IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v54y2024i4p656-682..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Navigating Conflicting Incentives: Discursive Strategies of Political Parties in Germany’s Cooperative Federalism

Author

Listed:
  • Antonios Souris
  • Sabine Kropp
  • Christoph Nguyen

Abstract

Federal systems create complex institutional settings that foster and encourage cooperation while also enabling self-serving and even opportunistic political behavior. Focusing on parliamentary discourses, we argue that political parties can navigate these conflicting incentives skillfully, employing a set of five distinct discursive strategies that integrate both the need for cooperation and the possibility of self-interest. Leveraging a qualitative content analysis of 212 German parliamentary debates and 4,524 manually coded statements, we demonstrate that the use of these discursive strategies is shaped by parties’ level of integration into federal institutions. The data reveal that parties which are more strongly involved in intergovernmental bodies uphold a more cooperative discourse, while refraining from confrontational strategies toward federal institutions and actors. We also find that the linkage between the vertically integrated party system, which incentivizes co-partisans to stick together across levels and constituent units, and multiparty coalition governments, counteracts federal blame games.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonios Souris & Sabine Kropp & Christoph Nguyen, 2024. "Navigating Conflicting Incentives: Discursive Strategies of Political Parties in Germany’s Cooperative Federalism," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 54(4), pages 656-682.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:54:y:2024:i:4:p:656-682.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjae024
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:publus:v:54:y:2024:i:4:p:656-682.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    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.