IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v57y1963i04p902-917_24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Analysis of Bloc Voting in the General Assembly: A Critique and a Proposal

Author

Listed:
  • Lijphart, Arend

Abstract

The existence of blocs in the General Assembly of the United Nations and the importance of their activities have been widely recognized ever since its establishment. Special attention to the phenomenon of bloc politics dates roughly from the ascendancy of the General Assembly over the Security Council after 1950, and the consequent importance of votes in the General Assembly. Because the various blocs and groups of states play a conspicuous role in the decisions of the Assembly, the operation of these blocs is well worth study.Among the many aspects of bloc politics in the General Assembly needing careful analysis, two of the most basic questions are the identification of blocs and the measurement of their cohesiveness or bloc-like behavior. The purpose of this essay is to review and evaluate the manner in which students of the United Nations have treated these two fundamental questions, and to suggest an alternative method not handicapped by the weaknesses of the techniques so far employed. The advantages of the proposed alternative method will also be demonstrated by applying it to a specific instance of bloc voting: the alignments on the colonial issues which arose in the 1956, 1957, and 1958 sessions of the General Assembly.

Suggested Citation

  • Lijphart, Arend, 1963. "The Analysis of Bloc Voting in the General Assembly: A Critique and a Proposal," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 902-917, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:57:y:1963:i:04:p:902-917_24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400241075/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tekleselassie, Tsegay Gebrekidan, 2016. "Three essays on the impact of institutions and policies on socio-economic outcomes," Economics PhD Theses 1316, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Kul B. Rai, 1982. "UN Voting Data," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(1), pages 188-192, March.
    3. Thomas R. Hensley, 1978. "Bloc Voting on the International Court of Justice," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 39-59, March.
    4. Michael W. Manulak, 2024. "The sources of influence in multilateral diplomacy: Replaceability and intergovernmental networks in international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 579-610, September.
    5. Plouffe, Michael, 2024. "The Public and the Assembly: Foreign Public Opinion and Voting in the UNGA," OSF Preprints pu2yv, Center for Open Science.
    6. Amanov, Shatlyk, 2021. "An empirical analysis of the EAEU’s voting behavior in the UN General Assembly, 2000–2020," OSF Preprints 6xfyu, Center for Open Science.
    7. Ali Murat Kurşun & Emel Parlar Dal, 2017. "An Analysis of Turkey's and BRICS’ Voting Cohesion in the UN General Assembly during 2002–2014," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(2), pages 191-201, May.
    8. Ulf Jakobsson, 2009. "An International Actor Under Pressure: The Impact of the War on Terror and the Fifth Enlargement on EU Voting Cohesion at the UN General Assembly 2000–05," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 531-554, June.
    9. Drieskens, Edith & Van Genderen, Ruben & Reykers, Yf, 2014. "From indications to indicators: Measuring regional leadership in the UN context," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 151-171.
    10. Yan, Jiaqiang & Zhou, Yonghong, 2021. "Economic return to political support: Evidence from voting on the representation of China in the United Nations," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:47:y:2009:i::p:531-554 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Simon Hug & Richard Lukács, 2014. "Preferences or blocs? Voting in the United Nations Human Rights Council," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 83-106, March.
    13. Adrienne Armstrong, 1981. "The Political Consequences of Economic Dependence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 25(3), pages 401-428, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:57:y:1963:i:04:p:902-917_24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.