Party leadership selection and party leaders’ powers: Empowered grassroots or leader-centric parties?

Abstract This paper explores whether parties’ leadership selection procedures carry broader implications for intraparty power. Prior scholarship has documented an ongoing shift in the ways that parties select their leaders, with a growing tendency to include grassroots supporters in such decisions, sometimes described as ‘plebiscitary intraparty democracy’. Some have portrayed moves towards more inclusive leadership selection as part of a more general shift towards the empowerment of individual party members and supporters; others have dismissed it as mere window dressing, and part of a trend towards more leader-centric parties. This study investigates these relationships, asking whether the extent of grassroots involvement in party leadership selection procedures in contemporary democracies relates in any way to the broader distribution of formal powers within parties. Contrary to some sceptics, we find no support for the argument that parties with bottom-up forms of leadership selection generally grant greater formal powers to leaders. Rather, the opposite, in fact: moreover, parties that use inclusive leadership selection procedures also tend to use plebiscitary methods across a wider array of intraparty decision-making procedures. Thus, the highly publicized spread of inclusive leadership contests can be seen as a symptom of wider shifts in the norms and practices of intraparty governance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Parliamentary Affairs
Published
2025-05-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsaf020
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Party leadership selection and party leaders’ powers: Empowered grassroots or leader-centric parties?

Thomas Poguntke, Susan E. Scarrow, Paul Webb
1 citations
Parliamentary Affairs
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
8.52
article

Party leadership selection and party leaders’ powers: Empowered grassroots or leader-centric parties?

Thomas Poguntke, Susan E. Scarrow, Paul Webb
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper explores whether parties’ leadership selection procedures carry broader implications for intraparty power. Prior scholarship has documented an ongoing shift in the ways that parties select their leaders, with a growing tendency to include grassroots supporters in such decisions, sometimes described as ‘plebiscitary intraparty democracy’. Some have portrayed moves towards more inclusive leadership selection as part of a more general shift towards the empowerment of individual party members and supporters; others have dismissed it as mere window dressing, and part of a trend towards more leader-centric parties. This study investigates these relationships, asking whether the extent of grassroots involvement in party leadership selection procedures in contemporary democracies relates in any way to the broader distribution of formal powers within parties. Contrary to some sceptics, we find no support for the argument that parties with bottom-up forms of leadership selection generally grant greater formal powers to leaders. Rather, the opposite, in fact: moreover, parties that use inclusive leadership selection procedures also tend to use plebiscitary methods across a wider array of intraparty decision-making procedures. Thus, the highly publicized spread of inclusive leadership contests can be seen as a symptom of wider shifts in the norms and practices of intraparty governance.

Parliamentary Affairs
University of Sussex (GB), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE), University of Houston (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
8.52
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.