INVESTIGATING THE CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION ON EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE AND POLICYMAKING    

Authors : Dr. SEEMA RANAWAT

Publishing Date : 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.52458/9789388996570.2023.eb.ch48

ISBN : 978-93-88996-58-7

Pages : 273-279

Chapter id : NSP/ICAAR-2023/A-48

Abstract : An analysis of the factors and outcomes of political polarization on efficient governance and policy formation is conducted in this research. Political polarization, the phenomenon of beliefs and ideologies being divided into separate camps with scant agreement, has been recognized as an escalating problem in democratic democracies. This study investigates the fundamental factors contributing to polarization, such as media influence, economic disparity, and social identity, and their consequences on the effectiveness of government and policy formation. Through an extensive literature analysis, the paper seeks to provide insights into how polarization hinders the formation of agreement, intensifies policy deadlock, and undermines public confidence in institutions.

Keywords : Causes, Consequences, Political Polarization, Effective Governance, Policymaking

Cite :

References :

1. Bartels, L. M. (2008). Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton University Press.
2. Bermeo, N. (2016). On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5-19.
3. Binder, S. A. (2003). Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock. Brookings Institution Press.
4. Bishop, B. (2008). The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
5. Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford University Press.
6. Hetherington, M. J., & Rudolph, T. J. (2015). Why Washington Won't Work: Polarization, Political Trust, and the Governing Crisis. University of Chicago Press.
7. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth Democracy: Americans' Beliefs about How Government Should Work. Cambridge University Press.
8. Iyengar, S., & Krupenkin, M. (2018). The strengthening of partisan affect. Political Psychology, 39, 201-218.
9. Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79(3), 487-516.
10. Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690-707.
11. Jones, B. D. (2001). Politics and the Architecture of Choice: Bounded Rationality and Governance. University of Chicago Press.
12. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480.
13. Lee, F. E. (2009). Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principles, and Partisanship in the U.S. Senate. University of Chicago Press.
14. Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How Democracies Die. Crown.
15. Levendusky, M. S. (2013). How Partisan Media Polarize America. University of Chicago Press.
16. Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. University of Chicago Press.
17. McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2006). Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. MIT Press.
18. Moe, T. M., & Howell, W. G. (1999). The presidential power of unilateral action. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 132-179.
19. Mounk, Y. (2018). The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It. Harvard University Press.
20. Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.
21. Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press.
22. Schedler, A. (2002). The menu of manipulation. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 36-50.
23. Skocpol, T., & Williamson, V. (2012). The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. Oxford University Press.
24. Stroud, N. J. (2010). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 32(3), 341-361.
25. Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press.
26. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769.
27.  Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Nelson-Hall.
28. Theriault, S. M. (2008). Party Polarization in Congress. Cambridge University Press.