Search

Temeljno pitanje na koje ovaj rad pokušava dati odgovor jest zašto je demokratska transformacija bila uspješna u Tunisu, a u Egiptu i Alžiru nije. Istraživanju je primarno pristupljeno sa stajališta deskriptivno-empirijskih teorija aktera, iako su korištene i kulturalističke teorije kako bi se bolje razumjele političke ideje i stavovi islamističkih aktera. Strategija istraživanja je fokusirana komparativna studija triju slučajeva – Tunisa, Egipta i Alžira – odnosno intraregionalna komparativna studija, budući da je riječ o zemljama koje pripadaju podregiji Sjeverne Afrike kao podsustavu regije Bliskog istoka. Komparativna studija ima različite ishode na ovisnoj varijabli kako bi se izbjegla neprirodna selekcijska pristranost te postigao kvazieksperimentalan efekt. Hipoteza koja je ponuđena glasi da je Tunis imao mekši civilni autoritarni režim koji je dopuštao interakciju i suradnju oporbenih i režimskih elita, a što je rezultiralo političkim dogovorom te, posljedično, uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U slučaju Egipta i Alžira interakcija oporbenih i režimskih elita imala je prvenstveno oblik sukoba te je izostao politički dogovor, a time i demokratska tranzicija. Neovisne varijable koje su izolirane u teorijskoj raspravi jesu: karakter prethodnog autoritarnog režima, uloga vojske, tip opozicije i vlasti, obrasci interakcije opozicije i vlasti, obrasci tranzicije u demokraciju. Uz te varijable, analiza obuhvaća i kolonijalno razdoblje koje je bitno zato što pokazuje jesu li te zemlje imale neko prethodno demokratsko iskustvo, je li ono imalo neki utjecaj na kasniju demokratizaciju, kakve su političke elite nastale u tom razdoblju i, konzekventno, kakav su oblik autoritarnog sustava kasnije izgradile. Iz analize proizlazi zaključak da je glavna hipoteza potvrđena. Tunis je bio „mekši“ autoritarni režim, što je omogućilo suradnju starih i novih elita koja je rezultirala političkim dogovorom, a time i uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U Egiptu i Alžiru je sukob starih i novih elita onemogućio uspješnu demokratizaciju., The main question this thesis tries to provide an answer to is why democratic transformation was successful in Tunisia, but not in Egypt and Algeria. The research approach is primarily rooted in descriptive-empirical actor theories, although culturalist theories were used as well, as to better understand the political ideas and stances of Islamist actors. The research strategy is a focused comparative three-case-study – comprising Tunisia, Egypt, and Algeria – i.e. an intra-regional comparative study since these countries belong to the subregion of North Africa, which is a subsystem of the Middle Eastern region. The comparative study has different outcomes on the dependent variable, in order to avoid unnatural selection bias and achieve a quasi-experimental effect. The proposed hypothesis claims that Tunisia had a softer civilian authoritarian regime which permitted interaction and cooperation of opposition and regime elites, which resulted in a political agreement and, subsequently, a successful democratic transition. In the cases of Egypt and Algeria, the interaction of opposition and regime elites primarily took the form of conflict, with a lack of a political agreement, and thus democratic transition. The independent variables which were isolated in the theoretical discussion were the following: the character of the previous authoritarian regime, the role of the army, opposition and government type, patterns of opposition-government interaction, patterns of transition to democracy. In addition, the analysis encompasses the colonial period as well, which is important because it demonstrates whether these countries had the previous democratic experience, whether it had some influence on later democratization, what kinds of political elites emerged in that period and, consequently, what form of an authoritarian regime they later established. The analysis provides the conclusion that the main hypothesis was confirmed. Tunisia was a “softer” authoritarian regime, which had enabled the cooperation of old and new elites, which resulted in a political agreement, and thus a successful democratic transition. In Egypt and Algeria, the conflict of old and new elites prevented successful democratization.

Temeljno pitanje na koje ovaj rad pokušava dati odgovor jest zašto je demokratska transformacija bila uspješna u Tunisu, a u Egiptu i Alžiru nije. Istraživanju je primarno pristupljeno sa stajališta deskriptivno-empirijskih teorija aktera, iako su korištene i kulturalističke teorije kako bi se bolje razumjele političke ideje i stavovi islamističkih aktera. Strategija istraživanja je fokusirana komparativna studija triju slučajeva – Tunisa, Egipta i Alžira – odnosno intraregionalna komparativna studija, budući da je riječ o zemljama koje pripadaju podregiji Sjeverne Afrike kao podsustavu regije Bliskog istoka. Komparativna studija ima različite ishode na ovisnoj varijabli kako bi se izbjegla neprirodna selekcijska pristranost te postigao kvazieksperimentalan efekt. Hipoteza koja je ponuđena glasi da je Tunis imao mekši civilni autoritarni režim koji je dopuštao interakciju i suradnju oporbenih i režimskih elita, a što je rezultiralo političkim dogovorom te, posljedično, uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U slučaju Egipta i Alžira interakcija oporbenih i režimskih elita imala je prvenstveno oblik sukoba te je izostao politički dogovor, a time i demokratska tranzicija. Neovisne varijable koje su izolirane u teorijskoj raspravi jesu: karakter prethodnog autoritarnog režima, uloga vojske, tip opozicije i vlasti, obrasci interakcije opozicije i vlasti, obrasci tranzicije u demokraciju. Uz te varijable, analiza obuhvaća i kolonijalno razdoblje koje je bitno zato što pokazuje jesu li te zemlje imale neko prethodno demokratsko iskustvo, je li ono imalo neki utjecaj na kasniju demokratizaciju, kakve su političke elite nastale u tom razdoblju i, konzekventno, kakav su oblik autoritarnog sustava kasnije izgradile. Iz analize proizlazi zaključak da je glavna hipoteza potvrđena. Tunis je bio „mekši“ autoritarni režim, što je omogućilo suradnju starih i novih elita koja je rezultirala političkim dogovorom, a time i uspješnom demokratskom tranzicijom. U Egiptu i Alžiru je sukob starih i novih elita onemogućio uspješnu demokratizaciju. The main question this thesis tries to provide an answer to is why democratic transformation was successful in Tunisia, but not in Egypt and Algeria. The research approach is primarily rooted in descriptive-empirical actor theories, although culturalist theories were used as well, as to better understand the political ideas and stances of Islamist actors. The research strategy is a focused comparative three-case-study – comprising Tunisia, Egypt, and Algeria – i.e. an intra-regional comparative study since these countries belong to the subregion of North Africa, which is a subsystem of the Middle Eastern region. The comparative study has different outcomes on the dependent variable, in order to avoid unnatural selection bias and achieve a quasi-experimental effect. The proposed hypothesis claims that Tunisia had a softer civilian authoritarian regime which permitted interaction and cooperation of opposition and regime elites, which resulted in a political agreement and, subsequently, a successful democratic transition. In the cases of Egypt and Algeria, the interaction of opposition and regime elites primarily took the form of conflict, with a lack of a political agreement, and thus democratic transition. The independent variables which were isolated in the theoretical discussion were the following: the character of the previous authoritarian regime, the role of the army, opposition and government type, patterns of opposition-government interaction, patterns of transition to democracy. In addition, the analysis encompasses the colonial period as well, which is important because it demonstrates whether these countries had the previous democratic experience, whether it had some influence on later democratization, what kinds of political elites emerged in that period and, consequently, what form of an authoritarian regime they later established. The analysis provides the conclusion that the main hypothesis was confirmed. Tunisia was a “softer” authoritarian regime, which had enabled the cooperation of old and new elites, which resulted in a political agreement, and thus a successful democratic transition. In Egypt and Algeria, the conflict of old and new elites prevented successful democratization.

Rad se bavi istraživanjem učinaka personalizacije izbornog sustava prije svega na političke stranke i kandidate za zastupnike. Pod personalizacijom izbornog sustava smatra se uvođenje mehanizama u izborni sustav koji osiguravaju veću ulogu birača u izboru njihovih parlamentarnih zastupnika. U radu su predstavljene četiri gusto opisane studije slučaja koje su služile kao temelj za testiranje temeljne i pomoćnih hipoteza. Rad sadrži fokusiranu poredbenu analizu dometa personalizacije izbornog sustava u odnosu na tri ključna slučaja (Austrija, Nizozemska i Finska), kao i u odnosu na kontrolni slučaj Kosovo. U radu je dokazano da snažni personalizirani izborni sustavi, koji imaju najveće vrijednosti personalizacije, odnosno izmjerene vrijednosti utjecaja dva institucionalna potičuća mehanizma koji su predstavljali nezavisne varijable ovog istraživanja (a. preferencijsko glasovanje unutar razmjernog sustava stranačkih lista i b. procedura selekcije kandidata), dovode do personalizacije političkih stranaka na razini zastupnika. Kroz dokazivanje pomoćnih hipoteza ispraćeni su učinci personalizacije izbornog sustava na političke stranke, kandidate/zastupnike, birače odnosno stranački/politički sustav. U radu predstavljeni nalazi fokusirane poredbene analize potvrđuju da snažna personalizacija izbornog sustava vodi personalizaciji izborne kampanje te smanjenoj ulozi političkih stranaka u političkom životu. Smanjena uloga stranaka u kampanjama otvara prostor jačanju uloge konkretnih donatora. Poslanici postaju nezavisniji u odnosu na stranku, ali s druge strane otvoreni za utjecaje donatora svojih kampanja. Nemogućnost opoziva, odnosno tekovina da je zastupnik, a ne stranka vlasnik mandata, dodatno ojačava poziciju zastupnika, a slabi poziciju stranke. Pozicija zastupnika jača, kao i birača koji imaju u snažno personaliziranim izbornim sustavima mogućnost presudnog utjecanja na to tko će ih zastupati u parlamentu, odnosno na koga će privremeno prenijeti suverenitet kao njegovi nositelji. Finski primjer najbolje pokazuje utjecaj snažne personalizacije izbornog sustava na političke stranke, kandidate i birače u konsolidiranoj demokraciji. Slučaj Kosova kao kontrolni slučaj govori da ukoliko izostane prevlast osobnog u odnosu na stranačko u unutarstranačkim procesima, učinci snažnog preferencijskog sustava bit će umanjeni. Izostanak vladavine prava utječe na ravnopravnost kandidata u predizbornim kampanjama, ali snažno preferencijsko glasovanje umanjuje negativne efekte izostanka demokratskih procedura unutar stranke te potiče daljnju demokratsku konsolidaciju u nekonsolidiranim demokracijama., The doctoral dissertation deals with research into the effects of personalization of the electoral system primarily on political parties and candidates for deputies. The personalization of the electoral system means the introduction of mechanisms in the electoral system that ensure a greater role for voters in the election of their parliamentary representatives. I define the electoral system as a “set of laws and party rules governing electoral competition between and within the parties” (Cox 1997: 38). This wider definition of the electoral system gives us space to build a more complete picture of the electoral system’s impact on political parties, candidates and voters as main actors in the electoral process. The focus of the research is the relationship between personal and party representation. In order to conduct a more comprehensive analysis of the effects of personalization on political parties, the research framework is narrowed down to list proportional electoral systems with preferential voting. Contemporary liberal democracy is characterized by a highly personalized politics. Governments are more recognizable by their leaders than by the parties that are the basis of their constitution. This personalization trend is not characteristic exclusively of presidential systems, but has become a feature of parliamentary political systems. In addition to personalization of the party at the leader level, there is also the personalization of politics at the level of members of parliament (MPs). In this paper, we only use the term ‘personalization of a party’ in reference to personalization at the level of the MP. We will not deal with the question of the presidentialization of political parties. Under the personalization of a political party at the level of MPs, we mean strengthening the position of deputies in the intra-party decision-making process. Thanks to the introduction of preferential voting in list proportional list systems, the group of electoral systems in which voters play an important role in the selection of their representatives has significantly expanded. Historically speaking, the representative position has been strengthened by the accepted attitude that the MP, not the party, is the ‘owner of the mandate’; preferential voting supports this. This paper deals with the personalization of politics at the level of the representative—the political party. That is to say, it explores the question of to what degree personalization of the electoral system affects the political party, its intra- and its inter-party dimension. Moreover, the paper deals with personal and party representation, an area that is a new field of interest for political scientists. Through this relationship, I explore the effect of electoral systems on political parties, candidates and voters. in developing this work, I was guided by the results achieved by Katz (1980, 1986) and Marsh 9 (1985) who first dealt with this issue. In his book A Theory of Parties and Electoral Systems (1980), Katz took his first steps in the research of preferential systems. Five years later, Marsh (1985) was dealing with differences between the preferential systems in Europe. In their works, Katz and Marsh set forth the first hypotheses about the effects of preferential voting. Although there has been a growing interest in research in this area over the last decade, no significant progress has yet been made. Karvonen (2004) made a significant step in systematizing the hypotheses of Katz and Marsh, and he added some more points. In his last paper on this subject (2011), Karvonen was working within the same group of hypotheses, which were open to further research. They are the basis of this research, with additional contributions. A major impetus for this work was one of the most influential articles in this field, ‘Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas’ by Carey and Shugart (1995), which examines the question of the influence of electoral systems on the candidate’s electoral strategies—that is, how electoral systems influence the pre-election roles of parties and their candidates. The authors developed three variables: (1) lack of party leadership control over access to and rank in ballots; (2) degree to which candidates are elected on individual votes independent of copartisans; and (3) whether voters cast a single intra-party vote instead of multiple votes or a party-level vote. By combining these three variables, there are up to thirteen combinations. This approach set me up to explore the impact that personalization creates when it comes to the relationship between the MP candidate and the party, or the MP and the party. Most authors agree that the introduction of personalization of the electoral system significantly affects interparty relations, which are sometimes reflected in a high degree of autonomy in campaigning and even in the collection and spending of funds for funding of their personal campaign. The bidding of candidates from the same party exercises a strong influence on intra-party relations, and it often happens that rival relations within the parties remain in the shadow of rival relations between the parties.

Rad se bavi istraživanjem učinaka personalizacije izbornog sustava prije svega na političke stranke i kandidate za zastupnike. Pod personalizacijom izbornog sustava smatra se uvođenje mehanizama u izborni sustav koji osiguravaju veću ulogu birača u izboru njihovih parlamentarnih zastupnika. U radu su predstavljene četiri gusto opisane studije slučaja koje su služile kao temelj za testiranje temeljne i pomoćnih hipoteza. Rad sadrži fokusiranu poredbenu analizu dometa personalizacije izbornog sustava u odnosu na tri ključna slučaja (Austrija, Nizozemska i Finska), kao i u odnosu na kontrolni slučaj Kosovo. U radu je dokazano da snažni personalizirani izborni sustavi, koji imaju najveće vrijednosti personalizacije, odnosno izmjerene vrijednosti utjecaja dva institucionalna potičuća mehanizma koji su predstavljali nezavisne varijable ovog istraživanja (a. preferencijsko glasovanje unutar razmjernog sustava stranačkih lista i b. procedura selekcije kandidata), dovode do personalizacije političkih stranaka na razini zastupnika. Kroz dokazivanje pomoćnih hipoteza ispraćeni su učinci personalizacije izbornog sustava na političke stranke, kandidate/zastupnike, birače odnosno stranački/politički sustav. U radu predstavljeni nalazi fokusirane poredbene analize potvrđuju da snažna personalizacija izbornog sustava vodi personalizaciji izborne kampanje te smanjenoj ulozi političkih stranaka u političkom životu. Smanjena uloga stranaka u kampanjama otvara prostor jačanju uloge konkretnih donatora. Poslanici postaju nezavisniji u odnosu na stranku, ali s druge strane otvoreni za utjecaje donatora svojih kampanja. Nemogućnost opoziva, odnosno tekovina da je zastupnik, a ne stranka vlasnik mandata, dodatno ojačava poziciju zastupnika, a slabi poziciju stranke. Pozicija zastupnika jača, kao i birača koji imaju u snažno personaliziranim izbornim sustavima mogućnost presudnog utjecanja na to tko će ih zastupati u parlamentu, odnosno na koga će privremeno prenijeti suverenitet kao njegovi nositelji. Finski primjer najbolje pokazuje utjecaj snažne personalizacije izbornog sustava na političke stranke, kandidate i birače u konsolidiranoj demokraciji. Slučaj Kosova kao kontrolni slučaj govori da ukoliko izostane prevlast osobnog u odnosu na stranačko u unutarstranačkim procesima, učinci snažnog preferencijskog sustava bit će umanjeni. Izostanak vladavine prava utječe na ravnopravnost kandidata u predizbornim kampanjama, ali snažno preferencijsko glasovanje umanjuje negativne efekte izostanka demokratskih procedura unutar stranke te potiče daljnju demokratsku konsolidaciju u nekonsolidiranim demokracijama. The doctoral dissertation deals with research into the effects of personalization of the electoral system primarily on political parties and candidates for deputies. The personalization of the electoral system means the introduction of mechanisms in the electoral system that ensure a greater role for voters in the election of their parliamentary representatives. I define the electoral system as a “set of laws and party rules governing electoral competition between and within the parties” (Cox 1997: 38). This wider definition of the electoral system gives us space to build a more complete picture of the electoral system’s impact on political parties, candidates and voters as main actors in the electoral process. The focus of the research is the relationship between personal and party representation. In order to conduct a more comprehensive analysis of the effects of personalization on political parties, the research framework is narrowed down to list proportional electoral systems with preferential voting. Contemporary liberal democracy is characterized by a highly personalized politics. Governments are more recognizable by their leaders than by the parties that are the basis of their constitution. This personalization trend is not characteristic exclusively of presidential systems, but has become a feature of parliamentary political systems. In addition to personalization of the party at the leader level, there is also the personalization of politics at the level of members of parliament (MPs). In this paper, we only use the term ‘personalization of a party’ in reference to personalization at the level of the MP. We will not deal with the question of the presidentialization of political parties. Under the personalization of a political party at the level of MPs, we mean strengthening the position of deputies in the intra-party decision-making process. Thanks to the introduction of preferential voting in list proportional list systems, the group of electoral systems in which voters play an important role in the selection of their representatives has significantly expanded. Historically speaking, the representative position has been strengthened by the accepted attitude that the MP, not the party, is the ‘owner of the mandate’; preferential voting supports this. This paper deals with the personalization of politics at the level of the representative—the political party. That is to say, it explores the question of to what degree personalization of the electoral system affects the political party, its intra- and its inter-party dimension. Moreover, the paper deals with personal and party representation, an area that is a new field of interest for political scientists. Through this relationship, I explore the effect of electoral systems on political parties, candidates and voters. in developing this work, I was guided by the results achieved by Katz (1980, 1986) and Marsh 9 (1985) who first dealt with this issue. In his book A Theory of Parties and Electoral Systems (1980), Katz took his first steps in the research of preferential systems. Five years later, Marsh (1985) was dealing with differences between the preferential systems in Europe. In their works, Katz and Marsh set forth the first hypotheses about the effects of preferential voting. Although there has been a growing interest in research in this area over the last decade, no significant progress has yet been made. Karvonen (2004) made a significant step in systematizing the hypotheses of Katz and Marsh, and he added some more points. In his last paper on this subject (2011), Karvonen was working within the same group of hypotheses, which were open to further research. They are the basis of this research, with additional contributions. A major impetus for this work was one of the most influential articles in this field, ‘Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas’ by Carey and Shugart (1995), which examines the question of the influence of electoral systems on the candidate’s electoral strategies—that is, how electoral systems influence the pre-election roles of parties and their candidates. The authors developed three variables: (1) lack of party leadership control over access to and rank in ballots; (2) degree to which candidates are elected on individual votes independent of copartisans; and (3) whether voters cast a single intra-party vote instead of multiple votes or a party-level vote. By combining these three variables, there are up to thirteen combinations. This approach set me up to explore the impact that personalization creates when it comes to the relationship between the MP candidate and the party, or the MP and the party. Most authors agree that the introduction of personalization of the electoral system significantly affects interparty relations, which are sometimes reflected in a high degree of autonomy in campaigning and even in the collection and spending of funds for funding of their personal campaign. The bidding of candidates from the same party exercises a strong influence on intra-party relations, and it often happens that rival relations within the parties remain in the shadow of rival relations between the parties.

U ovom radu pokušavam istražiti čimbenike koji utječu na razlike u uspješnosti uspostave de facto teritorijalnosti kod regionalističkih stranaka. Regionalističke stranke predstavljaju posebnu vrstu stranaka, različitu od etnoregionalističkih stranaka i od etničkih stranaka, odnosno stranaka nacionalnih manjina. Presudna karakteristika regionalističkih stranaka je teritorijalni identitet. Pojam uspješne provedbe de facto teritorijalnosti označava situaciju u kojoj regionalistička stranka kroz određeno razdoblje rasta i razvoja uspije definirati i označiti regiju koju želi predstavljati na način da u svim ili barem većini izbornih jedinica koje tvore navedenu regiju uspije kontinuirano osvajati mandate u predstavničkom tijelu, a u drugom koraku i obnašati izvršnu vlast. Vrhunac uspjeha provedbe de facto teritorijalnosti predstavlja postizanje statusa predominantne stranke, odnosno osvajanje apsolutne većine u predstavničkom tijelu matične regije kroz minimalno tri uzastopna izborna ciklusa. Uspjeh u provedbi de facto teritorijalnosti ovisi o sposobnosti regionalističke stranke da se prilagodi kontekstualnim uvjetima stranačkog sustava, izbornog sustava i upravne podjele zemlje, kao i da izgradi uspješnu organizacijsku infrastrukturu, izvuče korist iz odnosa s glavnim koalicijskim partnerom te suzbije sve potencijalne konkurentske regionalističke stranke. Također, uspješna operacionalizacija regionalnog identiteta važan je faktor koji pridonosi uspješnosti de facto teritorijalnosti. Komparativna analiza Istarskog demokratskog sabora u Hrvatskoj i Sjeverne lige u Italiji pokazala je da upravna podjela zemlje, odnos s glavnim koalicijskim partnerom te uspjeh u operacionalizaciji regionalnog identiteta dominantno utječu na uspjeh u provođenju de facto teritorijalnosti. In this dissertation I am trying to explore the factors which affect the differences in the success of establishment of de facto territoriality among regionalist parties. Regionalist parties are a particular kind of parties, distinct from both ethnoregionalist and ethnic parties, i.e. ethnic minority parties. Their defining characteristic is territorial identity. The concept of successful establishment of de facto territoriality implies that a regionalist party, through a certain period of growth and development, has succeeded in demarcating a region which it wants to represent by managing to continuously win legislative seats in all or at least the majority of constituencies in that region. On the second level, this also includes the ability to enter regional government. Ultimately, establishment of de facto territoriality means attainment of predominant party status, i.e. the winning of regional absolute majority in a minimum of three consecutive elections. The success in establishment of de facto territoriality depends on the ability to adapt to the context of the party system, the electoral system and the administrative division of the country, as well as the ability to build a successful organizational infrastructure, draw benefits from the relation with the main coalition partner and suppress all potential rival regionalist parties. Successful operationalization of regional identity is also an important factor for de facto territoriality success. A comparative analysis of the Istrian Democratic Assembly and the Northern League has shown that administrative division of the country, relation with the main coalition partner and successful operationalization of regional identity have a dominant influence on success in establishment of de facto territoriality.

U ovom radu pokušavam istražiti čimbenike koji utječu na razlike u uspješnosti uspostave de facto teritorijalnosti kod regionalističkih stranaka. Regionalističke stranke predstavljaju posebnu vrstu stranaka, različitu od etnoregionalističkih stranaka i od etničkih stranaka, odnosno stranaka nacionalnih manjina. Presudna karakteristika regionalističkih stranaka je teritorijalni identitet. Pojam uspješne provedbe de facto teritorijalnosti označava situaciju u kojoj regionalistička stranka kroz određeno razdoblje rasta i razvoja uspije definirati i označiti regiju koju želi predstavljati na način da u svim ili barem većini izbornih jedinica koje tvore navedenu regiju uspije kontinuirano osvajati mandate u predstavničkom tijelu, a u drugom koraku i obnašati izvršnu vlast. Vrhunac uspjeha provedbe de facto teritorijalnosti predstavlja postizanje statusa predominantne stranke, odnosno osvajanje apsolutne većine u predstavničkom tijelu matične regije kroz minimalno tri uzastopna izborna ciklusa. Uspjeh u provedbi de facto teritorijalnosti ovisi o sposobnosti regionalističke stranke da se prilagodi kontekstualnim uvjetima stranačkog sustava, izbornog sustava i upravne podjele zemlje, kao i da izgradi uspješnu organizacijsku infrastrukturu, izvuče korist iz odnosa s glavnim koalicijskim partnerom te suzbije sve potencijalne konkurentske regionalističke stranke. Također, uspješna operacionalizacija regionalnog identiteta važan je faktor koji pridonosi uspješnosti de facto teritorijalnosti. Komparativna analiza Istarskog demokratskog sabora u Hrvatskoj i Sjeverne lige u Italiji pokazala je da upravna podjela zemlje, odnos s glavnim koalicijskim partnerom te uspjeh u operacionalizaciji regionalnog identiteta dominantno utječu na uspjeh u provođenju de facto teritorijalnosti., In this dissertation I am trying to explore the factors which affect the differences in the success of establishment of de facto territoriality among regionalist parties. Regionalist parties are a particular kind of parties, distinct from both ethnoregionalist and ethnic parties, i.e. ethnic minority parties. Their defining characteristic is territorial identity. The concept of successful establishment of de facto territoriality implies that a regionalist party, through a certain period of growth and development, has succeeded in demarcating a region which it wants to represent by managing to continuously win legislative seats in all or at least the majority of constituencies in that region. On the second level, this also includes the ability to enter regional government. Ultimately, establishment of de facto territoriality means attainment of predominant party status, i.e. the winning of regional absolute majority in a minimum of three consecutive elections. The success in establishment of de facto territoriality depends on the ability to adapt to the context of the party system, the electoral system and the administrative division of the country, as well as the ability to build a successful organizational infrastructure, draw benefits from the relation with the main coalition partner and suppress all potential rival regionalist parties. Successful operationalization of regional identity is also an important factor for de facto territoriality success. A comparative analysis of the Istrian Democratic Assembly and the Northern League has shown that administrative division of the country, relation with the main coalition partner and successful operationalization of regional identity have a dominant influence on success in establishment of de facto territoriality.

U ovom radu nastojim ispitati osnovnu tezu o nastanku prezidencijaliziranih stranaka koje se pojavljuju kao poseban historijsko-empirijski model stranačke organizacije. Model prezidencijaliziranih stranaka ne predstavlja sljedeću fazu u postojećoj razvojnoj teoriji političkih stranaka koja bi označila kretanje prema još jednomu novom tipu stranke, niti mu se mogu pridodati značenja i vrijednosti novoga razvojnog tipa. Valjan je samo kao analitički model kojim se na historijskoj i empirijskoj razini može pratiti prilagodba suvremenih političkih stranaka zahtjevima socijalnih i političkih čimbenika za sve većom individualizacijom političkog života. Ono što prezidencijalizirane stranke čini specifičnim modelom upravo su ključne karakteristike snažne koncentracije moći u rukama stranačkog vođe i centralizacije procesa političkog odlučivanja, iz čega proizlaze njegova autonomija u formuliranju stranačkih politika, programa i izbornih strategija, neupitna dominacija nad svim razinama stranačke organizacije te rigidna hijerarhijska stranačka struktura. Komparativna analiza britanske Laburističke stranke, Španjolske socijalističke radničke stranke i Hrvatske demokratske zajednice nedvosmisleno je potvrdila glavnu hipotezu kojom je uspostavljena uzročna veza između složene kombinacije strukturnih i kontekstualnih čimbenika, koji su identificirani kao glavni pokretači prezidencijalizacijskih procesa, i nastanka prezidencijaliziranih stranaka koje se organizacijski prilagođavaju izazovima suvremenih demokracija., In this dissertation I test the hypothesis on the origin of presidentialized parties that appear as the specific historical and empirical model of party organization. The model of presidentialized parties does not represent the next phase in the existing developmental theory of political parties, which would indicate movement towards another new type of party organization, nor can it be attributed with the meaning and value of a new developmental type. It is valid only as an analytical model which follows the adaptation of modern political parties to the challenges of social and political factors for the increasing individualization of political life on the historical and empirical level. What makes presidentialized parties a specific model are the key characteristics of the strong concentration of power in the hands of party leader and the centralization of decision-making process, from which derive his autonomy in the formulation of party policies, programs and electoral strategies, unquestioned supremacy over all levels of the party organization and the rigid hierarchical party structure. A comparative analysis of the British Labour party, the Spanish socialist worker's party and the Croatian democratic union unambiguously confirmed the main hypothesis which established a causal relationship between the complex combination of structural and contextual factors that are identified as the main drivers of the process of presidentialization, on one hand, and the emergence of the presidentialized parties which organizationally adapt to the challenges of modern democracies, on the other. In this dissertation I test the hypothesis on the origin of presidentialized parties that appear as the specific historical and empirical model of party organization. The model of presidentialized parties does not represent the next phase in the existing developmental theory of political parties, which would indicate movement towards another new type of party organization, nor can it be attributed with the meaning and value of a new developmental type. It is valid only as an analytical model which follows the adaptation of modern political parties to the challenges of social and political factors for the increasing individualization of political life on the historical and empirical level. What makes presidentialized parties a specific model are the key characteristics of the strong concentration of power in the hands of party leader and the centralization of decision-making process, from which derive his autonomy in the formulation of party policies, programs and electoral strategies, unquestioned supremacy over all levels of the party organization and the rigid hierarchical party structure. A comparative analysis of the British Labour party, the Spanish socialist worker's party and the Croatian democratic union unambiguously confirmed the main hypothesis which established a causal relationship between the complex combination of structural and contextual factors that are identified as the main drivers of the process of presidentialization, on one hand, and the emergence of the presidentialized parties which organizationally adapt to the challenges of modern democracies, on the other.

U ovom radu nastojim ispitati osnovnu tezu o nastanku prezidencijaliziranih stranaka koje se pojavljuju kao poseban historijsko-empirijski model stranačke organizacije. Model prezidencijaliziranih stranaka ne predstavlja sljedeću fazu u postojećoj razvojnoj teoriji političkih stranaka koja bi označila kretanje prema još jednomu novom tipu stranke, niti mu se mogu pridodati značenja i vrijednosti novoga razvojnog tipa. Valjan je samo kao analitički model kojim se na historijskoj i empirijskoj razini može pratiti prilagodba suvremenih političkih stranaka zahtjevima socijalnih i političkih čimbenika za sve većom individualizacijom političkog života. Ono što prezidencijalizirane stranke čini specifičnim modelom upravo su ključne karakteristike snažne koncentracije moći u rukama stranačkog vođe i centralizacije procesa političkog odlučivanja, iz čega proizlaze njegova autonomija u formuliranju stranačkih politika, programa i izbornih strategija, neupitna dominacija nad svim razinama stranačke organizacije te rigidna hijerarhijska stranačka struktura. Komparativna analiza britanske Laburističke stranke, Španjolske socijalističke radničke stranke i Hrvatske demokratske zajednice nedvosmisleno je potvrdila glavnu hipotezu kojom je uspostavljena uzročna veza između složene kombinacije strukturnih i kontekstualnih čimbenika, koji su identificirani kao glavni pokretači prezidencijalizacijskih procesa, i nastanka prezidencijaliziranih stranaka koje se organizacijski prilagođavaju izazovima suvremenih demokracija. In this dissertation I test the hypothesis on the origin of presidentialized parties that appear as the specific historical and empirical model of party organization. The model of presidentialized parties does not represent the next phase in the existing developmental theory of political parties, which would indicate movement towards another new type of party organization, nor can it be attributed with the meaning and value of a new developmental type. It is valid only as an analytical model which follows the adaptation of modern political parties to the challenges of social and political factors for the increasing individualization of political life on the historical and empirical level. What makes presidentialized parties a specific model are the key characteristics of the strong concentration of power in the hands of party leader and the centralization of decision-making process, from which derive his autonomy in the formulation of party policies, programs and electoral strategies, unquestioned supremacy over all levels of the party organization and the rigid hierarchical party structure. A comparative analysis of the British Labour party, the Spanish socialist worker's party and the Croatian democratic union unambiguously confirmed the main hypothesis which established a causal relationship between the complex combination of structural and contextual factors that are identified as the main drivers of the process of presidentialization, on one hand, and the emergence of the presidentialized parties which organizationally adapt to the challenges of modern democracies, on the other. In this dissertation I test the hypothesis on the origin of presidentialized parties that appear as the specific historical and empirical model of party organization. The model of presidentialized parties does not represent the next phase in the existing developmental theory of political parties, which would indicate movement towards another new type of party organization, nor can it be attributed with the meaning and value of a new developmental type. It is valid only as an analytical model which follows the adaptation of modern political parties to the challenges of social and political factors for the increasing individualization of political life on the historical and empirical level. What makes presidentialized parties a specific model are the key characteristics of the strong concentration of power in the hands of party leader and the centralization of decision-making process, from which derive his autonomy in the formulation of party policies, programs and electoral strategies, unquestioned supremacy over all levels of the party organization and the rigid hierarchical party structure. A comparative analysis of the British Labour party, the Spanish socialist worker's party and the Croatian democratic union unambiguously confirmed the main hypothesis which established a causal relationship between the complex combination of structural and contextual factors that are identified as the main drivers of the process of presidentialization, on one hand, and the emergence of the presidentialized parties which organizationally adapt to the challenges of modern democracies, on the other.