Isolating the Radical Right Coalition Formation and Policy Adaptation in Sweden ANDERS BACKLUND SÖDERTÖRN DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS Isolating the Radical Right Coalition Formation and Policy Adaptation in Sweden ANDERS BACKLUND Södertörns hgskola Subject: Political Science Research Area: Politics, Economy and the Organisation of Society School: School of Social Sciences (CC BY 3.0) Sdertrns hgskola (Sdertrn University) Library SE-141 89 Huddinge www.sh.se/publications © Anders Backlund Cover image: Anders Backlund Graphic form: Per Lindblom & Jonathan Robson Printed by Elanders, Stockholm 2020 Sdertrn Doctoral Dissertations 181 ISSN 1652–7399 ISBN 978-91-89109-38-4 (print) ISBN 978-91-89109-39-1 (digital) Abstract In recent decades, established political parties across Europe have become increasingly challenged by a new party family: the radical right. In terms of how mainstream parties respond to this challenge, Sweden has been a puzzling case both in a comparative Euro- pean perspective and in light of established theories of party competition. Rather than co- opting the restrictive immigration policies of the radical right party the Sweden Democrats, the Swedish mainstream parties jointly converged on liberal policies. In addi- tion, rather than being included as a coalition partner or support party to the government, the Sweden Democrats have been excluded from government formation despite a pivotal position between the established left and right blocs in the parliament. In order to explain these puzzling outcomes, this dissertation combines two bodies of scholarly literature that have tended not to communicate much: coalition theory and research on mainstream party reactions to the radical right. It uses a multi-method research design to analyse party behaviour at both the local and the national level, and in both the electoral and the parliamentary arena. In doing so, it identifies aspects of established theories and concepts in need of refinement. The dissertation argues that despite the apparently puzzling nature of the Swedish case, the isolation of the Sweden Democrats can be explained in terms of the strategic pursuit of policy, office, and votes. The key to the strategic explanation lies in considering three things: first, that different kinds of party strategies interact, within and across arenas; second, that the choice of strategy is constrained, between different levels of a party and over time; and third, that we need to reconsider how some commonly used concepts – such as anti-pacts, winning coalitions, and policy dimensions – are operationalised. Rather than relying on the idea of qualitatively different ‘pariah’ or ‘anti-system’ parties, the findings of this thesis show how the isolation of a radical right party can be explained in terms of the strategic incentives of rival parties. The results also show that the transition from isolation to cooperation can, under certain conditions, be a rapid process. The dissertation is a contribution to research on coalition formation, spatial party competition, and mainstream party reactions to the radical right. Keywords: radical right, mainstream parties, pariah parties, anti-system parties, cordon sanitaire, party strategy, government formation, anti-pacts, coalition theory, spatial theo- ries of party competition, policy co-optation, policy dimensionality, Sweden Democrats, Sweden. Sammanfattning (Summary/abstract in Swedish) Den här avhandlingen behandlar frågan om hur etablerade politiska partier agerar när de utmanas av nya partier från den hgerradikala partifamiljen. Studien fokuserar på Sverige och hur de svenska etablerade partierna har bemtt det hgerradikala partiet Sverige- demokraterna. Sverige har varit ett avvikande fall i jämfrelse med många andra länder i Europa, där etablerade partier har tenderat både att bilda regeringar med std av hger- radikala partier, och att ta ver deras politiska positioner – framfrallt i invandringsfrågan – fr att frska vinna tillbaka väljare. I Sverige valde de etablerade partierna istället (inledningsvis) att frflytta sina positioner bort från Sverigedemokraternas politik. Vidare har partiet trots sin starka position i riksdagen uteslutits från regeringssamarbete. I syfte att frklara det svenska fallet kombinerar denna avhandling teorier om rege- ringsbildning med teorier om hur etablerade partier bemter hgerradikala partier. Studien kombinerar kvalitativ och kvantitativ metod fr att analysera partibeteende på både lokal och nationell nivå, samt på väljararenan och den parlamentariska arenan. Genom att analysera ett avvikande fall vidareutvecklar avhandlingen etablerade teorier och koncept. Analysen visar att det svenska fallet, trots att det delvis skiljer sig från andra länder, kan frklaras i termer av hur partierna frsker uppnå tre strategiska mål: att vinna rster, att få genomslag fr sin politik, och att sitta i regeringsställning. Den strategiska frklaringen består av tre delar. För det frsta måste vi beakta att olika partistrategier – t.ex. valet av sakpolitiska positioner och valet att misskreditera ett annat parti – kan påverka varandra. Fr det andra måste vi ta hänsyn till att partier inte alltid är fria i sina val. De kan frhindras från att tillämpa en viss strategi, antingen på grund av meningsskiljaktigheter inom partiet eller på grund av att det kan vara väljarmässigt riska- belt att alltfr snabbt byta strategi. Fr det tredje behver vi omprva vissa av de koncept som vanligen används inom koalitionsforskningen – t.ex. vad som gr en koalition ”vin- nande”, vilka politiska konfliktdimensioner som är de viktigaste, och hur vi bäst mäter frekomsten av ”anti-pakter” mellan partier. Det strategiska perspektiv som presenteras i avhandlingen visar att isoleringen av hgerradikala partier kan frklaras utan att hänvisa till att vissa partier är väsensskilda ”paria”- eller ”anti-system”-partier. Resultaten visar också att ett skifte från isolering till samarbete kan ske snabbt, given att de strategiska frutsättningarna frändras. Avhand- lingen är ett bidrag till koalitionsforskning, till forskning om partibeteende på väljar- arenan, samt till forskning om hur etablerade partier bemter hgerradikala partier. Nyckelord: Sverigedemokraterna, hgerradikala partier, pariapartier, anti-systempartier, partistrategi, regeringsbildning, koalitionsteori. Acknowledgements This book is the result of a PhD project that has benefited from the help of many people. First and foremost, I want to thank my two supervisors, Ann- Cathrine Jungar and Hanna Bäck, for entrusting me with the freedom to pursue the study that I envisioned, while providing invaluable help when I needed it. I have enjoyed our discussions very much, and without Hanna and Ann-Cathrine this book would not have been possible. Ann-Cathrine was the one who first introduced me to research on the radical right, and through her network I have met a number of scholars who have provided me with helpful insights on the topic, including Duncan McDonnell, Ben Moffitt, and Anders Ravik Jupskås. I also want to thank the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg foundation for providing funding for my studies. My first step towards pursuing a PhD came when the supervisor for my Bachelor’s thesis, Wojciech Szrubka, put me in contact with Torbjrn Bergman, who needed a research assistant. Working in this capacity while I pursued my Master’s degree, I soon found myself in a project workshop in Budapest, surrounded by experts on coalition research. This sparked my interest in the topic, and I learned a lot from working in the project together with Alejandro Ecker and Thomas Meyer. Through Torbjrn, I have met many friendly people who have provided helpful comments on my research, including Niklas Bolin, Patrick Dumont, Johan Hellstrm, Tom Louwerse, and Daniel Walther. Torbjrn has remained a mentor through the years, and his support has meant a lot to me. In the early days of my PhD studies, I was kindly offered to attend a course in methods and research design jointly arranged by Uppsala University and Stockholm University. Apart from meeting many fellow PhD candidates, I was helped by Stefano Guzzini, Sven Oskarsson and Thomas Sommerer to get a good start on developing my research plan. At Sdertrn University, I owe thanks to Bengt Jacobsson for introducing me to the world of institutional theory, which came to play a bigger role in my research than I would have expected when I enrolled in his course on the topic. I want to thank my colleagues in the political science department, who have provided helpful comments throughout the years. Among these, Nicholas Aylott has read and commented more on my research than anyone apart from my supervisors, and I am truly grateful for his help. I also want to thank Uwe Jun, who during his time as affiliated professor at Sdertrn University served as discussant at my half-time seminar. Furthermore, I want to thank my fellow PhD candidates for making the writing of this disser- tation a less lonely experience – a special thanks to Nina Carlsson, Fredrik Jahnke, Eva Karlberg, Vasileios Kitsos, Vasileios Petrogiannis, and Jaakko Turunen. From 2016–2017, a scholarship from the Swedish parliament allowed me to put my PhD studies on hold to spend a year working in various parts of the parliamentary administration. This gave me a great opportunity to ob- serve the Swedish parliament first hand, and to contrast theory and practice. It also introduced me to a number of friendly and knowledgeable political scientists working there, from whom I could learn more about its cogs