Institutional Choice in New Democracies

By Kenneth Benoit, John W. Schiemann. 2001

115 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0eb5321e79a8dc9d4c10283a5d855c486e23f922

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Political Science and International Relations

1. S. Hix
2. John M. Carey
3. Kenneth Benoit
4. Bjørn Høyland

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Kenneth Benoit

In Strategy and Management

1. S. Hix
2. Kenneth Benoit

Citations in the corpus

• The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low‐Magnitude Proportional Electoral Systems (2011, background): “Source: Golder (2005); Center on Democratic Performance (2006); Reynolds, Reilly and Ellis (2005); Benoit and Schiemann (2001).”
• Electoral Laws as Political Consequences: Explaining the Origins and Change of Electoral Institutions (2007, methodology): “The choice of PR formula in the Hungarian electoral law of 1989, for instance, was delegated by the roundtable negotiators to a small group of experts who purported to understand its implications and who cited technical criteria in justifying their choice (Benoit & Schiemann 2001).”