Spelling suggestions: "subject:"noconfidence"" "subject:"ofconfidence""
1 |
Challenging government: institutional arrangements, policy shocks, and no-confidence motionsWilliams, Laron Kenneth 15 May 2009 (has links)
Our understanding of parliamentary politics suggests that no-confidence motions
have a critical place in government continuation, reorganization and termination. More
specifically, we know that opposition parties use no-confidence motions as a way of
removing the government and potentially inducing early elections. Up until now, we
know little about either the causes or the consequences of no-confidence motions.
In this dissertation, I first develop a formal model of the conditions under which
an opposition party will threaten to propose (and eventually propose) a no-confidence
motion in the government. The model provides a number of intuitive observations about
the behavior of opposition parties and the reactions of governments to challenges. I
develop a competence-based theory where opposition parties signal their perception of
the government's competence with no-confidence motions. In the game, opposition
parties act both in terms of short-term gains as well as long-term electoral gains. This
model provides intuitive answers that help us understand the circumstances under which
the opposition will challenge the government. The model also provides empirical expectations regarding the probability that the motion is successful, in addition to its
long-term electoral consequences.
Next, I test the theoretical propositions regarding the occurrence of noconfidence
motions on a cross-sectional time-series data set of all no-confidence motions
in a sample of parliamentary democracies in the post-World War II era. Even though
successful no-confidence motions are relatively rare, they can have profound
consequences on policy outcomes. The next section illustrates these consequences, as I
find that having a no-confidence motion proposed against them makes governments
more likely to be targeted by other states in international conflicts. In the conclusion I
summarize the key findings, present the broad implications for the study of
parliamentary decision making, and discuss avenues for future research.
|
2 |
Understanding No-Confidence Votes against Academic PresidentsMcKinniss, Sean Andrew 21 August 2008 (has links)
No description available.
|
3 |
Case Studies of Organizational Mindfulness and Shared GovernanceMcKinniss, Sean Andrew 19 May 2015 (has links)
No description available.
|
Page generated in 0.0602 seconds