Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov) is a simplified statics and valuation of political parties, which contains data on parties for all EU and most of OECD members for the entire post-war period by Holger Döring and Philip Manow.
Database description There are 23 columns in this database. They contain general information about parties, countries of the parties, some information about the aspects of the parties and there are columns dedicated to previous researches on parties, to connect this database with the some important other databases.
country_name_short Three letter abbreviation of country country_name Name of country party_name_short Parties’ short name abbreviation party_name_english party_name_ascii Parties’ name in ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange) encoding family_name_short The short version of family name, which reflects parties’s general political philosophy.
● What goods and services should and should not be public goods. Those who want the government to organize a nation’s economy are on the left; those who want private enterprise to organize a national economy are on the right. ● ● Mean value in left/right dimension with data from Castles/Mair 1983, Huber/Inglehart 1995, Benoit/Laver 2006 and CHESS 2010 Left_right
state_market Mean value in 'regulation of the economy' dimension with data from Benoit/Laver 2006 and CHESS 2010 liberty_authority Mean value in 'libertarian/authoritarian' dimension with data from Benoit/Laver 2006 and CHESS 2010 eu_anti_pro Mean value in 'EU integration' dimension with data from Ray 1999, Benoit/Laver 2006 and CHESS 2010
cmp The party IDs from Comparative Manifestos Project by Budge and Klingemann https://manifestoproject.wzb.eu/
euprofiler The party IDs from EU Profiler by Trechsel and Mair http://www.euprofiler.eu/
EES The party IDs from European Election Study The European Election Studies (EES) are about electoral participation and voting behavior in European Parliament election. Elections to the European Parliament are held every five years. In ParlGov database, also the party IDs are used in order to make matching two studies easier.
castles_mair The party IDs from Castles and Mair’s expert survey (1983)
huber_inglehart The party IDs from Huber and Inglehart’s expert survey (1995) This paper draws on a survey of political experts in 42 societies to address three questions raised by these changes. First, is the language of left and right still widely used, even in recently democratized countries? Second, do there exist secondary dimensions of political conflict that are orthogonal to the left- right dimension? Third, and most importantly, what substantive issues define the meaning of left-right ideology?
Ray The party IDs from Ray’s expert survey (1999) http://www.lsu.edu/faculty/lray2/data/data.htm l
benoit_laver The party IDs from Benoit and Laver’s expert survey (2006) For example, a table for Turkish parties is given in «external_party_benoit_laver.csv»
CHESS For the 2010 survey, 343 experts evaluated 237 political parties on European integration, ideology, and issue positions in all EU member states, except for Luxembourg, Cyprus and Malta. The experts in the 2010 survey also evaluated parties in 4 non-EU countries: Croatia, Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey. For the non-EU states, the time series varies by country (e.g. Experts evaluated Turkey in 2006 and 2010, but not in earlier surveys.)
Estimating party policy positions: Comparing expert surveys and hand-coded content analysis In this paper were compared estimates of the left-right positions of political parties derived from an expert survey recently completed by the authors with those derived by the Comparative Manifestos Project (CMP) from the content analysis of party manifestos. Firstly was explored the substantive policy content of left and right in the expert survey estimates. Then was compared the expert survey to the CMP method on methodological grounds. Thirdly, was compared the expert survey results to the CMP results for the most recent time period available, revealing some agreement but also numerous inconsistencies in both cross-national and within-country party placements.
Cross-temporal and Cross-national Comparisons of Party Left-Right Positions In this article was investigated the cross-time and cross-nation comparability of party left-right position measurements by expert surveys and the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP). While expert surveys show party left-right positions to be mostly static, we find the CMP records systematic party movements for one- third of the parties analyzed. On the issue of cross-national comparability, was found cross-national variation in expert surveys is muted. They contain little more than the variation associated with reputations based on party-family affiliation. The CMP measurements, on the other hand, contain variation attributable to national party-system differences.
The Preferences of Political Experts and Their Impact on Ideological Bias. An Unfolding Analysis based on Benoit-Laver Expert Survey In this article is shown that expert surveys method to detect the policy preferences of parties is not without flaws. For example it can be shown that in somes cases there is an evidence of bias in the expert placements of parties along the Left-Right dimension, especially against right-wing parties (not necessarily extreme-right ones). Was used the latest expert survey of Benoit and Laver (2006) to unfold the ideal points of the political experts who actually answered to the survey. By doing this, was shown that the Left-Right position of a party appears to be less important than the policy preferences of experts (and their variance) to explain the probability of a party being biased. Moreover, the bias is more pronounced when we deal with the Left-Right dimension compared to other less ambiguous policy dimensions.