Measuring intra-party democracy on a global scale

This research note presents two measures of intra-party democracy (IPD) used on a global scale. We distinguish between assembly-based and plebiscitary IPD which represent two distinct logics of intra-party decision-making. The instrument was developed in the context of the first round of the Political Party Database Project (PPDB) covering 146 parties in 25 countries. It is now applied for the first time to parties in countries on all continents. We cover 274 parties from the second round of the PPDB in 51 countries, which provides us with a unique opportunity to assess the applicability and validity of this measure and compare it over time. Our results show that the expected stability of IPD values go together with plausible change over time. This opens up the potential to trace changes of IPD in detail and to investigate possible reasons for these changes. Furthermore, the new data are ideally suited to be applied in different institutional and cultural contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Party Politics
Published
2025-03-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13540688251323756
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
34.09

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring intra-party democracy on a global scale

Thomas Poguntke, Simon D. Brause
4 citations
Party Politics
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
34.09
article

Measuring intra-party democracy on a global scale

Thomas Poguntke, Simon D. Brause
article en
4 citations

Abstract

This research note presents two measures of intra-party democracy (IPD) used on a global scale. We distinguish between assembly-based and plebiscitary IPD which represent two distinct logics of intra-party decision-making. The instrument was developed in the context of the first round of the Political Party Database Project (PPDB) covering 146 parties in 25 countries. It is now applied for the first time to parties in countries on all continents. We cover 274 parties from the second round of the PPDB in 51 countries, which provides us with a unique opportunity to assess the applicability and validity of this measure and compare it over time. Our results show that the expected stability of IPD values go together with plausible change over time. This opens up the potential to trace changes of IPD in detail and to investigate possible reasons for these changes. Furthermore, the new data are ideally suited to be applied in different institutional and cultural contexts.

Party PoliticsVol. 32(1)
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Newton Fund, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
34.09
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.