Opening the box of parties and party systems under autocratization: evidence from Turkey

References

• Ark-Yıldırım, C. 2017. Political parties and grassroots clientelistic strategies in Urban Turkey: One neighborhood at a time. South European Society & Politics 22(4): 1–18. doi:10.1080/13608746.2017.1406431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aytaç, S.E., and A. Çarkoğlu. 2019. Terror attacks, issue salience and party competence: Diagnosing shifting vote preferences in a panel study. Party Politics 27(4): 755–66. doi:10.1177/1354068819890060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baykan, T.S. 2018. The justice and development party in Turkey: Populism, personalism, organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• BBC News. 2020. Deva party-who is in the Ali Babacan’s party’s founding council?. https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-51801127 (accessed April 20, 2020)
   Google Scholar
• Bermeo, N. 2016. On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy 27, no. 1: 5–19. doi:10.1353/jod.2016.0012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bieber, F. 2020. The rise of Authoritarianism in the Western Balkans. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Boogards, M. 2018. De-democratization in Hungary: Diffusely defective democracy. Democratization 25, no. 8: 1481–99. doi:10.1080/13510347.2018.1485015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boucek, F. 2012. Factional politics: How dominant parties implode or Stabilize. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, A. 2008. Ideology or economic pragmatism?: Profiling Turkish voters in 2007. Turkish Studies 9, no. 2: 317–44. doi:10.1080/14683840802012074.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, A. 2012. Economic evaluations vs. ideology: Diagnosing the sources of electoral change in Turkey, 2002–2011. Electoral Studies 31, no. 3: 513–21. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2012.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, A., and S.E. Aytaç. 2015. Who gets targeted for vote buying? Evidence from an augmented list experiment in Turkey. European Political Science Review 7, no. 4: 547–66. doi:10.1017/S1755773914000320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carothers, T. 2018. The surprising instability of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy 29, no. 4: 129–35. doi:10.1353/jod.2018.0068.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casal Bértoa, F. 2016. Political parties or party systems? Assessing the ‘myth’ of institutionalisation and democracy. West European Politics 40, no. 2: 402–29. doi:10.1080/01402382.2016.1216921.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çınar, K. 2016. Local determinants of an emerging electoral hegemony: The case of justice and development party (AKP) in Turkey. Democratization 23, no. 7: 1216–35. doi:10.1080/13510347.2015.1077228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çınar, K. 2019. The decline of democracy in Turkey: A comparative study of hegemonic party rule. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge, M. 2017. Eroding regimes: What, where, and when?. V-Dem Working Paper. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3066677 (accessed April 1, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Duman, Ö., and D. Tsarouhas. 2006. “Civilianization” in Greece versus “Demilitarization” in Turkey”. Armed Forces & Society 32, no. 3: 405–23. doi:10.1177/0095327X05282122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DW.2016. Davutoğlu is leaving the prime ministry. https://www.dw.com/tr/davuto%C4%9Flu-ba%C5%9Fbakanl%C4%B1k-koltu%C4%9Funu-b%C4%B1rak%C4%B1yor/a-19238021 (accessed April 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Enyedi, Z. 2016. Populist polarization and party system institutionalization. Problems of Post-Communism 63, no. 4: 1–11. doi:10.1080/10758216.2015.1113883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, B., and Ş. Gumuscu. 2016. Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly 37, no. 9: 59–73. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, B., and Ş. Gumuscu. 2019. Killing competitive authoritarianism Softly: The 2019 local elections in Turkey. South European Society & Politics 24, no. 3: 317–42. doi:10.1080/13608746.2019.1691318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, B., and Ş. Gumuscu. 2020. Why did Turkish democracy collapse? A political economy account of AKP’s authoritarianism. Party Politics 27, no. 6: 1075–91. doi:10.1177/1354068820923722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ESS. 2008. European Social Survey Round 4 Data. Norway: Data file edition 4.0. Norwegian Social Science Data Services – Data Archive and distributor of ESS data.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, R., M. Waller, and L.L. Nieto, ed. 1995. Factional politics and democratization. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gumuscu, Ş. 2013. The emerging predominant system in Turkey. Government and Opposition 48, no. 2: 223–44. doi:10.1017/gov.2012.13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunther, R., and L. Diamond. 2003. Species of political parties: A new typology. Party Politics 9, no. 2: 167–99. doi:10.1177/13540688030092003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haggard, S., and R. Kaufman. 2021. Backsliding: Democratic regress in the contemporary world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hanley, V., and M.A. Vachudova. 2018. Understanding the illiberal turn: Democratic backsliding in the Czech Republic. East European Politics 34, no. 3: 276–96. doi:10.1080/21599165.2018.1493457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harmel, R., L.G. Svåsand, and H. Mjelde. 2018. Institutionalization (and de-institutionalization) of right-wing protest parties: The progress parties in Denmark and Norway. London: ECPR Press/Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Hicken, A., and E.M. Kuhonta. 2011. Shadows from the past: Party system institutionalization in Asia. Comparative Political Studies 44, no. 5: 572–97. doi:10.1177/0010414010396460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huntington, S.P. 1968. Political order in changing societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kalaycıoğlu, E. 2017. Two elections and a political regime in crisis: Turkish politics at the crossroads. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 18, no. 1: 21–51. doi:10.1080/14683857.2017.1379148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemahlıoğlu, Ö., and R. Bayer. 2020. Favoring co-partisan controlled areas in central government distributive programs: The role of local party organizations. Public Choice 187, no. 3–4: 301–19. doi:10.1007/s11127-019-00774-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KONDA. 2018a. Seçmen kümeleri-AKP [Sets of electorate-AKP]. Konda. https://konda.com.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/KONDA_SecmenKumeleri_AkParti_Secmenleri_Mayis2018.pdf (accessed March 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• KONDA. 2018b. Seçmen kümeleri-CHP [Sets of electorate-CHP]. Konda. https://konda.com.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/KONDA_SecmenKumeleri_CHP_Secmenleri_Mayis2018.pdf (accessed March 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• KONDA. 2018c. Seçmen kümeleri-MHP [Sets of electorate-MHP]. Konda. https://konda.com.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/KONDA_SecmenKumeleri_MHP_Secmenleri_Mayis2018.pdf (accessed March 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• KONDA. 2018d. Seçmen kümeleri-HDP [Sets of electorate-HDP]. Konda. https://konda.com.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2018/05/KONDA_SecmenKumeleri_HDP_Secmenleri_Mayis2018.pdf (accessed March 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Kuenzi, M., and G. Lambright. 2001. Party system institutionalization in 30 African countries. Party Politics 7, no. 4: 437–68. doi:10.1177/1354068801007004003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumbaracıbaşı, A.C. 2009. Turkish politics and the rise of the AKP: Dilemmas of institutionalization and leadership strategy. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lancaster, C. 2014. The iron law of Erdoğan: The decay from intra party democracy. Third World Quarterly 35, no. 9: 1672–90. doi:10.1080/01436597.2014.970866.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitsky, S. 1998. Institutionalization and Peronism: The concept, the case and the case for unpacking the concept. Party Politics 4, no. 1: 77–92. doi:10.1177/1354068898004001004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitsky, S., and L. Way. 2020. The new competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy 31, no. 1: 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2020.0004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindberg, S.I. 2007. Institutionalization of party systems? Stability and fluidity among legislative parties in Africa’s democracies. Government and Opposition 42, no. 2: 215–41. doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.2007.00219.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lührmann, Anna, Nils Düpont, Masaaki Higashijima, Yaman Berker Kavasoglu, Kyle L. Marquardt, Michael Bernhard, Holger Döring, Allen Hicken, Melis Laebens, Staffan I. Lindberg, Juraj Medzihorsky, Anja Neundorf, Ora John Reuter, Saskia Ruth– Lovell, Keith R. Weghorst, Nina Wiesehomeier, JosephWright, Nazifa Alizada, Paul Bederke, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Garry Hindle, Nina Ilchenko, Johannes von Römer, Daniel Pemstein, and Brigitte Seim. 2020. “Varieties of Party Identity and Organization (V–Party) Dataset V1”. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project, https://www.v-dem.net/en/data/data/v-party-dataset
   Google Scholar
• Lührmann, A., and I.S. Lindberg. 2019. A third wave of autocratization is here: What is new about it? Democratization 26, no. 7: 1095–113. doi:10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luna, J.P. 2014. Party system institutionalization: Do we need a new concept? Studies in Comparative International Development 49: 403–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mainwaring, S., and T.R. Scully. 1995. Building democratic institutions: Party systems in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Markowski, R. 2001. Party System Institutionalization in New Democracies: Poland – a Trend-setter with no followers. In Party development and democratic change in post-communist Europe: The first decade, ed. P.G. Lewis, 55–77. London:Frank Cass.
   Google Scholar
• McCoy, J., and M. Somer. 2019. Toward a theory of pernicious polarization and how it harms democracies: Comparative evidence and possible remedies. Annals, AAPSS 681, no. 1: 234–71. doi:10.1177/0002716218818782.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meleshevich, A. 2007 Party Systems in Post-Soviet Countries: A Comparative Study of Political Institutionalization in the Baltic States, Russia, and Ukraine (New York, NY: Palgrave)
   Google Scholar
• Müftüler-Baç, M., and E.F. Keyman. 2012. Turkey under the AKP: The era of dominant-party politics. Journal of Democracy 23, no. 1: 85–99. doi:10.1353/jod.2012.0000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ocaklı, F. 2015. Notable networks: Elite recruitment, organizational cohesiveness, and electoral success in Turkey. Politics & Society 43, no. 3: 385–413. doi:10.1177/0032329215584790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öney, B., and T.J. Selck. 2016. Exploring the level of party system institutionalization and party system type in Turkey: A convergence with established or new democracies? Turkish Studies 18, no. 2: 209–28. doi:10.1080/14683849.2016.1266446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Z. 2019. Turkey under the challenge of state capitalism: The political economy of the late AKP era. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 19, no. 2: 201–25. doi:10.1080/14683857.2019.1594856.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özbudun, E. 2013. Party politics and social Cleavages in Turkey. London: Lynne Reinner Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Panebianco, A. 1988. Political parties: Organization and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, M. 1979 The Dynamics of European Party Systems: Changing Patterns of Electoral Volatility European Journal of Political Research 7 1 1–26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randall, V., and L. Svåsand. 2002. Party institutionalization in new democracies. Party Politics 8, no. 1: 5–29. doi:10.1177/1354068802008001001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, R.P., and F. Rosenblatt. 2018. Stability and incorporation: Toward a new concept of party system institutionalization. Party Politics 26, no. 2: 249–60. doi:10.1177/1354068818777895.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sartori, G. 2005 Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis (Colchester: ECPR Press)
   Google Scholar
• Sayarı, S. 2002. The changing party system. In Politics parties, and elections in Turkey, ed. S. Sayarı and Y. Esmer, 9–33. London: Lynne Reinner Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Sayarı, S. 2014. Interdisciplinary approaches to political clientelism and patronage in Turkey. Turkish Studies 15, no. 4: 655–70. doi:10.1080/14683849.2014.985809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schedler, A. 1995. Under-and over institutionalization: Some ideal typical propositions concerning new and old party systems. South Blend: Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Selçuk, O., and D. Hekimci. 2020. The rise of the democracy – Authoritarianism cleavage and opposition coordination in Turkey (2014–2019). Democratization 27, no. 8: 1496–514. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1803841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, M. 2019 Turkey: The Slippery Slope from Reformist to Revolutionary Polarization and Democratic Breakdown The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681 1 42–61 doi:10.1177/0002716218818056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T24. 2019. Bülent Turan: We are nothing without Erdoğan, if we walk together, we have a value, our deputies are all in agreement with that. https://t24.com.tr/haber/bulent-turan-erdogan-olmadan-bir-hiciz-erdogan-la-beraber-yurursek-kiymetimiz-var-vekillerimizin-hepsi-ayni-kanaatte,839527 (accessed April 10, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• T24. 2020. Ahmet Davutoğlu: When I resigned from AKP all organization wanted to resign with me. https://t24.com.tr/haber/ahmet-davutoglu-akp-den-istifa-ettigimde-butun-teskilat-benimle-birlikte-ayrilmak-istedi,872867 (accessed 20 April 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Tavits, M. 2013. Post-communist democracies and party organization. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yardımcı-Geyikci, Ş. 2018. Party system institutionalization and democratic consolidation: The case of Turkey. In Party politics in Turkey: A comparative perspective, ed. S. Sayarı, P.A. Musil, and Ö. Demirkol, 216–37. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Yardımcı-Geyikçi, Ş. 2015. Party institutionalization and democratic consolidation: Turkey and Southern Europe in comparative perspective. Party Politics 21, no. 4: 527–38. doi:10.1177/1354068813487110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yardımcı-Geyikci, Ş., and H. Yavuzyilmaz. 2020. Party (de)institutionalization in times of political uncertainty: The case of the justice and development party in Turkey. Party Politics. Online First, September 22, 2020. doi:10.1177/1354068820960010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yavuzyılmaz, H. 2021. When local becomes general: Turkey’s 31 March 2019 elections and its implications for dynamics of polarization and sustainability of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Balkan and Near East Studies 23: 622–42. doi:10.1080/19448953.2021.1888600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar