The impact of using proportional representation system on the fragmentation of the party system in Algeria. Applied to the elections of the National People's Assembly (1997-2017)

Mahgoub, Ali Mahmoud Article The impact of using proportional representation system on the fragmentation of the party system in Algeria. Applied to the elections of the National People's Assembly (1997-2017) Review of Economics and Political Science (REPS) Provided in Cooperation with: Cairo University, Cairo Suggested Citation: Mahgoub, Ali Mahmoud (2022) : The impact of using proportional representation system on the fragmentation of the party system in Algeria. Applied to the elections of the National People's Assembly (1997-2017), Review of Economics and Political Science (REPS), ISSN 2631-3561, Emerald, Bingley, Vol. 7, Iss. 4, pp. 317-333, https://doi.org/10.1108/REPS-01-2020-0012 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/316068 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ The impact of using proportional representation system on the fragmentation of the party system in Algeria. Applied to the elections of the National People’s Assembly (1997–2017) Ali Mahmoud Mahgoub Foreign Information Sector, Egypt State Information Service, Cairo, Egypt Abstract Purpose –The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of using proportional representation system on the fragmentation of the party system in the Algerian political system within the period from 1997 to 2017, in which Algeria has experienced five legislative elections regularly every five years by testing a hypothesis about adopting the proportional representation system on the basis of the closed list during the foregoing legislative elections has obviously influenced the exacerbation of the Algerian party system’s fragmentation, compared to other factors. Design/methodology/approach –The essence of the theoretical framework of this study is to address the effect of the electoral system as an independent variable on the party system as a dependent variable. The starting point for that framework is to reassess the “Duverger’slaw,”which appeared since the early 1950s and has influenced the foregoing relationship, and then to review the literature on a new phase that tried to provide a more accurate mechanism for determining the number of parties and their relative weight, whether in terms of electoral votes or parliamentary seats. This means that researchers began to use a measure called the effective number of parties (ENP) for Laakso and Taagepera since 1979. The study elaborates the general concepts of the electoral system and the party system. It used Laakso, Taagepera index of the “ENP”to measure the phenomenon of fragmentation party during the five legislative elections from 1997 to 2017 in Algeria. Findings –The results of the study reveal that the proportional representation electoral system –beside other factors –had clear impacts on the fragmentation of the Algerian party system by all standards, whether on the level of the apparent rise in the number of the parties represented in the Algerian parliament from 10 parties in 1997 election to 36 parties in 2017 election or according to the index of Laakso and Taagepera (ENP). The average number of effective number of electoral parties in the five elections was around 7.66, and the average number of effective number of parliamentary parties in the five elections was around 4.39, which puts Algeria in an advanced degree of the fragmentation of the party system. Originality/value –This study about the phenomenon of the fragmentation of the party system, which is one of the new subjects in the field of comparative politics –globally and in the Arab world. Hence, the value of this study aims to shed light on this mysterious area of science, the fragmentation of the party system in the Algerian political system during the period from 1997 to 2017. Keywords Party system fragmentation, The electoral system, The party system, The effective number of parties (ENP), The legislative elections in Algeria, Party system fragmentation, The PR system Paper type Research paper Party system in Algeria 317 © Ali Mahmoud Mahgoub. Published in Review of Economics and Political Science. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ legalcode The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2631-3561.htm Received 18 January 2020 Revised 9 July 2020 Accepted 10 August 2020 Review of Economics and Political Science Vol. 7 No. 4, 2022 pp. 317-333 Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2631-3561 p-ISSN: 2356-9980 DOI 10.1108/REPS-01-2020-0012 1. Introduction Researchers and scholars in the field of comparative political systems devoted their attention to the phenomenon of the party system’s fragmentation recently; however, it is an old phenomenon. Since the 1960s, a number of western political researchers, such as Douglas Ray, Markku Laakso, Rein Taagepera and Arend Lijphart, began to study and analyze the phenomenon. On the other hand, few Arab researchers addressed the foregoing phenomenon; among them were Dr. Mazen Hassan and Dr. Yusri Al-Azbawi (Hassan and Al-Azbawi, 2013), who undertook a brief study on the fragmentation of the Egyptian party system after the January 25th revolution and Inmaculada Szmolka (2010), who provided another study on the fragmentation of the Moroccan party system. Accordingly, this study tries to shed light on the phenomenon of party system’s fragmentation within the Algerian political system from 1997 to 2017, in which Algeria has experienced five regular legislative elections, once every five years. The study consists of four sections, including the research problem, the importance of the study, the theoretical and conceptual framework and then the case study, which will be applied on the Algerian party system by application on the Algerian case using the Laakso and Taagepera index to measure the effective number of parties (ENP) and the fragmentation of the party system during the five legislative elections from 1997 to 2017, and then the conclusion. 2. The research problem The research problem of that study seeks to answer a key question about the impacts of Algeria’s adoption of a proportional representation system during the successive legislative elections from 1997 to 2017 on the fragmentation of its party system. The study attempts to test a hypothesis about adopting the proportional representation system on the basis of the closed list during the foregoing legislative elections has obviously influenced the exacerbation of the Algerian party system’s fragmentation, compared to other factors. 3. The scientific importance of the study Analyzing the impacts of the electoral system on the party system has become increasingly important because few researchers are interested in studying the electoral systems of non-competitive political systems in the Arab region, in general, and Algeria, in particular. Many researchers argued that the electoral systems of states, that witness electoral irregularities and lack impartiality, are insignificant. Consequently, the current study reconsiders such arguments and goes in a different direction in which electoral systems are already of critical importance in the non-competitive systems than what has been recognized by most academicians and researchers. The researcher believes that further research is needed in this area to internalize the dynamics and functions of electoral reforms that emerge from time to time in many Arab political systems, in general, and the Algerian system, in particular. The relationship between adopting the proportional representation on the basis of the closed list and the exacerbation of the Algerian party system’s fragmentation is still a controversial case study. The scientific research has not been given enough concern about it. Accordingly, if the hypotheses of the electoral system literature are valid in the Arab context, this would be a proof of their strength, and the difference between the Algerian and Arabic culture would not influence the anticipated relations between the variables of that study. REPS 7,4 318 4. The theoretical and conceptual framework 4.1 The theoretical framework The essence of the theoretical framework of this study is to address the effect of the electoral system as an independent variable on the party system as a dependent variable. The starting point for that framework is to reassess the “Duverger’s law,”which appeared since the early 1950s and has influenced the foregoing relationship, and then to review the literature on a new phase that tried to provide a more accurate mechanism for determining the number of parties and their relative weight, whether in terms of electoral votes or parliamentary seats. This means that researchers began to use a measure called the ENP for Laakso and Taagepera since 1979. In 1951, Duverger’s explanation of a state’s number of parties was fully commensurate with the rational-choice model, while his understanding of the party organization depended on the social and economic moulding of voters. However, the two previous trends, the analysis of Duverger on the numbers of parties was effective enough to continue for a long time. Duverger started with a brief historical explanation for the dualism of parties in the UK and the USA. Thus, he concluded that the electoral system is of due importance and the single-ballot majority vote is consistent with the dualism of parties. Duverger argued that the numbers of parties could be minimized through the mechanical factor, the underrepresentation of the third party, and the psychological factor, as well as voters’awareness that they may lose their votes if they vote for a third party (Schlesinger, 2006). That analysis was conducted by William Riker who gave it the name of “Duverger’s law”in 1982. Since that time, “Duverger’s law”has become a core element of studying political parties. Pippa Norris sought to assess the effects of electoral rules on political conduct, particularly in more than 30 states, and concluded that Duverger’s main assumption on multi-electoral systems favor party dualism of parties, whereas proportional representation systems are associated with multi-party system (Schlesinger, 2006). Christopher D. Raymond concluded that the results of his study proposed that adopting proportional systems caused an exacerbation of the party system’s fragmentation that led to the development of the multi-party systems in those states adopted it. That result proved the positive effect of the secular trend on party system’s fragmentation, which also led to the development of multi-party systems (Raymond, 2014). In a study for Pippa Norris conducted in 1997, she touched upon one of Duverger’s most famous claims, which is that the plurality rule favors a two-party system while proportional systems lead to multi-party systems. This raises a question of how to count parties, particularly very small ones. In recent years, Lijphart (1994) reconsidered the evidence for this assumption. During the period between 1945 and 1990, Lijphart compared 27 advanced industrialized democracies based on the Laakso and Taagepera measure of the effective number of parliamentary parties (ENPP), which takes into consideration account not only of the number of parties but also the relative size of them. In addition, Lijphart found that the ENPP was 2.0 in plurality systems, 2.8 in majority systems and 3.6 in proportional systems. Within proportional systems, he found that the minimum votes also had an effect on the inclusion of minor parties (Norris, 1997). Pippa Norris used the same measure (ENPP) to expand the scope of the analysis to cover a wider range of democracies, including developing and developed societies, particularly in that election held in the mid-1990s. The results of that analysis showed that the ENPP was 3.1 in majority systems, 3.9 in mixed or semi-proportional systems and 4.0 in proportional systems. Duverger’s law, which ascertained that proportional representation systems are associated with a multi-party system lent greater confirmation for the foregoing analysis (Norris, 1997). Party system in Algeria 319 Finally, the study depends on the conclusion of REIN TAAGEPERA and BERNARD GROFMAN in which all attempts to count the number of political parties emerging in democracies was usually based on one of two seemingly incompatible approaches: (1) The “institutional”approach (e.g. Duverger’s law and hypothesis focused on the nature of the electoral system and on the number of seats per district. (2) The “ideological”approach, which stressed the nature and degree of social cleavages. TAAGEPERA and GROFMAN tried to synthesizing between the two foregoing approaches through showing that the election system and cleavage type interacts to affect the number of parties. The most striking result is that the ENP is counted by adding “one”to the number of parties. Duverger’s hypothesis is replaced by a much more number to predict the ENP (Grofman, 1985). ENP is the measure that the study will rely on to analyze the Algerian case, and it will be examined in more detail in the conceptual framework. 4.2 The conceptual framework This section addresses the concepts of the study, which are party system, party system’s fragmentation, the effective number of political parties (ENP), the electoral system and the proportional representation system on the basis of the closed list, as follows: 4.2.1 The party system. Most literature on the party phenomenon focused on studying it in terms of its origin, composition, function, as well as types and classifications of party systems prevalent in the world whether bilateral, pluralistic, polarized or non-polarized, competitive or non-competitive, institutional or non-institutional, etc. Thus, researchers did not develop a precise definition of the party system itself. In addition, many scholars were keen to distinguish between political parties and party system, the later reflects the interactions between parties existing within a political system while the former is political organizations that aim to gain power, and rule. “Scott Mainwaring”was one of the most eminent scholars who attempted to develop an approach to the definition of a party system, as he defined it as being “a combination of interconnected parts that interact in a typical way to form the complex.”After that, “Mainwaring”introduced another definition of the party system as being “the system in which a group of parties interact in typical or systematic ways to formulate that system.”The concept of systemic interactions refers to critical rules of how parties compete widely, even if some rules are contentious and subject to change. The idea of a system focuses on the continuity of the components of that system and guarantees a minimum stability of the party competition, and if a severe break in the constituent parts of that system occurs, a different system will replace the former one (Mainwaring, 1998, p. 7). “Maurice Duverger”defined the party system as “a group of elements: number of parties, their internal structures and their size, as well as the form of alliances between these parties and the opposition model practiced by them within a political system, which are stable over a relatively long period”(Wahab, 2011, p. 138). The British jurist, “James Price,”used the term “party system”to refer to “a system in which political parties as muscles and nerves for bones; they are the formal structures and institutions in a political system”(Slimane, 2013, p. 74). On the level of Arab literature, the Algerian political professor “Abdelkader Abdulali” developed a definition of the party system as being “a system of interactions that are consisting of opposing and cooperative relations between political parties, which operate within the political arena; this means that a party system represents a sub-system of the political system”(Abdulali, 2008, p. 65). REPS 7,4 320 4.2.2 The fragmentation of the party system. The Italian researcher “Giovanni Sartori”was the first to address the concept of a fragmented party system when reviewing the different types of party systems; he added a new type of party systems other than those systems with limited pluralism, which consist of three, four or five active parties and those with excessive pluralism, which consist of more than five parties. The later is called a fragmented party system, which is significantly disintegrated, given that including more than one party makes no difference in the pattern of political and party competition. “Sartori”argued that a party system is not a system with a coherent structure (Richard, 2006, p. 57). In practice, a study on the party system of Ukraine argued that the party system prevailed was fragmented due to the weakness of parties and the instability in their relationship, particularly in the early 1990s (1990–1994); that was linked to the period of building a multi-party system after the unilateral era prevailed in the Soviet era (CENTER, 2017, p. 8). The study of both “Youssry Aezzbawi”and “Mazen Hassan”that was entitled “The Party Map in Egypt after the Revolution: From the Restricted Pluralism to the Fragmentation of Party System”and published in 2013, was one of the most important Arabic studies that tackled the phenomenon of party system’s fragmentation (Hassan, 2013). As well, a research paper conducted by “Inmaculada Szmolka”analyzed the fragmentation of the Moroccan party system and the effect of the electoral system on fragmentation, considering certain elements such as apportioning seats within constituencies, the electoral formula and the electoral barrier. Szmolka highlighted some characteristics of fragmentation, using the Rae’s fractionalization index, the ENP and the parties in government coalitions (Szmolka, 2010). Another study by Dr. “Mazen Hassan,”entitled “The Political Effects of the Egyptian Electoral System through Applying to the People’s Assembly Elections hold in 2011/2012,” sought to highlight the political implications of adopting the parallel mixed system in the election of the Egyptian People’s Assembly hold in 2011/2012 according to five main outputs (variables), which are the voter turnout, the level of representation of women, the structure of the party system, the degree of non-relatively and the electoral cost of the parliamentary seat. The key assumption of Hassan’s study is that the institutional factor represented in the electoral system is able to influence the foregoing outputs (variables) through empirical tests that show the apparent institutional impact on the degree of party system’s fragmentation, but the effect of the institutional factor may decline due to social or cultural factors, particularly in terms of the voter turnout, and the level of representation of women (Hassan, 2013). In a study of the Algerian researcher “Omar Ben Slimane”entitled “The effect of the electoral system on political parties in Algeria: 1989–2012,”the researcher tackled, but just briefly, the fragmentation of the Algerian party system according to the Laakso and Taagepera index in the four legislations in Algeria from 1997 to 2012. The scale appeared in the 1997, 2007 and 2012 elections and did not appear in the 2002 election (Slimane, 2013). In her PhD dissertation, “Robin E. Best”referred that documenting a party system’s fragmentation requires a precise definition of the size of a party system. She relied on the ENP as a primary measure of the size of a party system. (ENP) indicates the hypothetical equalsized parties that would have the same effect on fractionalization of the party system like the actual parties with varying sizes. For example, if four parties gained 25% of the legislative seats for each party, and then the (ENP) is exactly four. The use of the (ENP) as the measure of a party system’s size allows party vote shares to determine their weights. All parties receiving votes or seats are included in the calculation, although parties that gained very few votes or seats will count much less toward the overall number while larger parties will count Party system in Algeria 321 more. Thus, the use of the (ENP) as the measure of a party system’s size avoids the problems of alternate measures, such as arbitrary cutoff points for counting parties, by allowing all parties to determine their own degree of relevance. Furthermore, this measure is sensitive to fluctuations in electoral returns, and is able to aptly capture changes in a party system’s size over time (Best, 2007). Finally, “Christopher D. Raymond”is considered one of the fewest scholars who attempted to develop a definition of fragmentation. “Raymond”meant by fragmentation not only the number of parties, but their relative voting strength, as well (Raymond, 2014). 4.2.3 The effective number of parties. The term of “ENP,”which takes the acronym (ENP) was developed in late 1970s by “Laakso and Taagepera,”and it was known as the Laakso and Taagepera index (Laakso, 1979). After that, many studies focused on analyzing and modifying the concept in addition to analyzing its close relation with the phenomenon of party system’s fragmentation because the basic idea of the concept was to measure the fragmentation of the party system in any country using mathematical equations and methods. According to the Dutch American researcher “Arend Lijphart,”the ENP is a concept provided by “Laakso And Taagepera”in 1979, as an attempt to figure out the number of political parties in a country, and, at the same time, to identify the relative weight of these parties in which the relative strength refers to the parties’share of electoral votes (the effective number of electoral parties ENEP) or refers to their share of the seats in the parliament (the ENPP). That procedure is useful, in particular, comparing the effects of electoral systems within different countries. The number of parties becomes equal to the ENP when all parties are equally strong, but in another case the ENP may be less than the actual number of parties. In general, the ENP is a recurrent process for measuring the fragmentation of a party system (Lijphart, 1999, Patterns of Democracy). Both “Patrick Dumont”and “Jean-François Caulier”argued that the ENP is a standard numerical measurement tool used in the comparative analysis of party systems designed by “Laakso”and “Taagepera”in 1979 (Caulier and Dumont, 2003,p.2).“Sartori”named that measure as the smart way to count parties within a political system. Some scholars believed that the simplest way to identify the number of parties is to monitor the number of parties represented in parliament; however, some other scholars defined a minimum number of seats in parliament such as 3%, as they figured that parties got this percentage or higher are related to the party system. The two French research studies called the foregoing as “the effective number of relevant parties”(Caulier and Dumont, 2003,p.3). The two French researchers, namely, “Patrick Dumont”and “Jean-Francois Caulier,” elaborated on clarifying the relationship between the fragmentation of the party system as a phenomenon and measures of the ENP. They argued that the level of competition between political parties is of importance when classifying the party systems. It is said that a fragmented party system is that consists of many elected parties and that can be considered when defining the party system. Dumont and Caulier argued that the number of parties alone does not reflect the nature of the party system; however, the criterion for quantity is still significantly considered when measuring the party system’s fragmentation (Caulier, 2011, p. 2). The ENP developed by “Laakso”and “Taagepera”in 1979 is still the most widely and consistently used index despite some flaws emphasized by researchers (Caulier and Dumont, 2003, p. 3). The current study adopts the argument developed by “Arend Lijphart”about the “ENP” in which he applied Laakso and Taagepera index to 27 Western democratic countries from 1945–1990. “Lijphart”addressed a theoretical problem found in the literature of comparative REPS 7,4 322 politics on how to count parties in a party system and, at the same time, considering the relative weight of each party, particularly small ones. “Lijphart”pointed to the British party system, which was usually known to be a bipartisan system, but, in fact, there were more than two parties represented in the House of Commons, which means that third parties were not simply counted (Lijphart, 1994, p. 67): “Douglas Rae”presented an index based on the percentage of votes obtained by each party in the elections through the following equation “Fv 51/Pvi2”and also based on the proportion of parliamentary seats obtained by each party participating in the elections through another similar equation, which is “Fs 51/Psi2.” Regarding the values of fragmentation in the Douglas Rae index, “Dumont”and “Caulier” indicated that the more the result of the later formula for measuring the fragmentation rate of a party system is close to 1, the more the party system is fragmented. For example, we have five parties; each one has 20% of the available seats (0.2%). The Rae index will reach 0.80, indicating a highly fragmented party system. All five square proportions of seats should be added and the result should be extracted from 1. Nevertheless, if a party gains all the seats and gets one percentage, the Rae index will point to zero (the minimum value of the index) and this means that the party system is not fragmented. Therefore, the fragmentation index designed by Rae provides critical information on the number and relative size of parties (Caulier and Dumont, 2003, p. 4). The next formula clarifies how to calculate (ENP) and the logical link of ENP to Rae index, which can be also calculated through identifying the percentage of votes obtained by the party in the legislative elections and the number of seats obtained by the party in parliament. Consequently, there are two equations to get the ENP of a party system within any country, as follows: Equation of electoral votes of a specified party: N¼1.XðviÞ2 Equation of the parliamentary seats of a specified party: N¼1.XðsiÞ2 “Lijphart”argued that the concept of an ENPP provides the same data included by Rae index on the fragmentation of a party system. (N) can be calculated from (F) through the following equation: N¼1 1F “Lijphart”contended that (ENP) developed by “Laakso”and “Taagepera”and symbolized by (N) accurately determined the number of parties rather than the Rae index symbolized by (F) and developed by Douglas Rae. “Lijphart”gave an example to illustrate the foregoing as follows; in a bi-partisan system in which each party has an equal share of electoral votes or parliamentary seats, the scale (N), which indicates the ENP equals 2 while the scale (F) equals 0.50. Nevertheless, if one of the two parties became stronger than the other and obtained 70% and the second party had 30%, the scale (N) will equal 1.72. That is consistent with the general preliminary ruling that a party system is going to be a single party. In this case, Rae scale (F) equals t0.42. Similarly, a three-party system will have the same proportions in which (N) will equal 3 and (F) will be 0.67, but if one of these three parties becomes less than the other two parties, (N) will fluctuate between 2 and 3 depending on the relative strength of this third Party system in Algeria 323 party, while (F) will be between 0.50 and 0.67 according to the example provided by “Lijphart” (Lijphart, 1994, p. 68). “Lijphart”emphasized on the index of (ENP) in which within each electoral process, the (ENP) can be applied to the share of electoral votes of parties participating in this process, and that is symbolized by (V). In addition, it can be applied to the share of seats in parliament gained by those parties participating in elections and symbolized by (S). Thus, each party participating in an electoral process will gain votes but this does not mean that all parties involved, particularly small, will gain seats in parliament. The whole process is affected by many other factors such as mechanical and psychological factors, as well as proximal and distal factors (Lijphart, 1994, p. 69). “Lijphart”argued that the mechanical and approximate (proximal) factors influence the process of converting votes into seats in the elections immediately. Here, a question is arisen about to what extent the foregoing is biased against small parties? “Lijphart”referred to the voters, politicians, political activists and financial supporters who are unwilling to waste their voices, energy or money and they will tend to elect large parties. Consequently, such a strategic behavior eliminates the psychological and exclusionary (distal) impacts of electoral systems; the ENEP is affected only by the psychological effects of electoral systems. The ENPP is influenced by expectations (psychological factors) and by actual mechanical factors in the process of converting votes into seats. In other words, the ENEP is likely to be minimized because of psychological factors. However, any reduction in the ENEP in favor of the ENPP will be exclusively due to the impact of mechanical factors (Lijphart, 1994,p.70). 4.2.4 The electoral system. The definitions of an electoral system are numerous, expanding and narrowing from one researcher to another. Dr. “James Connolly”was one of those who provide a narrow concept of electoral system in Western literature. “Connolly”focused on the electoral formula considerably, and defined the electoral system as “a set of rules to transform the votes cast in elections to the representative assembly seats in accordance with specific formula electoral.”Here, he identified the electoral formula to be “the rule that governs the transformation process of votes into seats.”Accordingly, “Connolly”figured out that there are different types of electoral formulas, but they can be collected in groups as follows: majority systems in which candidates should obtain a majority of votes to be elected whether absolutely or relatively, proportional representation systems in which parties’candidates are represented in proportion to the votes gained by each party, and mixed systems that combine two of the following systems (Connolly, 2013, p. 5). Dr. “Abdel Salam Nuer”was one of those who adopted a narrow concept of electoral system in Arabic literature. He defined that concept as “a set of principles, rules and institutions that organize and affect the process of election.”In other words, the electoral system refers to a set of procedures by which the votes are transformed into seats in legislative bodies (Nuer, 2003, p. 22). The majority of Western researchers tended to adopt the wide concept of electoral system. “David M. Farrell”was a pioneer researcher in that field as he differentiated between electoral systems and electoral laws. “Farrell”provided a specific definition for electoral systems; these systems determine the means through which votes are transformed to seats in an election. “Farrell”also argued that an electoral system is “a set of rules that deal with the electoral process itself with regard to how voters vote, the design of the ballot paper, the way of counting votes, determining who is finally win the elections.”Electoral laws as a group of rules governing the electoral process as a whole, starting from calling for elections, clarifying the conditions for candidates, electioneering, the voting process and ending with counting votes to determine the outcome of the elections; “Farrell”focused on the rule of determining who has the right to vote whether REPS 7,4 324 democratic transformation, including the success of the implementation of the legislative elections regularly every five years over 20 years without an interruption as happened in early 1990s of the past century, allowing the representation of the small parties in all successive electoral processes, and permitting a steady increase in the number of parties in the parliament from one election to another. However, this electoral system –besides other factors –had negative impacts on the successive Algerian electoral experience such as the increasing degree of fragmentation of the Algerian party system by all standards, whether on the level of the numerical representation of the parties in APN as an apparent rise for the parties represented in the APN in the consecutive elections from 10 parties in 1997 election to 36 parties in 2017 election or on the level of Laakso and Taagepera index for the ENP. The first indicator ENEP averaged in the elections five was around 7.66 and the measure of the second indicator ENPP in the five elections was around 4.39, which places Algeria in an advanced degree of the fragmentation party system (the pattern of pluralism party systems, with the presence of two parties dominant, index retail about 4.41 according to the classification made by the scientist of politics Alan Siaroff for party systems, which focuses on the relative size and strength of the votes of the parties obtained more than 3% in the election. From the foregoing, it seems that there is a suitable degree of reliability of the hypothesis presented by the study about the existence of a positive relationship between Algeria’s system of proportional representation in the closed list, and the high degree of fragmentation in the party system according to the index of Laakso and Taagepera (ENP) during the period 1997–2017. Therefore, it is clear that the Algerian case corresponded to the general theoretical context of the literature presented in this regard about the increasing degree of fragmentation in the party system in light of the use of the PR system. Here the paper proposes to do more in future research on the phenomenon of fragmentation of party systems at the Arab and African levels, as follows: Doing more comparative studies among Arab and African countries that follow the system of proportional representation by using the effective party number (ENP), and comparing the extent of their impact on their party systems, and whether or not they effected on the phenomenon of party system fragmentation? Especially, as there are several Arab and African countries that use PR system, including Tunisia, Morocco, Jordan, Iraq, Palestine, South Africa, Namibia, Cameroon, Guinea and Egypt in some periods. preparing more comprehensive and comparative studies on the phenomenon of fragmentation of the party system in the Arab and African countries in general, whether those that use the majority, proportional or even mixed electoral systems, by using the effective party number (ENP) of Laakso and Taagepera. This is similar to a lot of studies carried out by western researchers in Western democracies on this phenomenon. References Ali, L.B. (2017), “Legislative elections in Algeria, may 4, 2017: an analytical study”, from the Arab Democratic Center, available at: https://democraticac.de/?p5485932017 (accessed 7 January 2019) Benoit, K. (2000), “Which electoral formula is the most proportional? A new look with new evidence”, Political Analysis, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 381-388. Best, R.E. (2007), “Political parties, voters, and institutions:an examination of party system fragmentation”,Advanced Democracies, 1950-2005, Binghamton University, New York, NY. Party system in Algeria 331 Bouandel, Y. (2005), “Reforming the Algerian electoral system”,The Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 393-415. Caulier, J.-F. (2011), “The Interpretation of the Laakso-Taagepera Effective Number of Parties”, Documents de Travail du Center d’Economie de la Sorbonne, Paris. Caulier, J.F. and Dumont, P. (2003), “The ‘EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF RELEVANT PARTIES’: how voting power improves Laakso-Taagepera’s index”. Connolly, J. (2013), “Glossary of electoral systems”,Paper presented to the workshop was held with members of the Commission amending the Egyptian Constitution, The Arab Forum for Alternatives Studies Foundation, Cairo. Farrell, D.M. (2011), Electoral Systems: A Comparative Introduction, Palgrave, London and New York, NY. Grofman, R.T. (1985), “Rethinking Duverger’s law: predicting the effective number of parties in plurality and PR systems –parties minus issues”,European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 341-352. Hassan, M. (2006), “The impact of the electoral system on the party system: case study German”, Master Degree, Faculty of Economics and Science Political, Cairo University, Cairo. Hassan, D.M. (2013), “The political effects of the Egyptian electoral system applied to the 2011/2012 people’s assembly elections”,Democratic Transformation Series, Al-Mahrousa Center for Publishing, Press Services and Information, Cairo. Hassan, D. and Al-Azbawi, Y. (2013), “Partisan map in Egypt after the revolution: from constrained pluralism to partisan fragmentation”,Strategic Pamphlets, Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Cairo. Laakso, M. (1979), “The ‘effective’number of parties: ‘a measure with application to west Europe’”, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 3-27. Larkam, R. (2006), “Electoral systems and their impact on the political parties in Algeria”, Master Thesis, Faculty of Law, Mentouri University, Constantine, Algeria. Lijphart, A. (1994), Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Lijphart, A. (1999), Patterns of Democracy, New Haven/Yale UP, London. Mainwaring, S. (1998), “RETHINKING PARTY SYSTEMS THEORY IN the THIRD WAVE OF DEMOCRATIZATION the importance of party system institutionalization”, Working Paper #260, The Kellogg Institute. Morsy, A. (2017), “An overview of Algeria’s upcoming elections, an analytical study”, available at: https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/68160 and https://carnegieendowment.org/?lang5en (accessed 18 May 2020). Norris, P. (1997), “Choosing electoral systems: proportional, majoritarian and mixed systems”, International Political Science Review, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 297-312. Nuer, D.A. (2003), “The political dimensions of the development of the electoral system in Egypt. D. A.-M.)”, Electoral systems between Egypt and the world, The Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University. Quenter, L.K. (2000), “Electoral systems, party system fragmentation and government”. Raymond, C.D. (2014), “The effect of the secret ballot on party system fragmentation: a test of three competing arguments”,Politics, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 378-390. Richard, S.K.W.J. (2006), Handbook of Party Politics, SAGE Publications. Schlesinger, J.A. (2006), “Maurice Duverger and the study of political parties”,French Politics, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 58-68. Slimane, O.B. (2013), “The effects of the electoral system on parties in Algeria 2012-1989”, Master Thesis, 2013Saida –Algeria Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Dr. Tahir Moula. REPS 7,4 332 Szmolka, I. (2010), “Party system fragmentation in Morocco”,The Journal of North African Studies, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 13-37. Wahab, A.M. (2011), The Electoral System in Algeria. Approach about the Political Participation and Competition, Dar Ermaah for publication and distribution, Constantine. Corresponding author Ali Mahmoud Mahgoub can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Party system in Algeria 333