IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/kitwps/151.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analysis of the 2021 Bundestag elections. 1/4. Representativeness of the parties and the Bundestag

Author

Listed:
  • Tanguiane, Andranick S.

Abstract

This is the first out of four papers devoted to the 2021 German federal elections continuing our analysis of the 2009, 2013 and 2017 Bundestag elections by the methods of the mathematical theory of democracy. This one estimates the policy representation ability of the 39 parties that participated in the 2021 elections and the Bundestag. For this purpose, the positions of the parties on 38 topical issues are compared with the results of recent public opinion polls. Then the parties' indices of popularity (the average percentage of the population represented) and universality (frequency in representing a majority) are constructed. Assuming that the Bundestag's position on the 38 issues is determined by the Bundestag majority, the Bundestag's indices of popularity and universality are estimated as well. The main conclusion is that the representativeness of the Bundestag parties and the Bundestag (before coalition-formation) has significantly increased since 2017. In particular, the election winner, the SPD, is now ranked 4 instead of 22 in 2017, having the mean index (popularity + universality) / 2 = 65% instead of 52 % in 2017. The Bundestag's mean index is now equal to 61% instead of former 40%. As for the ruling 'Traffic light coalition', SPD+GRUNE+FDP, its compatibility is as low as 45% and the representativeness is not the best either.

Suggested Citation

  • Tanguiane, Andranick S., 2022. "Analysis of the 2021 Bundestag elections. 1/4. Representativeness of the parties and the Bundestag," Working Paper Series in Economics 151, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:kitwps:151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/249328/1/1786855550.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andranik Tangian, 2020. "Analytical Theory of Democracy," Studies in Choice and Welfare, Springer, number 978-3-030-39691-6, June.
    2. Frederick Mosteller & Cleo Youtz & Douglas Zahn, 1967. "The Distribution of Sums of Rounded Percentages," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 4(2), pages 850-858, June.
    3. Miller, Warren E. & Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Constituency Influence in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 45-56, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    2. Tanguiane, Andranick S., 2022. "Analysis of the 2021 Bundestag elections. 3/4. Tackling the Bundestag growth," Working Paper Series in Economics 153, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    3. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    4. Xiao Tang & Weiwei Chen & Tian Wu, 2018. "Do Authoritarian Governments Respond to Public Opinion on the Environment? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, February.
    5. Mattozzi, Andrea & Snowberg, Erik, 2018. "The right type of legislator: A theory of taxation and representation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 54-65.
    6. Scott Crichlow, 2002. "Legislators' Personality Traits and Congressional Support for Free Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(5), pages 693-711, October.
    7. Garrick L. Percival, 2010. "Ideology, Diversity, and Imprisonment: Considering the Influence of Local Politics on Racial and Ethnic Minority Incarceration Rates," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1063-1082, December.
    8. Tanguiane, Andranick S., 2022. "Analysis of the 2021 Bundestag elections. 4/4. The third vote application," Working Paper Series in Economics 154, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    9. Kim Quaile Hill & Tetsuya Matsubayashi, 2008. "Church Engagement, Religious Values, and Mass‐Elite Policy Agenda Agreement in Local Communities," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 570-584, July.
    10. Sean Gailmard & Jeffery A. Jenkins, 2009. "Agency Problems, the 17th Amendment, and Representation in the Senate," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 324-342, April.
    11. Andranik Tangian, 2021. "MCDM Application of the Third Vote," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 775-787, August.
    12. Hanna Ågren & Matz Dahlberg & Eva Mörk, 2007. "Do politicians’ preferences correspond to those of the voters? An investigation of political representation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 137-162, January.
    13. David H. Bearce & Thomas R. Cook, 2018. "The first image reversed: IGO signals and mass political attitudes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 595-619, December.
    14. repec:gig:joupla:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:73-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Matthew Eshbaugh‐Soha, 2010. "How Policy Conditions the Impact of Presidential Speeches on Legislative Success," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(2), pages 415-435, June.
    16. Mann, Stefan, 2005. "Deliberation, Responsivity and Power in German and Swiss Agricultural Policy," Agrarwirtschaft und Agrarsoziologie\ Economie et Sociologie Rurales, Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 2005(1), pages 1-18.
    17. Robert E. Hogan, 2008. "Policy Responsiveness and Incumbent Reelection in State Legislatures," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 858-873, October.
    18. Andranik Tangian, 2017. "Policy Representation of a Parliament: The Case of the German Bundestag 2013 Elections," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 151-179, January.
    19. Jacob M. Grumbach & Jamila Michener, 2022. "American Federalism, Political Inequality, and Democratic Erosion," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 143-155, January.
    20. Dennis, Christopher, 1998. "Support for campaign spending limitations in the U. S. senate: The role of party, ideology and electoral security," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 641-649.
    21. Bellemare, Marc F. & Carnes, Nicholas, 2015. "Why do members of congress support agricultural protection?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-34.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy representation; representative democracy; direct democracy; elections; coalitions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:kitwps:151. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwkitde.html .

    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.