Klientelizm ve Etnisitenin Parti Örgütü Değişimine Kısıtlayıcı Etkisi: Türkiye’de AKP ve İlçe Başkanlıkları Değişimi

Year 2023, , 141 - 166, 15.02.2023

Gül Arıkan Akdağ Halide Yazgan

https://doi.org/10.53376/ap.2023.06

Abstract

Bu çalışma, var olan literatür bağlamında seçim ve parti içi ittifak kaygısının AKP’nin 2017 İlçe Kongrelerinde meydana gelen parti örgütü değişimi üzerindeki etkisini ölçmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Partinin bu kongreler öncesi karşı karşıya kaldığı seçim ve ittifak kaygıları, çalışmanın temel hipotezlerinin test edilmesi için uygun bir vaka olarak ele alınabileceği kanaatini güçlendirmektedir. Bu amaç için kullanılan veri seti Türkiye’deki 971 ilçenin ikincil verisinden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmada kullanılan bağımlı değişken, ilçe başkanının değişimidir. Uygulanan lojistik regresyonun sonuçları ilçede yüzer seçmenlerin ve bir önceki koalisyon üyelerinin oranındaki artışın AKP’nin örgüt değişimi olasılığı üzerindeki etkisinin geçerli ve pozitif ancak sınırlı olduğunu göstermektedir. Secim desteği açısından partinin güveninin istatistiki açıdan önemli bir faktör olarak ortaya çıkmaması AKP’nin 2017’de örgüt değişimini seçim rekabetinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirdiğine işaret etmektedir. Analizin ilginç bir sonucu ilçelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişliğinin ve ilçelerde etnik grupların varlığının parti değişimini anlamlı bir şekilde etkilediğidir. Bu sonuçların ışığında, çalışma, parti örgütü değişiminin partilerin oy desteklerini, kaynakların seçmenlere şartlı dağılımı üzerine kurulu olan ve güçlü klientalist ağlar kullanan partiler için daha karmaşık bir süreç olduğu iddia edilmektedir. Benzer şekilde, partilerin bu seçmenlerle geliştirdikleri ilişkilerin özelliği sebebiyle bir etnik grubun varlığının kısıtlayıcı bir etkisi olduğu öne sürülmektedir. Bu çalışma, bu iki değişkenin parti örgütü değişimi üzerindeki etkisinin genelleştirilebilmesi için farklı kurgularda test edilmesi zorunluluğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

Siyasal Partiler, Parti Örgütü, Klientalizm, Etnik Mobilizasyon, AKP

Clientelism and Ethnicity as Constraints to Party Organization Change: The AKP in Turkey and Change in District Presidencies

Abstract

Based on the existing literature, the study tests the relevance of electoral and intra-party alliance concerns on party organization change for the AKP in its 2017 District Congress. We believe that both the electoral and intra-party alliance concerns the party faced in 2017, make it a suitable case to test the basic hypothesis of the study. The dataset used in the analysis consists of secondary data on 971 districts present in Turkey. District presidency change is employed as the key independent variable to estimate organization change. The result of the logistic regression indicates that the effect of increasing percentage of swing voters and members of the former alliance, despite being valid, have moderate positive effects on the AKP’s decision to change its organization. The insignificancy of the electoral safety of the party in the district reveals that in 2017 the AKP changed its organization regardless of the nature of the electoral competition it faces. Interestingly, results indicate that socioeconomic development and ethnic presence in districts are also significant factors that constrain organization change in the AKP. Based on these results we suggest that change in party organization becomes a more difficult issue in parties with strong clientelistic networks where political parties built electoral support through the conditional distribution of resources to voters. Similarly, ethnicity also acts as a constraint due to the peculiarity of the relations political parties develop with these groups. As such clientelism and ethnicity seem to have constraining effects on the abilities of parties to change their organizations. The results highlight the necessity of further research to generalize the validity of the effectiveness of clientelism and ethnic groups on political parties’ organization change on different settings.

Keywords

Political Parties, Party Organization, Clientelism, Ethnic Mobilization, the AKP

References

• Arıkan Akdağ, Gül (2012b), “AKP’s Local Politics: Perceived Discrimination as an Obstacle to Ethnic Mobilization’’, Alternatif Politika, 4 (2): 147.
• Arıkan Akdağ, Gül (2012a), “An Alternative Explanation to AKP’s Electoral Success: Structure and Functions of the Local Branches’’, Alternatif Politika, 4 (1): 27.
• Arıkan Akdağ, Gül (2014), Ethnicity and Elections in Turkey: Party Politics and the Mobilization of Swing Voters (Abingdon: Routledge).
• Arikan Akdağ, Gül (2016), “Rational Political Parties and Electoral Games: The AKP's Strategic Move for the Kurdish Vote in Turkey’’, Turkish Studies, 17 (1): 126-154.
• Ark Yıldırım, Ceren (2014), “From Metropolitan Projects to Local Politics: The Local Elections of 2009 and 2014 in an Informal Neighborhood of Istanbul”, Presented at the Conference on Local Elections and Clientelism in Turkey (Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center).
• Ark Yıldırım, Ceren (2017), “Political Parties and Grassroots Clientelist Strategies in Urban Turkey: One Neighbourhood at a Time’’, South European Society and Politics, 22 (4): 473–490.
• Arslantaş, Düzgün and Şenol Arslantaş (2020), “How Does Clientelism Foster Electoral Dominance? Evidence From Turkey’’, Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 7 (3): 1-17.
• Auyero, Javier (2000), Poor People’s Politics: Peronist Survival Networks and the Legacy of Evita (Durham: Duke University Press).
• Ayata, Ayşe Güneş (1994), “Roots and Trends of Clientelism in Turkey”, Luis Roniger and Ayşe Güneş Ayata (Ed.), Democracy, Clientelism and Civil Society (Boulder: Lynne Rienner): 49–63.
• Aytaç, Erdem (2014), “Distributive Politics in a Multiparty System: The Conditional Cash Transfer Programme in Turkey’’, Comparative Political Studies, 47 (9): 1211–1237.
• Aytaç, Erdem, Ali Çarkoğlu and Özge Kemahlioğlu (2014), “‘Party Organizations’ Campaign Strategies and the Electoral Context’’, APSA 2014 Annual Meeting Paper, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2453791
• Brusco, Valeria, Marcelo Nazareno and Susan Stokes (2004), “Vote-Buying in Argentina’’, Latin American Research Review, 39 (2): 66–88.
• Calvo, Ernesto and Maria Victoria Murillo (2004), “Who Delivers? Partisan Clients in the Argentine Electoral Market’’, American Journal of Political Science, 48 (4): 742-757.
• Chandra, Kanchan (2004), Why Ethnic Parties Succeed: Patronage and Ethnic Head Counts in India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
• CNNTürk (2017), “Şamil Tayyar AK Parti'den İhraç Edilen Kişi Sayısını Açıkladı’’, https://www.cnnturk.com/turkiye/samil-tayyar-ak-partiden-ihrac-edilen-kisi-sayisini-acikladi (10.05.2019).
• Çarkoğlu, Ali and Erdem Aytaç (2015), “Who Gets Targeted for Vote-buying? Evidence from an Augmented List Experiment in Turkey’’, European Political Science Review, 7 (4): 547-566.
• Deschouwer, Kris (1992), “The Survival of the Fittest: Measuring Adaptation and Change of Political Parties”, 20th ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops.
• Duverger, Maurice (1954), Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State (New York: Wiley).
• Ecevit, Yüksel Alper and Gülnur Kocapınar (2018), “Do Party Lists Matter? Political Party Strategies in Legislative Candidate Nominations’’, Parliamentary Affairs, 71 (3): 697-716.
• Estéves, Federico, Beatriz Magaloni and Alberto Diaz-Cayeros (2001), “A Portfolio Diversification Model of Electoral investment”, Paper presented at the Citizen-Elite Linkages’ Workshop, Duke University, March 30- April 1, 2001; 2001 American Political Science and Latin American Studies Association Meetings (Stanford: The Conference Frontiers in Latin American Political Economy).
• Grigoriadis, Ioannis N. and Esra Dilek (2018), “Struggling for the Kurdish Vote: Religion, Ethnicity and Victimhood İn AKP and BDP/HDP Rally Speeches’’, Middle Eastern Studies, 54 (2): 289-303.
• Gümüşçü, Şebnem, Gürleyen Işık and Aytac Erdem (2014), “Clientelism in Contemporary Turkish Politics: Social Goods Distribution Practices of the AKP and CHP Compared”, Presented at the Conference on Local Elections and Clientelism in Turkey (Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center).
• HaberTürk (2017), “AK Parti Sözcüsü Ünal’dan Gökçek’in İstifasıyla İlgili Açıklama’’, https://www.haberturk.com/ak-parti-sozcusu-unal-dan-gokcek-in-istifasiyla-ilgili-aciklama-1691691 (10.05.2019).
• Harmel, Robert (2002), “Party Organizational Change: Competing Explanations’’, Kurt Richard Luther and Ferdinand Müller-Rommel (Ed.), Political Parties in the New Europe: Political and Analytical Challenges (Oxford University Press): 119-142.
• Harmel, Robert and Kenneth Janda (1994), “An İntegrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change’’, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6 (3): 259-287.
• Harmel, Robert and Alexander C. Tan (2003), “Party Actors and Party Change: Does Factional Dominance Matter?’’, European Journal of Political Research, 42 (3): 409–424. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00090.
• Hürriyet (2013), “AK Parti'den Bir Ayda 3 Bakan, 4 Vekil Gitti’’, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/ak-partiden-bir-ayda-3-bakan-4-vekil-gitti-25451746 (07.05.2019).
• Janda, Kenneth (1990), “Toward a Performance Theory of Change in Political Parties’’, Madrid: I n 12th World Congress of the International Sociological Association, 9-13.
• Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin (1995), “The Turkish Grand National Assembly: A Brief Inquiry into the Politics of Representation in Turkey”, Çiğdem Balım, et al. (Eds.), Turkey: The Political, Social, and Economic Challenges in the 1990s (Leiden: E.J. Brill): 42–60.
• Katz, Richard S. and Peter Mair (1995), “Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy the Emergence of the Cartel Party’’, Party Politics, 1 (1): 5–28.
• Kemahlıoğlu, Özge (2012), Agents or Bosses? Patronage and Intra-Party Politics in Argentina and Turkey (Colchester UK: ECPR Press).
• Kemahlıoğlu, Özge (2022), “Distributive Politics and Electoral Competition for the Kurdish Vote’’, Turkish Studies, 23 (2): 223-242.
• Kemahlıoğlu, Özge and Reşat Bayer (2020), “Favoring Co-Partisan Controlled Areas in Central Government Distributive Programs: The Role of Local Party Organizations”, Public Choice, Online First http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11127-019-00774-5.
• Kirchheimer, Otto (1966), “The Transformation of the Western European Party System”, Joseph La Parombara and Myron Weiner (Ed.), Political Parties and Political Development (Princeton, NY: Princeton University press): 177-200.
• Kitschelt, Herbert (2000), ‘‘Linkages Between Citizens and Politicians in Democratic Polities’’, Comparative Political Studies, 33 (6–7): 845–879.
• Kitschelt, Herbert and Steven J. Wilkinson (2007), “Citizen-Politician Linkages: An Introduction”, Herbert Kitschelt and Wikinson (Ed.), Patrons, Clients, and Policies (New York: Cambridge University Press): 1–49.
• Kitschelt, Herbert P. (2011), “Clientelistic Linkage Strategies. A Descriptive Exploration”, Paper Presented at the Workshop on Democratic Accountability Strategies, May 18–19, Duke University.
• Long, J. Scott (1997), Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables: Advanced Quantitative Techniques in the Social Sciences Series, 204 Kalter.
• Marschall, Mellisa, Abdullah Aydoğan and Alper Bulut (2016), “Does Housing Create Votes? Explaining the Electoral Success of the AKP in Turkey’’, Electoral Studies, 42: 202–212.
• Martin, Natalie (2020), “Allies and Enemies: the Gülen Movement and the AKP’’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 35 (1): 110-127.
• Müller, Wolfgang C. (1997), “Inside the Black Box: A Confrontation of Party Executive Behaviour and Theories of Party Organizational Change’’, Party Politics, 3 (3): 293-313.
• Nichter, Simeon (2018), Votes for Survival: Relational Clientelism in Latin America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
• Nichter, Simeon (2008), “Vote Buying or Turnout Buying? Machine Politics and The Secret Ballot”, American Political Science Review, 102 (1): 19–31.
• Özbudun, Ergun (1981), “Turkey: The Politics of Political Clientelism”, S. N. Eisenstadt and Rene Lemarchand (Ed.), Political Clientelism, Patronage and Development (Beverly Hills: Sage): 249–268.
• Özbudun, Ergun (2014), “AKP at the Crossroads: Erdoğan’s Majoritarian Drift’’, South European Society and Politics, 19 (2): 155-167.
• Panebianco, Angelo (1988), Political Parties: Organization and Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 1-318.
• Penfold-Becerra, Micheal (2007), “Clientelism and Social Funds: Evidence from Chávez's Misiones’’, Latin American Politics and Society, 49: 63–84.
• Rutten, Marcel, Alaminand Mazrui and Francois Grignon (2001), Out for the Count: The 1997 General Elections and Prospects for Democracy in Kenya (Kampala: Fountain Publishers).
• Sarıgil, Zeki (2010), “Curbing Kurdish Ethno-Nationalism in Turkey: An Empirical Assessment of Pro-Islamic and Socio-Economic Approaches’’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33 (3): 533-553.
• Sayarı, Sabri (2014), “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Political Clientelism and Patronage in Turkey”, Turkish Studies, 15 (4): 655–670.
• Sayari, Sabri and Alim Hasanov (2008), “The 2007 Elections and Parliamentary Elites in Turkey: The Emergence of a New Political Class?”, Turkish Studies, 9 (2): 345-361.
• Schady, Norbert R. (2000), “The Political Economy of Expenditures by the Peruvian Social Fund (FONCODES) 1991–95’’, American Political Science Review, 94 (2): 289-304.
• Stokes, Susan C. (2005), “Perverse Accountability: A Formal Model of Machine Politics with Evidence from Argentina”, American Political Science Review, 99 (3): 315–325.
• Tafolar, Mine (2014), “Social Goods Provisioning in a Low-Income Neighborhood: A Tale of Bağcılar”, Presented at the Conference on Local Elections and Clientelism in Turkey (Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center).
• Turan, Ilter (1994), “The Turkish Legislature: From Symbolic to Substantive Representation”, Sabri Sayari and A. Hasanov Gary W. Copeland and Samuel C. Patterson (Eds.), Parliaments in the Modern World: Changing Institutions (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press): 105-28.
• TÜİK, https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/secimdagitimapp/menusecim.zul.
• Yıldırım, Kerem (2020), “Clientelism and Dominant İncumbent Parties: Party Competition in an Urban Turkish Neighbourhood’’, Democratization, 27 (1): 81-99.
• Yıldırım, Kerem (2022), “Who Receives Clientelistic Benefits? Social Identity, Relative Deprivation, and Clientelistic Acceptance among Turkish Voters’’, Turkish Studies, 1-27.
• Yıldırım, Kerem and Herbert Kitschelt (2020), “Analytical Perspectives on Varieties of Clientelism", Democratization, 27 (1): 20-43.
• Yıldırım, Kerem and Gülnur Kocapınar (2018), “Untangling the Gender Gap: Nomination and Representativeness in Turkish Local Elections’’, Turkish Studies, 1–27.