![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
The Ukrainian parliament consistently attracts scholarly attention as one of the developing parliaments in the Former Soviet Region that is succeeding with institutionalisation. This study assesses committee roles in the legislative process and discusses factors that are associated with strong or weak roles for committees. We bring evidence from the Ukrainian parliament to test traditionally hypothesised institutional factors in committee studies, such as roles of government and parties. To account for the difference between developed and developing legislatures, we add an attitudinal component to the analysis. The results confirm that traditionally hypothesised factors are important in assessing committee roles. However, important intervening factors such as strength and size of factions and the range of ideologies have to be taken into account to explain institutional dynamics in a developing legislature. In addition, an analysis of attitudes provides a valuable insight into the development of committee roles in a developing legislature.
Notes
1. C. R. Wise and T. L. Brown, ‘Laying the Foundation for Institutionalisation of Democratic Parliaments in the Newly Independent States: The Case of Ukraine’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 2/3 (1996), pp.216–44; V. Pigenko, C. R. Wise and T. L. Brown, ‘Elite Attitudes and Democratic Stability: Analyzing Legislators' Attitudes towards the Separation of Powers in Ukraine’, Europe-Asia Studies, 54/1 (2002), pp.87–107; T. Kuzio, ‘The 2002 Parliamentary Elections in Ukraine: Democratization or Authoritarianism?’ Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 19/2 (2003), pp.24–54; E. S. Herron, ‘Political Actors, Preferences and Election Rule Re-design in Russia and Ukraine’, Democratization, 11/2 (2004), pp.41–59; O. Protsyk, ‘Troubled Semi-Presidentialism: Stability of the Constitutional System and Cabinet in Ukraine’, Europe-Asia Studies, 55/7 (2003), pp.1077–95; T. L. Brown and C. R. Wise, ‘Constitutional Courts and Legislative-Executive Relations: The Case of Ukraine’, Political Science Quarterly, 119/1 (2004), pp.143–69; F. Thames, ‘Searching for Party Effects in Post-Communist Ukraine’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 38/1 (2005), pp.20–108; M. A. Molchanov, ‘State-Building in Ukraine: The Ukrainian Parliament, 1990–2003’, Slavic Review, 64/4 (2005), pp.897–98; R. K. Christensen, E. R. Rakhimkulov and C. R. Wise, ‘The Ukrainian Orange Revolution Brought More Than a New President: What Kind of Democracy Will the Institutional Changes Bring?’ Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 38/2 (2005), pp.207–30.
2. J. Ostrow, Comparing Post-Soviet Legislatures: A Theory of Institutional Design and Political Conflict (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 2000); M. Hospel, T. F. Remington and S. S. Smith, ‘Electoral Institutions and Party Cohesion in the Russian Duma’, The Journal of Politics, 60/2 (1998), pp.417–39; T. Remington, Russian Parliament: The Institutional Evolution in a Transitional Regime 1989–1999 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001).
3. D. M. Olson and M. L. Mezey (eds.), Legislatures in the Policy Process: The Dilemmas of Economic Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).
4. G. Loewenberg, P. Squire and D. R. Kiewit (eds.), Legislatures: Comparative Perspectives on Representative Assemblies (Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, 1991), p.vii.
5. J. D. Lees and M. Shaw (eds.), Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1979); M. L. Mezey, Comparative Legislatures (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1979); L. D. Longley and A. Ágh (eds.), Working Papers on Comparative Legislative Studies. II: The Changing Roles of Parliamentary Committees (Appleton, WI: Research Committee of Legislative Specialists, International Political Science Association, Lawrence University, 1997); L. D. Longley and R. Davidson (eds.), The New Role of Parliamentary Committees (London: Frank Cass, 1998); L. D. Longley and D. Zajc (eds.), Working Papers on Comparative Legislative Studies. III: the New Democratic Parliaments, The First Years (Appleton, WI: Research Committee of Legislative Specialists, International Political Science Association, Lawrence University, 1998); D. Olson and W. Crowther (eds.), Committees in Post-Communist Democratic Parliaments: Comparative Institutionalization (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 2002).
6. D. Arter, ‘On Assessing Strength and Weakness in Parliamentary Committee Systems: Some Preliminary Observations on the New Scottish Parliament’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 8/2 (2002), pp.93–117.
7. T. Gilligan and K. Krehbiel, ‘Asymmetric Information and Legislative Rules with a Heterogeneous Committee’, American Journal of Political Science, 33/2 (1989), pp.459–90; K. Krehbiel, Information and Legislative Organization (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1991).
8. Longley and Ágh, Working Papers on Comparative Legislative Studies. II: The Changing Roles of Parliamentary Committees, p. 5; R. Y. Hazan, Reforming Parliamentary Committees: Israel in Comparative Perspective (Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press, 2001), pp.77–8.
9. J. Ostrow, Comparing Post-Soviet Legislatures: A Theory of Institutional Design and Political Conflict, p.7.
10. D. M. Olson, ‘The Sundered State: Federalism and Parliament in Czechoslovakia’, in T. Remington (ed.), Parliaments in Transition: The New Legislative Politics in the Former USSR and Eastern Europe (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994), pp.104–5; J. Reschova and J. Syllove, ‘The Legislature of the Czech Republic’, in D. M. Olson and P. Norton (eds.), The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe (London: Frank Press, 1996), p.100.
11. A. Ágh, ‘Democratic Parliamentarism in Hungary: The First Parliament (1990–1994) and the Entry of the Second Parliament’, in Olson and Norton (eds.), The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe, pp.20–21.
12. M. D. Simon, ‘Institutional Development of Poland's Post-Communist Sejm: A Comparative Analysis’, in Olson and Norton (eds.), The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe, p.70.
13. P. Kask, ‘Institutional Development of the Parliament of Estonia’, in Olson and Norton (eds.), The New Parliaments of Central and Eastern Europe, p.195.
14. J. Ostrow, Comparing Post-Soviet Legislatures: A Theory of Institutional Design and Political Conflict, p.9.
15. Ostrow, Comparing Post-Soviet Legislatures: A theory of institutional Design and Political Conflict, p.9.
16. M. Shaw, ‘Conclusions’, in J. D. Lees and M. Shaw (eds.), Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1979), p.371.
17. D. Olson and M. Mezey (eds.), Legislatures in the Policy Process: The Dilemmas of Economic Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p.208.
18. K. Matsuzato, ‘Semipresidentialism in Ukraine: Institutionalist Centrism in Rampant Clan Politics’, Demokratizatsiya, 13/1 (2005), pp.45–58; D. Horowitz, ‘Comparing Democratic Systems’, Journal of Democracy, 1/2 (1990), pp.73–79; M. S. Shugart and J. M. Carey, Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992); S. Mainwaring, Brazilian Party Underdevelopment in Comparative Perspective, Working Paper #134 (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies, 1990), pp.198–229; A. Stepan and C. Skach, ‘Constitutional Frameworks and Democratic Consolidation’, World Politics, 46/1, (1993), pp.1–21; A. Przeworski and A. Lijphart, ‘Constitutional Choices for New Democracies’, in L. Diamond and M. F. Plattner (eds.), The Global Resurgence of Democracy (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), pp.162–74; P. D'Anieri, ‘Leonid Kuchma and the Personalization of the Ukrainian Presidency’, Problems of Post-Communism, 50/5 (2003), pp.58–65; E. S. Herron, ‘Legislative Behavior in Mixed-member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 27/3 (2002), pp.361–82; O. Protsyk, ‘Ruling with decrees: presidential decree making in Russia and Ukraine’, Europe-Asia Studies, 56/5 (2004), pp.637–60; O. Protsyk, ‘Constitutional Politics and Presidential Power in Kuchma's Ukraine’, Problems of Post-Communism, 52/5 (2005), p.23–31; S. Whitmore, ‘State and Institution Building Under Kuchma’, Problems of Post-Communism, 52/5 (2005), pp.3–11; S. Whitmore, ‘Challenges and Constraints for Post-Soviet Committees: Exploring the Impact of Parties on Committees in Ukraine’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 12/1 (2006), pp.32–53; Hazan, Reforming Parliamentary Committees: Israel in Comparative Perspective.
19. M. S. Shugart and J. M. Carey, Presidents and assemblies: Constitutional design and electoral dynamics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
20. P. D'Anieri, R. Kravchuk and T. Kuzio, Politics and Society in Ukraine (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999), p.101.
21. R. K. Christensen, E. R. Rakhimkulov and C. R. Wise, ‘The Ukrainian Orange Revolution brought more than a new president: What kind of democracy will the institutional changes bring?’ Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 38/2, (2005), p.211.
22. M. Mezey, ‘Legislative Development and Political Parties: The Case of Thailand’, in G. R. Boynton and C. Lim Kim (eds.), Legislative Systems in Developing Countries (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1975), p.6.
23. D. M. Olson, The Legislative Process: A Comparative Approach (New York: Harper and Row, 1980), p.269.
24. Lees and Shaw (eds.), Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis, p.394.
25. M. Shaw, ‘Parliamentary Committees: A Global Perspective’, in L. D. Longley and R. H. Davidson (eds.), The New Roles of Parliamentary Committees (London, Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 1998), p.228; Lees and Shaw (eds.), Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis, p.394.
26. G. W. Cox and M. D. McCubbins, Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1993).
27. Shaw, ‘Conclusions’, in Lees and Shaw (eds.), Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis, p.397.
28. S. Mainwaring, Brazilian Party Underdevelopment in Comparative Perspective, Working Paper #134, pp.198–229.
29. Wise and Brown, ‘Laying the Foundation for Institutionalisation of Democratic Parliaments in the Newly Independent States: The Case of Ukraine’, p.226.
30. K. Heidar and R. Koole, ‘Parliamentary Party Groups Compared’, in K. Heidar and R. Koole (eds.), Parliamentary Party Groups in European Democracies (London and New York: Routledge, 1999), p.249.
31. Whitmore, ‘Challenges and Constraints for Post-Soviet Committees: Exploring the Impact of Parties on Committees in Ukraine’, p.35–6.
32. Olson and Crowther (eds.), Committees in Post-Communist Democratic Parliaments: Comparative Institutionalization, p.12.
33. Olson and Mezey (eds.), Legislatures in the Policy Process: The Dilemmas of Economic Policy, p.7.
34. Hazan, Reforming Parliamentary Committees: Israel in Comparative Perspective, p.91.
35. Wise and Brown, ‘Laying the Foundation for Institutionalisation of Democratic Parliaments in the Newly Independent States: The Case of Ukraine’, p.226.
36. Brown and Wise, ‘Constitutional Courts and Legislative-Executive Relations: The Case of Ukraine’, pp.143–69; Herron, ‘Legislative Behavior in Mixed-member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada’, pp.361–82; Pigenko, Wise and Brown, ‘Elite Attitudes and Democratic Stability: Analyzing Legislators’ Attitudes Towards the Separation of Powers in the Ukraine', pp.87–107; Protsyk, ‘Troubled Semi-Presidentialism: Stability of the Constitutional System and Cabinet in Ukraine’, pp.1077–95.
37. P. D'Anieri, R. Kravchuk and T. Kuzio, Politics and Society in Ukraine (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999), p.170.
38. Herron, ‘Legislative Behavior in Mixed-member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada’, p.365.
39. N. W. Polsby, ‘The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives’, American Political Science Review, 62 (1968), pp.144–68.
40. Pigenko, Wise and Brown, ‘Elite Attitudes and Democratic Stability: Analyzing Legislators' Attitudes towards the Separation of Powers in Ukraine’, pp.87–107.
41. R. Herrik and M. K. Moore, ‘Political Ambition's effect on legislative behavior’, Journal of Politics, 55 (1993), pp.765–76; J. R. Hibbing, ‘The career paths of members of Congress’, in S. Williams and E. L. Lascher, Jr. (eds.), Ambition And Beyond: Career Paths of American Politicians (Berkeley CA: Institute of Governmental Studies Press, University of California, 1993) pp.109–77; J. A. Schelsinger, Ambition and Politics: Political Careers in the University States (Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1966); J. R. Van Der Slik and S. J. Pernacciaro, ‘Office Ambitions and Voting Behavior in the US Senate: A Longitudinal Study’, American Politics Quarterly, 17/3 (1984) pp.198–224; W. L. Francis and L.W. Kenny, ‘Position Shifting in Pursuit of Higher Office’, American Journal of Political Science, 40 (1996), pp.768–86; G. Sussman and B. W. Daynes, ‘The impact of political ideology on congressional support for presidential policy making authority’, Congress and the Presidency, 22/2 (1995), pp.141, 143–241; Pigenko, Wise and Brown, ‘Elite Attitudes and Democratic Stability: Analyzing Legislators' Attitudes Towards the Separation of Powers in Ukraine’, pp.87–107; J. Linz and A. Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996).
42. R. F. Fenno, Congressmen in Committees (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1973); D. Rhode, ‘Parties and Committees in the House: Member Motivations, Issues, and Institutional Arrangements’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 19/3 (1994), pp.91–111; H. Eulau and V. McCluggage, ‘Standing Committees in Legislatures: Three Decades of Research’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 9/2 (1984), pp.195–270; W. T. Bianco, Trust: Representatives and Constituents, (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1994).
43. Hospel, Remington and Smith, ‘Electoral Institutions and Party Cohesion in the Russian Duma’, pp.417–39.
44. D'Anieri, Kravchuk and Kuzio, Politics and Society in Ukraine, p.170.