Abstract
AbstractConstitutional amendment rules have traditionally been considered the most important part of a constitution. Nevertheless, recent empirical analyses argue that constitutional amendment rules do not matter at all. This dispute is due to the misuse of independent and dependent variables and inappropriate methodology. Using the Veto Players approach to measure constitutional rigidity, this article proposes a new index covering ninety-four democratic countries. It starts by explaining the underlying logic of the veto players approach and describing the specific derivation of the rules for the construction of the rigidity index, which aggregates all institutional provisions in a logically consistent way. It then explains why the lack of constitutional rigidity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for significant constitutional amendments in democratic countries. Finally, the author creates a new dataset on the significance of constitutional amendments and estimates the appropriate (heteroskedastic) model, which corroborates the theoretical expectations and demonstrates that more significant amendments lead to a better fit.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference69 articles.
1. A Long Constitution is a (Positively) Bad Constitution: Evidence from OECD Countries
2. Courts and informal constitutional change in the states;Marshfield;New England Law Review,2017
3. Is an independent judiciary necessary for democracy?;Howard;Judicature: The Journal of American Judicature Society,2004
4. The Constitution of Freedom
Cited by
13 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献