Party members in a pillarised partitocracy. An empirical overview of party membership figures and profiles in Belgium

Abstract

This study examines the pillarised and partitocratic nature of Belgian political parties via an empirical overview of their party on the ground. Two main research questions guide the study: To what extent can party membership figures in Belgium be considered as ideal-typical of pillarised or partitocratic parties? And how does the social and political profile of party members in Belgium correspond to what one might expect from pillarised or partitocratic parties? The study relies on two types of data set: party membership figures since WWII and membership survey data of the four 'dominant' relatives in each party family in Belgium. The article shows contradicting results. Although party membership figures have nuanced the idea of partitocratic and pillar parties, the analysis of the profile of party members has produced more conclusive results. The members of some parties (PS, CD&V) still display a strong encapsulation in their sociological world, report specific reasons for joining, as well as lower levels of activism than in other parties. The pillar parties in Belgium seem to have reached a paradoxical situation in which their anchorage in civil society is still very strong, yet it relies on a shrinking social basis. These results raise the question of the incentives that parties offer to their party on the ground to mobilise citizens for participation. They indicate a need to look more systematically and empirically at this neglected aspect of party organisation, as it provides important information for the debate on party decline.

Bringing agency back into the study of partisan politics: A note on recent developments in the literature on party politics

“…Very similar results have been found in surveys from other countries, too: see Elklit (2008) on Denmark, van Haute et al (2013) on Belgium, or Heidar and Saglie (2003) on Norway.…”

Do Characteristics of Consociational Democracies Still Apply to Belgian Parties?

“…Twenty years later, Deschouwer and Opsomer (1993) pointed out that there was no negative trend in activism in Belgium but rather that activism varied according to parties, with new parties (Regionalists and Greens) having more active members than pillar parties. This is also what van Haute et al (2013) emphasized on the basis of party member surveys. Members of pillar parties are the least active, as reflected by the declaration of a majority of members that they devote no time at all to their party (52% in the PS, 57% in the CD&V and up to 63% in the OpenVLD), as opposed to a quarter of the French-speaking Greens (Ecolo).…”

What Citizens Want in Terms of Intra-Party Democracy: Popular Attitudes towards Alternative Candidate Selection Procedures

“…2 Belgium is an interesting case when it comes to (intra-party) democratic reforms and candidate selection in particular. At the system level, Belgium has known similar trends to other Western countries, among which a (comparatively modest) decline in party membership figures (Van Biezen et al, 2012;Van Haute et al, 2013), as well as growing electoral volatility (Dassonneville et al, 2014) and disaffection with political institutions and parties in particular (Henry et al, 2015). Belgium is also a singular case, often described as pillarised and partitocratic (Brans et al, 2009;Deschouwer, 2009).…”