Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-nx7b4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-03T12:36:08.912Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Global dominant party systems dataset (GDPS): Data on executive dominance 1900–2024

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2025

Boris Lipovina Open the ORCID record for Boris Lipovina [Opens in a new window]
Boris Lipovina*
Affiliation:
Doctoral School of International Relations and Political Science, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
*
Email: lipovinaboris@gmail.com
Get access

Abstract

Despite a long tradition of research on dominant party systems (DPS), comparative analysis remains limited by conceptual ambiguities, regional and historical biases, and the absence of accessible data. This research note introduces the Global Dominant Party Systems (GDPS) Dataset, which includes 187 cases of executive dominance across 106 independent countries from 1900 to 2024, addressing the regional and historical biases that have traditionally plagued the literature. Drawing on foundational theories and refined concepts, the dataset differentiates between dominant parties and DPS and develops the minimal definition of DPS that focuses on executive arena and at least minimally contested elections. The dataset identifies cases with mechanical properties typical of DPS, that is those in which one party (or coalition) consistently monopolizes executive power and electoral competition fails to produce changes in government leadership. Despite setting permissive minimal criteria, the dataset also offers a broad range of variables on democracy, corruption and institutional features which can be used to set different criteria for case selection and conduct robustness checks. The dataset also includes variables on ethnic and opposition fragmentation, voter turnout, economy and population size, enabling researchers to investigate the institutional and socio-economic foundations of dominance across regime types and world regions. Finally, the proposed model of DPS evolution and change can serve as a useful guide for qualitative research on unpacking causal mechanisms. While limited to positive cases of dominance, the dataset offers new potential for cross-regional hypothesis testing and theory development on executive power, party system change, and democratic resilience.

Keywords

comparative politicsdemocracyelectionspolitical parties

Information

Type
Research Note: Dataset
Information
Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica , First View , pp. 1 - 9
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Società Italiana di Scienza Politica.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abedi, A and Schneider, S (2010) Big fish in small ponds: a comparison of dominant parties in the Canadian provinces and German Lander. In Boucek, F and Bogaards, M (eds), Dominant Political Parties and Democracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases, and Comparisons. London; New York: Routledge, 77–97.Google Scholar
Anckar, D (2009) Small Polities: tyrannized by Majorities? The Open Political Science Journal 2(1). doi:10.2174/1874949600902010035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartolini, S and Mair, P (1990) Identity, competition and electoral availability: the stabilisation of European electorates 1885-1985. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb37371406q (accessed 26 January 2024).Google Scholar
Bogaards, M (2004) Counting parties and identifying dominant party systems in Africa. European Journal of Political Research 43(2), 173–197. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2004.00150.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogaards, M and Boucek, F (2010a) Conclusion. In Boucek, F and Bogaards, M (eds), Dominant Political Parties and Democracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases, and Comparisons. London; New York: Routledge, 219–229.10.4324/9780203850114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogaards, M and Boucek, F (eds) (2010b) Dominant Political Parties and Democracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases, and Comparisons. London; New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203850114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boucek, F (1998) Electoral and parliamentary aspects of dominant party systems. In Pennings, P and Lane, J-E (eds), Comparing Party System Change. London: Routledge, 103–124.Google Scholar
Carty, RK (2022) The Government Party: Political Dominance in Democracy. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780192858481.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, M, Gerring, J, Knutsen, CH, Lindberg, SI, Teorell, J, Altman, D, Bernhard, M, Cornell, A, Fish, SM, Gastaldi, L, Gjerløw, H, Glynn, A, God, AG, Grahn, S, Hicken, A, Kinzelbach, K, Krusell, J, Marquardt, KL, McMann, K, Mechkova, V, Medzihorsky, J, Natsika, N, Neundorf, A, Paxton, P, Pemstein, D, Pernes, J, Rydén, O, von Römer, J, Seim, B, Sigman, R, Skaaning, S-E, Staton, J, Sundström, A, Tzelgov, E, Wang, Y, Wig, T, Wilson, S, and Ziblatt, D (2023) V-Dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v13” Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. doi:10.23696/vdemds23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruz, C, Keefer, P and Scartascini, C (2021) Database of Political Institutions 2020. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank Research Department. doi:10.18235/0003049.Google Scholar
Dietz, HA and Myers, DJ (2007) From Thaw to Deluge: party System Collapse in Venezuela and Peru. Latin American Politics and Society 49(2), 59–86.10.1111/j.1548-2456.2007.tb00407.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drazanova, L (2020) Introducing the Historical Index of Ethnic Fractionalization (HIEF) Dataset: accounting for Longitudinal Changes in Ethnic Diversity. Journal of Open Humanities Data 6. doi:10.5334/johd.16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunleavy, P (2010) Rethinking dominant party systems. In Bogaards, M and Boucek, F (eds), Dominant Political Parties and Democracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases and Comparisons. London, UK: Routledge, 23–44.Google Scholar
Duverger, M (1959) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. North, B and North, R London: Methuen New York J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Enyedi, Z, and Bértoa, FC (2020) Party Systems: Types, Dimensions, and Explanations. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1754 (accessed 4 August 2025). doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, E and Wong, J eds (2008) Political Transitions in Dominant Party Systems: Learning to Lose. Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Giliomee, H and Simkins, C (1999) The Awkward Embrace: One-party Domination and Democracy. Amsterdam: Harwood academic publishers.Google Scholar
Global Change Datalab and Oxford Martin Programme on Global Development (n.d.) Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/ (accessed 26 August 2024).Google Scholar
Greene, KF (2007) Why Dominant Parties Lose: Mexico's Democratization in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
International IDEA (n.d.) Data & Tools | international IDEA. https://www.idea.int/data-tools (accessed 26 August 2024).Google Scholar
Ishiyama, J and Batta, A (2012) The emergence of dominant political party systems in unrecognized states. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 45(1–2), 123–130.10.1016/j.postcomstud.2012.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, SI and Jones, J (2010) Laying a foundation for democracy or undermining it? Dominant parties in Africa's burgeoning democracies. In Bogaards, M and Boucek, F (eds), Dominant Political Parties and Democracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases, and Comparisons. London; New York: Routledge, 196–218.Google Scholar
Lipset, SM and Rokkan, S eds (1967) Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Mair, P (1989) The Problem of Party System Change. Journal of Theoretical Politics 1(3), 251–276. doi:10.1177/0951692889001003001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J (2011) Bankrupt Representation and Party System Collapse. Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
Nwokora, Z and Pelizzo, R (2014) Sartori Reconsidered: toward a New Predominant Party System. Political Studies 62(4), 824–842. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pempel, TJ (1990a) Conclusion. One-Party Dominance and the Creation of Regimes. In Pempel, TJ (ed), Uncommon Democracies: The One-Party Dominant Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 333–360.10.7591/9781501746161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pempel, TJ ed (1990b) Uncommon Democracies: The One-Party Dominant Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.10.7591/9781501746161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, G (1976) Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, G (2005) Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Seawright, J (2012) Party-System Collapse: The Roots of Crisis in Peru and Venezuela. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Serra, G (2013) Demise and Resurrection of a Dominant Party: understanding the PRI's Comeback in Mexico. Journal of Politics in Latin America 5(3), 133–154.10.1177/1866802X1300500305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikk, A (2005) How unstable? Volatility and the genuinely new parties in Eastern Europe. European Journal of Political Research 44(3), 391–412. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2005.00232.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skaaning, S-E, Gerring, J and Bartusevičius, H (2015) A Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy. Comparative Political Studies 48(12), 1491–1525. doi:10.1177/0010414015581050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G (1989) A System Perspective on Party System Change. Journal of Theoretical Politics 1(3), 349–363. doi:10.1177/0951692889001003005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Templeman, KA (2010) Who's Dominant?: incumbent Longevity in Multiparty Regimes, 1950-2006. SSRN Scholarly Paper, Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1657512 (accessed 8 October 2023).Google Scholar
Templeman, KA (2012) The Origins and Decline of Dominant Party Systems: Taiwan's Transition in Comparative Perspective (PhD Thesis). The University of Michigan. Retrieved from https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/91373/kharist_1.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed December 2023).Google Scholar
United Nations Statistics Division (n.d.) UNSD — methodology. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/ (accessed 29 June 2024).Google Scholar
Weiss, ML and Suffian, I (2023) Decline, Fall, and Resurrection of a Dominant-coalition System: malaysia's Tortured Partisan Path. Pacific Affairs 96(2), 281–301. doi:10.5509/2023962281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank (n.d.) World Bank Open Data. https://data.worldbank.org (accessed 3 June 2024).Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lipovina supplementary material

Lipovina supplementary material
Download Lipovina supplementary material(File)
File 33.4 KB