established themselves as political parties.’ However, participation in national government made it very hard to maintain these principles, and most parties had to abandon them to some extent. Gradually, the greens had to alter their programmes and organisation in order to keep up with the pace of the other parties and attract a broader vote base.

        Party strategy and organisation have been important factors in the rise (and fall?) of the greens in Europe. They also provide some answers as to why some green parties have been more successful than others. Where green issues are on the political agenda, green parties are more likely to succeed, and vice versa. Grass roots democracy has attributed to the rise of the greens, and the distinction between radical and pure green parties also justifies the differences in success and failure. For these reasons, party strategy appears to be a fairly plausible explanation. However, because it is partially based on assumptions, it may not be the most concing out of the three explored in this essay. Therefore, there is one more theory to consider: institutions.

Institutional design

Variations in insitutional design, such as electoral systems, federalism and party finance can greatly influence the fortune of political parties. First of all, electoral systems can have great effect on the formation of new parties. Maurice Duverger, a French sociologist, discovered in the 1950s that first-past-the-post electoral systems have a tendency to create two-party systems. This tendency is now called Duverger’s Law. In countries with a proportional representation-vote, these electoral rules encourage a multi-party system. Duverger himself did not regard his principle as absolute: instead he suggested that FPTP would act to delay the emergence of a new political force, and would accelerate the elimination of a weakening force, PR would have the opposite effect. 

The failure of the Green Party in the United Kingdom is a good example of this principle. Although the party system has changed in recent years, it is very hard for new parties, or even existing parties to become part of government. The Conservatives and Labour dominate the British elections, and the Greens are marginalised and excluded from power. This is directly and indirectly caused by the FPTP-electoral system. Directly, as mentioned before, but also indirectly, because of the cognitive effect of this system. Voters are pressured to vote for the candidate they think are most likely to win, instead of the candidate they actually prefer, because a vote for any other candidate (like a candidate from a green party) will be likely to be wasted and have no impact on the final result.

Duverger’s Law is a good explanation for the failure of the Green party in Britain. However, it does not really apply to the rest of Europe. Firstly because France is (apart from Britain) the only party without the PR-system. The Greens in France are quite successful, which challenges the theory. Secondly, failure of the greens also occurs in countries which do use the PR-system, such as Spain. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the FPTP-system per definition causes failure, and the PR-system guarantees success.

Federalism is another factor that affects the fate of green parties in Europe. A federal organisation of a state enables new parties to start their political journey at local level, which makes it relatively easier and cheaper to organise than on federal level. Therefore, new smaller parties, like the greens, have ‘the oppurtunity to first articulate their demands at the level of the component bodies, state, land, or region.’ In other words, the political system is more accessible and makes it more likely for the greens to succeed.

In Germany, for example, the green party (Die Grünen) made it into provincial government in 1987, over ten years before they achieved the same on federal level. In Austria, Switzerland and Belgium, all countries with a federal organisation, the greens have greatly succeeded.   

In unitary states, such as Greece, Denmark and Ireland, green parties seem to have a harder time to find their way into government.

The final factor to be taken into account whilst trying to explain the succes or failure of green parties, is party financing. Some countries, such as Austria, Germany, France and Belgium have a high degree of public party financing. This helps parties to cover costs like election campaigns. Especially for new parties, this can improve their chances of succeeding, as it can help them to build up internal institutions. The degree of public party finanancing can explain why in the countries mentioned before, the greens were (and still are) a success, whereas the greens failed in countries with low public party financing, such as Denmark, The United Kingdom and Ireland. Of course, there are some exceptions, but generally speaking, the combination of electoral system, state organisation and party financing, in other words, institutional design, seems to be the most convincing explanation.

Conclusion

After exploring the three explanations mentioned in the introduction, namely value change, party strategy and institutions, it can be stated that they have all, to some extent, influenced the succes or failure of green parties.

        Value change can account for the emergence of green parties in Europe. After the economic growth in the 1950s and 1960s, people were less concerned with materialistis issues, and became more aware of environmental issues. The established parties were still mainly focused on materialistic affairs, whereas the newly founded green parties met the demands of the voters whose values had shifted towards postmaterialism. The trouble with this theory is that it explains the rise of green parties in general, but is not country-specific. Therefore value change is not the most plausible explanation.

        The second approach, which considers party strategy and organisational structure as important factors in the development of green parties in Europe, does explain the difference in their level of achievement. Radical greens are very likely to gain votes, whereas pure greens are not, because their attitude is too similar to that of the established parties. Apart from that, the organisational structure of the greens, the grass roots democracy, has helped them to gain support, although they have had to gradually move away from this approach. Green issues that are country-specific, such as the nuclear power plants in France and Germany, provide the greens with a better chance of succeeding in these countries, because green issues are high on the political agenda. One can assume that in countries where the greens are less successful, issues like this are not that high on the political agenda. Party strategy seems a rather reasonable explanation for the succes/failure of the greens, but it is still not completely convincing, as this theory is partially based on assumptions.

        The final explanation that was considered in this essay was institutional design. Electoral systems can greatly influence the formation and succes of new parties, such as the greens. Duverger’s Law states that countries with a FPTP-electoral system, are likely to have a two-party system. Therefore it is very difficult for new or smaller parties to make it into government. Countries with a PR-system are supposed to have the opposite effect.

This Law explains why the greens have been unsuccessful in the United Kingdom. However, the French, who live in the only other country in Europe without the PR-system, have a rather successful green party and failure of the greens also takes place in countries with the PR-system. We therefore cannot use electoral systems as a standard.

        Another feature of institutional design is federalism, or rather, if a state is federal or unitary. Green parties in unitary states seem to find it difficult to succeed, whereas federalism can improve the chances of success for new parties, because they can start out at local level, which is easier and cheaper than federal level. This makes the political system more accessible, as we can see in Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and Austria.

        The final aspect to be considered is party financing. Public party financing is very important for parties to cover their expenditures, such as the costs of election camapaigns. Countries such as Germany, Belgium and France, which have a high degree of public party financing, have successful green parties. In Denmark, The United Kingdom and Ireland, the greens failed, which can be partly due to the fact that in these countries public party finanancing is not a priority.

Out of the three explanations considered in this essay, the institutional approach seems to be the most convincing. None of the theories are completely foolproof, but  to take into account the combination of electoral system, party financing and state organisation seems to be the most plausible strategy to explain the succes (or failure) of the greens in Europe.

---

Bibliography

1. Berman, Sheri, ‘The Life of the Party’ Comparative Politics, Vol. 30, No. 1. (Oct., 1997), pp. 101-122.

2. Dalton, Russell J., Citizen Politics in Western Democracies - Public Opinion

and Political Parties in the United States, Great Britain, West Germany,

and France. Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House 1988.

3. Duverger, Maurice, Party Politics and Pressure Groups: A Comparative Introduction.
   New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1972.

4. Duverger, Maurice, ‘The two-party system and the multiparty system’ In: Peter Mair (ed) The West European Party System. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1990. pp. 285-295

5. Inglehart, Ronald, The Silent Revolution - Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press 1977.

6. Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand, ‘Explaining the Electoral Success of Green Parties: A Cross-National Analysis.’ Environmental Politics, Vol. 7, No. 4 (1998). pp. 145-154.

7. Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand, ‘Greens in Western Europe’, International Political Science Review, Vol. 6, No. 4 (Oct. 1985). pp. 483-499.

8. Poguntke, Thomas, Green Parties in National Governments: From Protest to Acquiescence

Date accessed: 16/11/2007

9. Website European Green Party

http://www.europeangreens.org/cms/default/rubrik/9/9034.htm

Date accessed: 15/11/2007

---