What are the consequences posed by the enhancement of Intra-Party Democracy (IPD) both for the party leadership and for the internal functioning of the critical democratic institution that is a political party? Do political parties with high levels of IPD perform better and have a higher appeal than business-firm parties? There are crucial questions yet under researched by political scientists. This paper aims to fill this research gap and assess the consequences posed by the adoption of more inclusive leadership election method, defined as the main method to increase the level of Intra Party Democracy (IPD).
In normative debates the argument is sometimes raised that making parties more internally democratic may reverse the negative trend and tackle their crisis. The concept of IPD is gaining increasing and at its core is about the internal distribution of power within a political party. According to some scholars the most used instrument to pursue IPD is the enhancement of the inclusiveness of leadership election methods. However, the assessment of the consequences generated by the adoption of such methods for the internal functioning of parties and for the party leadership is still at an embryonic stage.
Drawing from the tradition of participatory democracy and supported by Dahl’s five criteria of democracy, this paper will first present a newly developed classification of leadership election methods and then a framework to measure IPD based on the key democratic parameters of Participation, Representation, Competition, Accountability and Transparency. The framework will then be applied to the cases of the Italian Democratic Party and of the Five Stars Movement, so to assess the consequences posed by different levels of IPD.
By presenting a comparative study of IPD this paper will provide a valuable empirical contribution which will help the development of the theoretical and normative debate around IPD and its implications for contemporary political parties
