This article provides a multi-dimensional perspective on parliamentary composition in an era of political turbulence. It extends existing turnover models by proposing a three-dimensional framework to understand persistence which includes the structure of the ballot, electoral volatility and institutional career opportunities. Using novel comparative data from 14 European democracies (1965–2021), where we distinguish between newcomers, seniors (3+ terms) and super-seniors (5+ terms), we find that persistence is most likely in politico-institutional contexts characterised by candidate control over ballot access, low electoral volatility and unicameral legislatures. Super-seniors seem to occupy an advantaged position, as prior seniority levels strongly shape subsequent ones, and they are also less vulnerable to electoral shocks. At the same time, we descriptively show that none of the countries in our sample provide the full configuration conducive to persistence, suggesting that contemporary democracies contain institutional arrangements that promote circulation within the legislative elite and limit concentration.
Youth transitions to adulthood have become longer, more complex and diverse, yet these shifts are often overlooked in studies of political attitudes and behaviour, leading to contradictory conclusions. This article explores the evolving nature of youth political engagement through the concept of ‘engagement biographies’, drawing on biographical interviews with young activists in Spain. It examines the extent to which young activists experience political involvement as a dynamic, context-dependent process shaped by their individualised and de-standardised paths to adulthood, interpersonal relationships and broader socio-political contexts. Adopting a biographical perspective enhances understanding of key trends identified in the literature on youth and politics, including the volatility of participation, a preference for direct and less institutionalised activism, the integration of activism into everyday life, and increasing disengagement from formal politics. These insights contribute to a more nuanced understanding of young people’s patterns of political engagement and their broader implications for democracies.
This review article examines the rise of democratic resilience as a central concept in the comparative study of regime stability and change. Over the past decade, resilience – understood not simply as institutional survival but as the capacity of democratic systems to adapt, regenerate and deepen democratic norms in the face of crises – has gained prominence in response to accelerating autocratisation. The article situates this shift within the diverse pathways through which democracies weaken and decline, including executive aggrandisement and growing political polarisation. While the existing literature has improved our understanding of autocratisation, much comparative research remains influenced by a relatively narrow set of Northern cases. As a result, it risks treating regional experiences as universal. Drawing on evidence from Africa, Asia and other parts of the Global South, the article argues for a comparative theory of democratic resilience that incorporates state capture, rapid authoritarian reversals and more diverse forms of aggrandisement.
This article seeks to explore the nature and determinants of political conflict in European Parliament (EP) debates within the unique context of the Rule of Law Crisis (RoLC). While previous research on this topic has mainly studied the ideological dimension of this conflict, we shift focus to the affective dimension, analysing the roles of negative sentiment and motive-based criticism through a quantitative analysis of 53 hand-coded debates. We find that negativity dominates, and that this tone is adopted by Members of the EP (MEPs) irrespective of the ideological orientation or geographical origin of their national party. However, concerning levels of motive-based cynicism are primarily driven by MEPs from more right-wing, Eurosceptic and, to a lesser extent, Central and Eastern European parties. These findings suggest that the EP, an institution traditionally geared towards compromise-building, is becoming increasingly susceptible to the normative jeopardies of negative and attack politics when it comes to the RoLC.
There are concerns about the distinctiveness of opposition party behaviour in parliaments, but the literature offers mixed findings. This article analyses how distinctive the opposition is from the government in its voting patterns and speech-making in four parliamentary democracies (Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, United Kingdom [UK]) over a long time span (1945–2020). Our results show a diversity of trends in opposition distinctiveness. Overall, the distinctiveness in terms of parliamentary voting behaviour increased up to the 1980s, and slightly decreased or remained stable thereafter in most countries. Opposition sentiment in speech-making follows a different pattern, particularly in the UK and Canada, where the increasingly positive sentiment of governing party MPs and the increasingly negative sentiment of opposition parties has led to significant divergence over time. These trends in opposition distinctiveness in voting and speech-making are shown to be related most strongly to opposition parties’ prior governing experience, in particular in Denmark and the Netherlands.
