Assessing the complex relationship between government alternation and ideological congruence

Abstract

This article analyses the impact of government alternation on ideological congruence, going beyond the traditional distinction between the majoritarian and proportional visions of democracy that characterises the literature. I postulate that the effects of alternation on congruence differ according to the concept of alternation adopted and the time frame considered. While the possibility of alternation has no significant effect on congruence, the actual levels of alternation do play an ambivalent role. Higher levels of alternation increase the distance between the median voter’s and the government’s preferences at the time of the election. However, in the long run, the level of alternation accumulated over time reduces the average level of ideological distance, compensating for gaps in one direction with opposing gaps in the other direction. Empirical analysis conducted on a sample of 32 democracies confirms all of the hypotheses advanced.