Workshop on Long-term perspectives on parliaments and governments

Du 26 mars 2018 au 27 mars 2018
  • Actualité Sciences PoActualité Sciences Po


"Workshop on Long-term perspectives on parliaments and governments"

[langue: anglais]

From 26 March 2018 at 2:00 p.m. to 27 March 2:00 p.m.

LIEPP, 254 Boulevard Saint-Germain, 75007 Paris


The workshop will focus on long-term trends in the development of electoral institutions, legislatures and executive-legislative relations. Papers will either analyze their topics within a historical perspective (from 50 years to 200) or by considering the impact of specific historical events and choices primarily on the parliamentary arena. A major aim of the workshop is to assess why and how historical arrangements may impact legislatures decades after they took place. The conference presentations will first and foremost deal with the institutional and sociological aspects of long-term trends in European countries.

Bjorn-Erik Rasch
Olivier Rozenberg 

Laboratoire interdisciplinaire d’évaluation des politiques publiques (LIEPP)
Department of Political Science, University of Oslo



Monday, March 26

14.00 Welcome & introduction by Bjorn-Erik Rasch (University of Oslo) & Olivier Rozenberg (Sciences Po)

Chair: Shane Martin, University of Essex

Session 1: Electoral competition

14.30 Alexandra Cirone (London School of Economics) "Under Pressure: Political Geography of Mobilization in France"
Discussant: J.Navarro (Lille Catholic University)

15.15 Michael Koss (Munich University) "Legislative democracy and the problem of conceptual shrinking. Lessons from a longitudinal comparison"
Discussant: B. van Coppenolle (Linden University)

16.00 Break

16.15 Julien Navarro (Lille Catholic University) "Short Terms in the Long Term: Historical and Theoretical Foundations of Repeated Elections"
Discussant: Sh. Martin (University of Essex)

Session 2: Sociology of MPs

17.00 Athanassios Gouglas (KU Leuven University) "Legislative turnover in West European chambers & parties 1945 – 2015"
Discussant: V. Schröder (Bremen University)

17.45 Sylvain Brouard (Sciences Po) "Institutional settings and parliamentary turn-over The example of the French Senate 1959 - 2017"
Discussant: A. Gouglas (KU Leuven University)

Tuesday, March 27

Chair: Emiliano Grossman (Sciences Po)

Session 3: Institutional rules

9.30 Alexandra Cirone (LSE) & Brenda van Coppenolle (Linden University) "Bridging the Gap: Lottery-based Procedures in European Democratization"
Discussant: M. Koss (Munich University)

10.15 Bjorn-Erik Rasch (University of Oslo) "Investiture Rules and Government Formation in Israel, 1949-2015"
Discussant: S. Brouard (Sciences Po)

11.00 Break

11.15 Olivier Rozenberg (Sciences Po) "Selection or oversight? Assessing the de-parliamentarisation thesis in France over a long period"
Discussant: A. Cirone (LSE)

Session 4: Party politics

12.00 Valentin Schröder (Bremen University) "When Rules Follow Practice: The Evolution of Intra-party Legislative Centralization and Specialization in Germany, 1890-1969"
Discussant: J. Navarro (Lille Catholic University)

12.45 Conclusion & prospects

13.00 End of the conference

2nd Interdisciplinary Corruption Research (ICR) Forum

15-16 Juin 2017, Sciences Po, Paris
  • LIEPP-Sciences PoLIEPP-Sciences Po
  • LIEPP-Sciences PoLIEPP-Sciences Po


The Second Interdisciplinary Corruption Research (ICR) Forum “How to conceptualize corruption? Understanding corruption to design effective policies” aims to bring together international young researchers working in the field of (anti-)corruption. Keynote speeches, workshops and presentations focus on the conceptualization and theoretical underpinnings of anti-corruption policies.

The ICRForum 2017 offer room for exchange and new ideas on how corruption definitions change across time and space. These discussions combine theoretical and empirical efforts to conceptualize specific occurrences of corruption, such as systemic corruption or political corruption etc., and empirical work aiming to identify the roots of the problem. Furthermore, based on this jointly elaborated understanding of corruption, we seek to propose improvements for existing anti-corruption policies and develop ideas on new anti-corruption strategies.

More information about the conference on United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) website : 

"Conceptualizing corruption to design effective policies: how education is key to tackling crime"


Thursday, June 15th 2017

09:00 – 09:30 Registration and coffee 

09:30 – 10:30  Welcome note from the ICRNetwork, LIEPP and UNODC representatives 

10:30 – 12:30 Workshop session I

  1. The Role of Data: How Can Indicators Be Useful for Combatting Corruption?
  2. The Impact of International Assistance on Domestic Anti-Corruption Strategies
  3. How to Successfully Implement International Legal Norms in National AntiCorruption Contexts
  4. Corruption and the Impact of Democracy (authors' workshop) 

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

13:30 – 15:30 Workshop session II

  1. Historical Roots of Corruption
  2. Conceptualizing Corruption in Fragile States
  3. The Importance of Social Norms in Designing Anti-Corruption Mechanisms
  4. Corruption and the Role of Law (authors' workshop) 

15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break 

16:00 – 18:00 Keynote speeches

  1. Kath Hall, Australian National University: "Don't forget the Whistleblower: Challenges in Regulating for the Reporting of Corruption"
  2. Julio Bacio-Terracino, OECD

Friday, June 15th 2017

09:00 – 10:00 Keynote speech : Paul Heywood, University of Nottingham: "Rethinking Corruption: Hocus-Pocus, Locus and Focus"

10:00 – 10:30 Coffee break

10:30 – 12:30 Workshop session III

  1. Corruption in Public Administration
  2. Compliance, Competition and Corruption: Private-Sector Perspectives
  3. Anti-Corruption Policies and Practices in Post-Soviet and Eastern European States
  4. Corruption and Norms: Why informal rules matter (authors' workshop)

12:30 – 14:00 Lunch

14:00 – 15:00 Keynote speech : Matthew Stephenson, Harvard University: "Scattered Thoughts and Musings on the Future of Anticorruption Research"

15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break

15:30 – 17:00 Plenary session: Education for Justice (E4J) Initiative, UNODC Ronan O'Laoire, UNODC, Oksana Huss, University of Duisburg-Essen, Nils Köbis, University of Amsterdam, Matthew Ayibakuro, University of Birmingham, Roxana Bratu, University College London, Elitza Katzarova, University of Braunschweig, Oksana Nesterenko, Anti-Corruption Research and Education Centre, Muriel Poisson, International Institute for Educational Planning-UNESCO, Laras Susanti, Universitas Gadjah Mada

17:00-17:30 Closing

More information on the research project and the Evaluation of LIEPP's Democracy research group

Impromptu : débat autour du livre "Pourquoi détestons-nous autant nos politiques"

Séminaire co-organisé LIEPP-Maxpo-CEE, 22 mars 2017 16h30-18h00
  • LIEPP-Sciences PoLIEPP-Sciences Po

Le LIEPPle MaxPo et le CEE organisent un événement “Impromptu” : un débat autour du livre d'Emiliano Grossman et Nicolas Sauger, “Pourquoi détestons-nous autant nos politiques ?

Mercredi 22 mars 2017, 16h30 - 18h00

Salle de séminaire du LIEPP

1er étage, 254 boulevard Saint-Germain, 75007 Paris

Entrée libre dans la limite des places disponibles

Merci de cliquer sur ce lien pour vous inscrire

Discutants : 

  • Anne Levade (Professeure de droit public à l'Université Paris Est)
  • Gérard Grunberg (Directeur de recherche au CNRS émérite, Centre d'études européennes-Sciences Po)



Approaches to Understanding the Quality of Legislation

Séminaire avec Dr. Ruth Dixon, jeudi 23 mars 2017 18h00 - 20h00
  • LIEPP Sciences PoLIEPP Sciences Po

Approaches to Understanding the Quality of Legislation

L'axe "Evaluation de la démocratie" du LIEPP et le médialab, ont le plaisir de vous convier au séminaire avec Dr. Ruth Dixon

Jeudi 23 mars 2017, 18h00 - 20h00

Salle du médialab, 13 rue de l'Université, 75007 

Entrée gratuite dans la limite des places disponibles

Merci de cliquer sur le lien suivant pour vous inscrire


Résumé (en anglais) 

The legislation of a country underpins its efforts to support the rule of law. The body of legislation should therefore be fit for this purpose, conforming as far as possible to theoretical principles of ‘good’ legislation. But there have been few empirical studies of objective qualities of legislation. In this presentation I explore some ways of addressing this question and describe a novel approach. 

One approach is to look at the language of legislation (e.g. Williams, 2016) and another is to look at the extent to which the legislation itself gives rise to litigation, for instance via judicial review. A third approach is to focus on the parliamentary process itself. In our study of the changing face of UK government (Hood and Dixon, 2015), Christopher Hood and I assembled qualitative and quantitative evidence of how the process of legislation changed over the past thirty to forty years in the UK, and assessed whether those changes tended to support the production of ‘good legislation.’ 

One aspect of that study was to measure how often laws are amended as they pass through the parliamentary process. We reasoned that if legislation is presented to Parliament in an incomplete or unsatisfactory state, a large number of late-stage amendments will be needed to ‘repair’ the legislation, to the detriment of fully informed scrutiny by legislators. For that study, we were only able to count by hand the amendments to a limited number of laws. In extending that study I developed, with Jonathan Jones, a semi-automated method for quantifying legislative amendments (outlined in Dixon, 2016). In this presentation I will describe the development of that methodology and our preliminary results.

Biographie (en anglais)

Dr Ruth Dixon is a researcher at the Blavatnik School of Government and an associate member of the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford. Her early career was in the life sciences. From 1992 to 2001 she was a senior scientist and University Research Lecturer at the MRC Biochemical and Clinical Magnetic Resonance Unit, University of Oxford. After a career break, Ruth worked from 2006 to 2013 at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford, funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust. Ruth studies aspects of British public administration, and her recent book with Christopher Hood, A Government that Worked Better and Cost Less? Evaluating Three Decades of Reform and Change in UK Central Government, (Oxford University Press, 2015), won the 2015 Louis Brownlow Book Award from the American National Academy of Public Administration, and the 2016 W.J.M. MacKenzie Book Prize from the Political Studies Association.

Pourquoi détestons-nous autant nos politiques ?

Nouvel ouvrage d'Emiliano Grossman & Nicolas Sauger
  • LIEPP Sciences PoLIEPP Sciences Po

Nouvel ouvrage d'Emiliano Grossman et Nicolas Sauger, co-directeurs de l'axe "Evaluation de la démocratie"

Nous sommes parfois séduits par leurs promesses, mais, très vite, ils nous déçoivent. Si cette séquence se répète régulièrement depuis près de quarante ans en France, le phénomène gagne en intensité. Entre les citoyens et leurs représentants, la rupture semble consommée. Ce phénomène n’est pas limité à la France, certes, mais la crise y semble souvent plus profonde et y prend des formes particulières.

Ce désenchantement à l’égard du politique, il faut l’expliquer et lui donner sens pour espérer en sortir.  Ce livre explore plusieurs hypothèses. Est-ce le résultat de l’inefficacité des politiques publiques ? De la « médiocrité » de nos élites ? Ou alors d’un pessimisme atavique des Français, prompts à se plaindre et à manifester ?

Aucune de ces explications n’est en fait pleinement convaincante. Quand on compare la situation du système politique français à celui des pays qui nous entourent, les différences existent mais restent très limitées. Les politiques publiques françaises coûtent cher, mais elles ne sont pas plus inefficaces que celles de nos voisins. Les élites ne sont ni très représentatives ni très réactives, mais c’est le cas pratiquement partout en Europe. Les Français protestent souvent, mais ne sont pas plus défiants que les autres.

Alors comment expliquer cette différence française, celle d’un cycle répété de la déception ?

Les causes profondes du mal français sont à chercher dans un système politique de plus en plus inadapté au monde contemporain. En projetant tous les espoirs sur une seule personne, le Président, ce système pousse les candidats présidentiels à exagérer leurs promesses et les partis à s’aligner sur leurs candidats. Les attentes énormes qui en résultent chez les électeurs ne peuvent alors conduire qu’à la frustration. De fait, plus aucun Président n’a réussi à se faire réélire, dans des conditions « normales », depuis les débuts de la 5e République.

Il est dès lors urgent de revaloriser les élections législatives, par exemple en les faisant coïncider avec les élections présidentielles et en créant un système électoral avec un forte de dose proportionnelle. Il faut aussi repenser en profondeur la réglementation de la vie politique et la mise en œuvre de cette réglementation : il n’est plus acceptable que cette réglementation soit élaborée et mise en œuvre par la classe politique elle-même. C’est à ce prix qu’on pourra éviter de voir céder la 5e République aux promesses populistes qui agitent le spectre politique de notre époque.

Evenements associés :

Pour plus d'informations :