This book examines whether parties' ability to channel voter interests into political institutions has in fact declined in the wake of decline of party membership figures and the increase of state finance of parties. It first looks at relevant empirical studies to summarize what we already know. Second, it presents an in-depth study of Norwegian voters and parties, based on a number of voter, member and parliamentarian surveys conducted between 1990 and 2010. The existing literature is scarce and indecisive, whereas the Norwegian parties still seem to represent voters fairly well, despite the waning of mass parties. The party organizations-the members, activists, and representatives-continue to channel voter opinions into the Parliament. This book argues that the high and persistent policy congruence between voters and parties revealed might be related to party members and mid-level activists still resemble voters socially and politically to a large degree. At the same time, the party competition for votes is also still relatively efficient, and there appears to be some interaction in terms of what happens within party organizations and the stimuli offered by competing parties. Hence, this book challenges the "decline thesis". It argues that parties can continue to represent, even "after the mass party". At the same time, it suggests that the persistence of the formal representative structures and the closed candidate selection processes that you still find in Norway and elsewhere could make some parties somewhat more resistant to representative decline than others.

Both parties and interest groups matter to democracy. Historically, examples of close relationships between the two abound. But perhaps the best known because it was supposedly the most intimate and politically important is the relationship between left-of-centre parties and trade unions. Whether rooted in a shared history, culture and ideology or more a 'marriage of convenience', it is widely believed that their relationship helped socialist, social democratic, and labour parties win power and ensured the working class achieved huge gains in terms of full employment, the welfare state and labour market regulation in the post war period. In recent decades, however, it has been widely argued that the links between left-of-centre parties and trade unions have declined as their collaboration has become less mutually beneficial, not least as a consequence of structural changes in the economy and labour market. This volume interrogates, qualifies, and even challenges that widespread assumption. Based on a brand new dataset, including organizational data gathered by a cross-national team of experts, it uncovers and explores what turns out to be considerable variation in the strength of contemporary organizational links between left-of-centre parties and unions in twelve different countries that have been democracies since at least the mid -to late-1940's. Testing a series of hypotheses on the importance and the impact of particular political systems and socio-economic factors, and on the costs and benefits for both parties and unions, detailed qualitative and quantitative analysis suggests that left-of-centre party-trade union links are stronger where trade unions are larger, denser, and more unified and where parties are less able to rely on the state to finance their organizational activities and electoral campaigns. Traditional partners that still have fairly strong links with each other seem to have greater incentives than others to maintain those links. Moreover, it remains the case that the links between parties and unions matter in policy terms.

How do today's political parties relate to other organisations? Do they prefer rather distant relationships with a wide range of interest groups - or have they virtually detached themselves from civil society altogether? Scholars seem to agree that traditionally close relationships - such as those between social democratic parties and trade unions - have grown weaker since the 1960s. But to date only limited systematic research has been conducted. While parties and interest groups attract a great deal of attention from political scientists, the links between them have been largely overlooked. This book is an attempt to bridge the gap, starting from the party side of the relationship. It throws new light on the topic by presenting a theory-driven, comprehensive study of Norway's seven major political parties and their relationships with interest groups at the beginning of the new millennium. Based on original and extensive data, including party documents, in-depth interviews with key players and a survey of national party elites, Elin Haugsgjerd Allern paints a nuanced picture of the nature and significance of these relationships and the factors that shape them. A major conclusion is that Norway's parties tend to maintain rather distant but wide-ranging relationships with interest groups today. However, some parties still have fairly strong links with their traditional associates and a narrower network of links with other groups. Hence, Allern also shows that significant differences exist between parties that are apparently exposed to the same social, political and institutional environment.