Conceptions of Government Systems Revisited

Many analyses of governance in different government systems or government forms (parliamentary and presidential systems, consensus and majority democracies) show a greater variance of governance (and performance) as one would expect considering the limited numbers of specific types of systems based on formal characteristics. Here the differentiation of government systems (Shugart/Carey 1992) is only of limited assistance. More promising is the taking up of informal structures and integrating them into the analysis. In social sciences the category of informality is used in very different contexts. It is new to use it prominently for the analysis of government systems. This enlargement of the focus of research makes it possible to overcome the rigidity of analysis which is focused on formal institutions and to capture the factual actions. However the term of informality has often been blurred, as critics rightfully remarked (Bueger/Gadinger 2011). But this analytic problem can be solved through a closer look at informal institutions. This paper demonstrates the limitations of existing typologies considering as example Lijpharts conception of consensus and majority democracies. The validity of existing concepts can be increased by systematic integration of informal structures. Diminished subtypes of democracy (as subtypes of polical regimes) might allow an auspicious combination strategy. Prof. Dr. Hans-Joachim Lauth University of Würzburg Institute of Political Science and Sociology Chair in Comparative Politics Wittelsbacherplatz 1 D-97074 Würzburg Germany Tel. 49 (0)931 31-84801 (84802) Fax. 49 (0)931 31-84893 http://www.politikwissenschaft.uni-wuerzburg.de