Interest Aggregation

Interest aggregation
A. The activity in which the political demands of individuals are combined into policy programs
Competing demands have to be balanced (crop irrigation, drinking water supply, food provision, lower taxes) Backed by resources issues with resources become more significant (money or votes)

B. Individual or group
two methods across which Interest AGGREGATION occur (single individuals = he/she may be important in the process otherwise process is by groups some perhaps specially created for a particular policy issue) Political Party the dominant group form standing organizations that generally exist to compete for elections so that they can implement their policy agendas

Personal interest aggregation

Patron-client networks

a process of personal connections benefits in exchange for loyalty

When interest aggregation occurs primarily by Patron-client then it is static unlikely to change, makes crisis response difficult This tends to exist mostly in underdeveloped countries
Ex: Tungurahua Volcano, Ecuador

Static and difficult to mobilize for change

Institutional interest aggregation

Groups are most able to make transition from articulation of demand to aggregation of demands bc/ they have resources Associational groups (trade unions, chamber of commerce) sometimes have enough influence to do more than just represent a particular interest Institutional groups bureaucratic & military factions government bureaucracies negotiate with groups sometimes are captured by special interests bureaucracies like to expand and this leads them to create client networks Military organization control physical force have power as aggregators political coups

Competitive Party Systems

seek to build electoral support depends on ability of party to freely form and to compete for citizen support thus even dominant parties (Labour now in Great Britain) are still competitive parties (Democrats in Congress from WWII until Bill Clinton) Party structure and electoral laws, important in this effort

Parties and elections

What parties do: Develop political positions Attempt to win a majority target the center (in systems w/ only 2 parties) or win a cohesive electoral base (in multiple party systems)

Plural versus proportional representation

Electoral system how vote choice is translated into outcomes In US, Britain, Jamaica, India, Canada legislative election rules divide country into election districts; in each district first past the post or candidate with the most votes is the rule. Simple single member district PLURALITY ELECTION RULE

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
-country divided into few large districts (or single national district) and competing parties offer lists of candidates. -Number of legislative seats a party wins depends on the percentage of the vote the party receives -For example: party winning 5% of the vote could win 5% of the seats in the national legislature (this would be an example of an electoral rule for a national district and would have been developed ahead of the election)

Two Major Types of Party Systems

Competitive and Authoritarian Competitive parties aggregate interests through elections, participation in government and implementation of policy Authoritarian attempt to develop policy proposals and mobilize support within the ranks of the party in interaction with specific groups; can be very responsive to social demands (ex: CCP)

Competitive Party Systems

Majoritarian two party dominant system (either because the parties dominate or because election laws help them win) Multiparty-narrowly based parties that negotiate and create alliances to achieve goals (exist because a variety of circumstances make party domination difficult) Consensual or conflictual are the parties relatively close on policies? Do they generally trust one another and the political system? OR are the parties far apart

Consociational Party Systems

Mixed both conflictual and consensual elements Society has cleavage points that crosscut and become cumulative Leadership works to bridge the gap (relatively intense gaps) between antagonistic voters (utilizing crosscutting differences).

Military Interest Aggregation

Military rule seems illegitimate Able to aggregate interests due to monopoly of coercive resources Difficulty with bureaucratic professionalization issues and with military professionalization issues Responsive to demands to leave or are overthown (typically transient rulers)

Trends in Aggregation
Internationally interest aggregation appears to be moving toward the democratic model Explanation for this trend?
Decline of ideology Change in public acceptance of unpopular regimes International efforts to support democratization Illegitimate nature of autocratic regimes