text:
Presidential system
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
(Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Systems of government
Republican forms of government:
Presidential republics with a full presidential system
Presidential republics with a semi-presidential system
Parliamentary republics with an executive presidency dependent on the legislature
Parliamentary republics with a ceremonial/non-executive president, where a separate head of government leads the executive
Monarchical forms of government:
Constitutional monarchies with a ceremonial/non-executive monarch, where a separate head of government leads the executive
Constitutional monarchies which have a separate head of government but where royalty still hold significant executive and/or legislative power
Absolute monarchies
Countries in which constitutional provisions for government have been suspended (e.g. military dictatorship)
One-party states
Countries which do not fit any of the above systems (e.g. transitional governments, unclear political situations or no government)
Part of a series on
Politics
Primary topics[show]
Index of politics articles
Politics by country
Politics by subdivision
Political economy
Political history
Political history of the world
Political philosophy
Political systems[hide]
Anarchy
City-state
Democracy
Federacy
Feudalism
Dictatorship
Directory
Meritocracy
Monarchy
Parliamentary
Presidential
Republic
Semi-parliamentary
Semi-presidential
Theocracy
Academic disciplines[show]
Political science
(political scientists)
International relations
(theory)
Comparative politics
Public administration[show]
Bureaucracy (street-level)
Adhocracy
Policy[show]
Public policy (doctrine)
Domestic and foreign policy
Civil society
Public interest
Organs of government[show]
Separation of powers
Legislature
Executive
Judiciary
Election commission
Related topics[show]
Sovereignty
Theories of political behavior
Political psychology
Biology and political orientation
Political organisations
Foreign electoral intervention
Subseries[show]
Electoral systems
Elections (voting)
Federalism
Form of government
Ideology
Political campaigning
Political parties
v
t
e
Part of the Politics series
Basic forms of government
Power structure
Separation
Associated state
Dominion
Chiefdom
Federalism
Federation
Confederation
Devolution
Integration
Empire
Hegemony
Unitary state
Administrative division
Power source
Democracy
power of many
Direct
Representative
Liberal
Social
Demarchy
others
Oligarchy
power of few
Aristocracy
Plutocracy
Kraterocracy
Stratocracy
Timocracy
Meritocracy
Technocracy
Geniocracy
Noocracy
Kritarchy
Particracy
Ergatocracy
Netocracy
Autocracy
power of one
Despotism
Dictatorship
Military dictatorship
Others
Anocracy
Anarchy
Theocracy
Power ideology
Monarchy vs. republic
socio-political ideologies
Absolute
Legalist
Constitutional
Parliamentary
Directorial
Semi-presidential
Presidential
Authoritarian vs. libertarian
socio-economic ideologies
Tribalism
Despotism
Feudalism
Colonialism
Minarchism
Distributism
Anarchism
Socialism
Communism
Totalitarianism
Global vs. local
geo-cultural ideologies
Commune
City-state
National government
Intergovernmental organisation
World government
Politics portal
v
t
e
A presidential system is a democratic and republican system of government where a head of government leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch. This head of government is in most cases also the head of state, which is called president.
In presidential countries, the executive is elected and is not responsible to the legislature, which cannot in normal circumstances dismiss it. Such dismissal is possible, however, in uncommon cases, often through impeachment.
The title "president" has persisted from a time when such person personally presided over the governing body, as with the President of the Continental Congress in the early United States, prior to the executive function being split into a separate branch of government.
A presidential system contrasts with a parliamentary system, where the head of government is elected to power through the legislative. There is also a hybrid system called semi-presidentialism.
Countries that feature a presidential or semi-presidential system of government are not the exclusive users of the title of president. Heads of state of parliamentary republics, largely ceremonial in most cases, are called presidents. Dictators or leaders of one-party states, popularly elected or not, are also often called presidents.
Presidentialism is the dominant form of government in the continental Americas, with 19 of its 23 sovereign states being presidential republics. It is also prevalent in Central and southern West Africa and in Central Asia.
Contents
[hide]
1 Characteristics
2 Subnational governments of the world
3 Advantages
3.1 Direct elections
3.2 Separation of powers
3.3 Speed and decisiveness
3.4 Stability
4 Criticism and disadvantages
4.1 Tendency towards authoritarianism
4.2 Political gridlock
4.2.1 Lack of accountability
4.3 Impediments to leadership change
5 Differences from a parliamentary system
5.1 Overlapping elements
6 Republics with a presidential system of government
6.1 Presidential systems with a prime minister
7 See also
8 Notes and references
9 External links
Characteristics[edit]
In a full-fledged presidential system, a politician is chosen directly by the people or indirectly by the winning party to be the head of government. Except for Belarus and Kazakhstan, this head of government is also the head of state, and is therefore called president. The post of prime minister (also called premier) may also exist in a presidential system, but unlike in semi-presidential or parliamentary systems, the prime minister answers to the president and not to the legislature.
The following characteristics apply generally for the numerous presidential governments across the world:
The executive can veto legislative acts and, in turn, a supermajority of lawmakers may override the veto. The veto is generally derived from the British tradition of royal assent in which an act of parliament can only be enacted with the assent of the monarch.
The president has a fixed term of office. Elections are held at regular times and cannot be triggered by a vote of confidence or other parliamentary procedures, although in some countries there is an exception which provides for the removal of a president who is found to have broken a law.
The executive branch is unipersonal. Members of the cabinet serve at the pleasure of the president and must carry out the policies of the executive and legislative branches. Cabinet ministers or executive departmental chiefs are not members of the legislature.[citation needed] However, presidential systems often need legislative approval of executive nominations to the cabinet, judiciary, and various lower governmental posts. A president generally can direct members of the cabinet, military, or any officer or employee of the executive branch, but cannot direct or dismiss judges.
The president can often pardon or commute sentences of convicted criminals.
Subnational governments of the world[edit]
See also: State governments of the United States
Subnational governments, usually states, may be structured as presidential systems. All of the state governments in the United States use the presidential system, even though this is not constitutionally required. On a local level, many cities use Council-manager government, which is equivalent to a parliamentary system, although the post of a city manager is normally a non-political position. Some countries without a presidential system at the national level use a form of this system at a subnational or local level. One example is Japan, where the national government uses the parliamentary system, but the prefectural and municipal governments have governors and mayors elected independently from local assemblies and councils.
Advantages[edit]
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Supporters generally claim four basic advantages for presidential systems:
Direct elections — in a presidential system, the president is often elected directly by the people. This makes the president's power more legitimate than that of a leader appointed indirectly. However, this is not a necessary feature of a presidential system. Some presidential states have an indirectly elected head of state.
Separation of powers — a presidential system establishes the presidency and the legislature as two parallel structures. This allows each structure to monitor and check the other, preventing abuses of power.
Speed and decisiveness — A president with strong powers can usually enact changes quickly. However, the separation of powers can also slow the system down.
Stability — a president, by virtue of a fixed term, may provide more stability than a prime minister, who can be dismissed at any time.
Direct elections[edit]
In most presidential systems, the president is elected by popular vote, although some such as the United States use an electoral college (which is itself directly elected) or some other method.[1] By this method, the president receives a personal mandate to lead the country, whereas in a parliamentary system a candidate might only receive a personal mandate to represent a constituency. That means a president can only be elected independently of the legislative branch.
Separation of powers[edit]
A presidential system's separation of the executive from the legislature is sometimes held up as an advantage, in that each branch may scrutinize the actions of the other. In a parliamentary system, the executive is drawn from the legislature, making criticism of one by the other considerably less likely. A formal condemnation of the executive by the legislature is often considered a vote of no confidence. According to supporters of the presidential system, the lack of checks and balances means that misconduct by a prime minister may never be discovered. Writing about Watergate, Woodrow Wyatt, a former MP in the UK, said "don't think a Watergate couldn't happen here, you just wouldn't hear about it." (ibid)
Critics respond that if a presidential system's legislature is controlled by the president's party, the same situation exists. Proponents[who?] note that even in such a situation a legislator from the president's party is in a better position to criticize the president or his policies should he deem it necessary, since the immediate security of the president's position is less dependent on legislative support. In parliamentary systems, party discipline is much more strictly enforced. If a parliamentary backbencher publicly criticizes the executive or its policies to any significant extent then he/she faces a much higher prospect of losing his/her party's nomination, or even outright expulsion from the party. Even mild criticism from a backbencher could carry consequences serious enough (in particular, removal from consideration for a cabinet post) to effectively muzzle a legislator with any serious political ambitions.
Despite the existence of the no confidence vote, in practice it is extremely difficult to stop a prime minister or cabinet that has made its decision. In a parliamentary system, if important legislation proposed by the incumbent prime minister and his cabinet is "voted down" by a majority of the members of parliament then it is considered a vote of no confidence. To emphasize that particular point, a prime minister will often declare a particular legislative vote to be a matter of confidence at the first sign of reluctance on the part of legislators from his or her own party. If a government loses a parliamentary vote of confidence, then the incumbent government must then either resign or call elections to be held, a consequence few backbenchers are willing to endure. Hence, a no confidence vote in some parliamentary countries, like Britain, only occurs a few times in a century. In 1931, David Lloyd George told a select committee: "Parliament has really no control over the executive; it is a pure fiction." (Schlesinger 1982)
By contrast, if a presidential legislative initiative fails to pass a legislature controlled by the president's party (e.g. the Clinton health care plan of 1993 in the United States), it may damage the president's political standing and that of his party, but generally has no immediate effect on whether or not the president completes his term.
Speed and decisiveness[edit]
Some supporters of presidential systems claim[who?] that presidential systems can respond more rapidly to emerging situations than parliamentary ones. A prime minister, when taking action, needs to retain the support of the legislature, but a president is often less constrained. In Why England Slept, future U.S. president John F. Kennedy argued that British prime ministers Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain were constrained by the need to maintain the confidence of the Commons.
Other supporters of presidential systems sometimes argue in the exact opposite direction, however, saying that presidential systems can slow decision-making to beneficial ends. Divided government, where the presidency and the legislature are controlled by different parties, is said to restrain the excesses of both parties, and guarantee bipartisan input into legislation. In the United States, Republican Congressman Bill Frenzel wrote in 1995:
There are some of us who think gridlock is the best thing since indoor plumbing. Gridlock is the natural gift the Framers of the Constitution gave us so that the country would not be subjected to policy swings resulting from the whimsy of the public. And the competition—whether multi-branch, multi-level, or multi-house—is important to those checks and balances and to our ongoing kind of centrist government. Thank heaven we do not have a government that nationalizes one year and privatizes next year, and so on ad infinitum. (Checks and Balances, 8)
Stability[edit]
Although most parliamentary governments go long periods of time without a no confidence vote, Italy, Israel, and the French Fourth Republic have all experienced difficulties maintaining stability. When parliamentary systems have multiple parties, and governments are forced to rely on coalitions, as they often do in nations that use a system of proportional representation, extremist parties can theoretically use the threat of leaving a coalition to further their agendas.
Many people consider presidential systems more able to survive emergencies. A country under enormous stress may, supporters argue, be better off being led by a president with a fixed term than rotating premierships. France during the Algerian controversy switched to a semi-presidential system as did Sri Lanka during its civil war, while Israel experimented with a directly elected prime minister in 1992. In France and Sri Lanka, the results are widely considered to have been positive. However, in the case of Israel, an unprecedented proliferation of smaller parties occurred, leading to the restoration of the previous system of selecting a prime minister.
The fact that elections are fixed in a presidential system is considered by supporters a welcome "check" on the powers of the executive, contrasting parliamentary systems, which may allow the prime minister to call elections whenever they see fit or orchestrate their own vote of no confidence to trigger an election when they cannot get a legislative item passed. The presidential model is said to discourage this sort of opportunism, and instead forces the executive to operate within the confines of a term they cannot alter to suit their own needs.
Proponents of the presidential system also argue that stability extends to the cabinets chosen under the system, compared to a parliamentary system where cabinets must be drawn from within the legislative branch. Under the presidential system, cabinet members can be selected from a much larger pool of potential candidates. This allows presidents the ability to select cabinet members based as much or more on their ability and competency to lead a particular department as on their loyalty to the president, as opposed to parliamentary cabinets, which might be filled by legislators chosen for no better reason than their perceived loyalty to the prime minister. Supporters of the presidential system note that parliamentary systems are prone[citation needed] to disruptive "cabinet shuffles" where legislators are moved between portfolios, whereas in presidential system cabinets (such as the United States Cabinet), cabinet shuffles are unusual.
Criticism and disadvantages[edit]
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Critics generally claim three basic disadvantages for presidential systems:
Tendency towards authoritarianism — some political scientists say presidentialism raises the stakes of elections, exacerbates their polarization and can lead to authoritarianism (Linz).
Political gridlock — the separation of powers of a presidential system establishes the presidency and the legislature as two parallel structures. Critics argue that this can create an undesirable and long-term political gridlock whenever the president and the legislative majority are from different parties, which is common because the electorate usually expects more rapid results from new policies than are possible (Linz, Mainwaring and Shugart). In addition, this reduces accountability by allowing the president and the legislature to shift blame to each other.
Impediments to leadership change — presidential systems often make it difficult to remove a president from office early, for example after taking actions that become unpopular.
Tendency towards authoritarianism[edit]
A prime minister without majority support in the legislature must either form a coalition or, if able to lead a minority government, govern in a manner acceptable to at least some of the opposition parties. Even with a majority government, the prime minister must still govern within (perhaps unwritten) constraints as determined by the members of his party—a premier in this situation is often at greater risk of losing his party leadership than his party is at risk of losing the next election. On the other hand, winning the presidency is a winner-take-all, zero-sum game. Once elected, a president might be able to marginalize the influence of other parties and exclude rival factions in his own party as well, or even leave the party whose ticket he was elected under. The president can thus rule without any party support until the next election or abuse his power to win multiple terms, a worrisome situation for many interest groups. Yale political scientist Juan Linz argues that:
“ The danger that zero-sum presidential elections pose is compounded by the rigidity of the president's fixed term in office. Winners and losers are sharply defined for the entire period of the presidential mandate... losers must wait four or five years without any access to executive power and patronage. The zero-sum game in presidential regimes raises the stakes of presidential elections and inevitably exacerbates their attendant tension and polarization. ”
Constitutions that only require plurality support are said[by whom?] to be especially undesirable, as significant power can be vested in a person who does not enjoy support from a majority of the population.
Some political scientists say that presidential systems are not constitutionally stable and have difficulty sustaining democratic practices, noting that presidentialism has slipped into authoritarianism in many of the countries in which it has been implemented. According to political scientist Fred Riggs, presidentialism has fallen into authoritarianism in nearly every country it has been attempted.[2][3] Political sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset pointed out that this has taken place in political cultures not conducive to democracy and that militaries have tended to play a prominent role in most of these countries. On the other hand, an often-cited[by whom?] list of the world's 22 older democracies includes only two countries (Costa Rica and the United States) with presidential systems.
In a presidential system, the legislature and the president have equal mandates from the public. Conflicts between the branches of government might not be reconciled. When president and legislature disagree and government is not working effectively, there is a strong incentive to use extra-constitutional measures to break the deadlock. Of the three common branches of government, the executive is in the best position to use extra-constitutional measures, especially when the president is head of state, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the military. By contrast, in a parliamentary system where the often-ceremonial head of state is either a constitutional monarch or (in the case of a parliamentary republic) an experienced and respected figure, given some political emergency there is a good chance that even a ceremonial head of state will be able to use emergency reserve powers to restrain a head of government acting in an emergency extra-constitutional manner — this is only possible because the head of state and the head of government are not the same person.[citation needed]
Ecuador is sometimes presented[who?] as a case study of democratic failures over the past quarter-century. Presidents have ignored the legislature or bypassed it altogether. One president had the National Assembly teargassed, while another disagreed with congress until he was kidnapped by paratroopers. From 1979 through 1988, Ecuador staggered through a succession of executive-legislative confrontations that created a near permanent crisis atmosphere in the policy. In 1984, President León Febres Cordero tried to physically bar new Congressionally appointed supreme court appointees from taking their seats.
In Brazil, presidents have accomplished their objectives by creating executive agencies over which Congress had no say.[citation needed]
Dana D. Nelson in her 2008 book Bad for Democracy[4] sees the office of the President of the United States as essentially undemocratic[5] and characterizes presidentialism as worship of the president by citizens, which she believes undermines civic participation.[5]
Political gridlock[edit]
Some political scientists speak of the "failure of presidentialism" because the separation of powers of a presidential system often creates undesirable long-term political gridlock and instability whenever the president and the legislative majority are from different parties. This is common because the electorate often expects more rapid results than are possible from new policies and switches to a different party at the next election. These critics, including Juan Linz, argue that this inherent political instability can cause democracies to fail, as seen in such cases as Brazil and Chile.[citation needed]
Lack of accountability[edit]
In such cases of gridlock, presidential systems are said by critics[who?] not to offer voters the kind of accountability seen in parliamentary systems. It is easy for either the president or the legislature to escape blame by shifting it to the other. Describing the United States, former Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon said "the president blames Congress, the Congress blames the president, and the public remains confused and disgusted with government in Washington".[6]
An example is the increase in the federal debt of the United States that occurred during the presidency of Republican Ronald Reagan. Arguably, the deficits were the product of a bargain between President Reagan and the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tip O'Neill. O'Neill agreed to tax cuts favored by Reagan, and in exchange Reagan agreed to budgets that did not restrain spending to his liking. In such a scenario, each side can say they are displeased with the debt, plausibly blame the other side for the deficit, and still claim success.
Impediments to leadership change[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Another alleged problem of presidentialism is that it is often difficult to remove a president from office early. Even if a president is "proved to be inefficient, even if he becomes unpopular, even if his policy is unacceptable to the majority of his countrymen, he and his methods must be endured until the moment comes for a new election."[7] John Tyler was elected vice president and assumed the presidency because William Henry Harrison died after thirty days in office. Tyler blocked the Whig agenda, was loathed by his nominal party, but remained firmly in control of the executive branch. Most presidential systems provide no legal means to remove a president simply for being unpopular or even for behaving in a manner that might be considered unethical or immoral provided it is not illegal. This has been cited[citation needed] as the reason why many presidential countries have experienced military coups to remove a leader who is said to have lost his mandate.
Parliamentary systems can quickly remove unpopular leaders by a vote of no confidence, a procedure that serves as a "pressure release valve" for political tension. Votes of no confidence are easier to achieve in minority government situations, but even if the unpopular leader heads a majority government, he or she is often in a less secure position than a president. Usually in parliamentary systems a basic premise is that if a premier's popularity sustains a serious enough blow and the premier does not as a matter of consequence offer to resign prior to the next election, then those members of parliament who would persist in supporting the premier will be at serious risk of losing their seats. Therefore, especially in parliaments with a strong party system, other prominent members of the premier's party have a strong incentive to initiate a leadership challenge in hopes of mitigating damage to their party. More often than not, a premier facing a serious challenge resolves to save face by resigning before being formally removed—Margaret Thatcher's relinquishing of her premiership being a prominent example.
On the other hand, while removing a president through impeachment is allowed by most constitutions, impeachment proceedings often can be initiated only in cases where the president has violated the constitution or broken the law. Impeachment is often made difficult; by comparison the removal a party leader is normally governed by the (often less formal) rules of the party. Nearly all parties (including governing parties) have a relatively simple process for removing their leaders.
Furthermore, even when impeachment proceedings against a sitting president are successful, whether by causing his removal from office or by compelling his resignation, the legislature usually has little or no discretion in determining the ousted president's successor, since presidential systems usually adhere to a rigid succession process which is enforced the same way regardless of how a vacancy in the presidency comes about. The usual outcome of a presidency becoming vacant is that a vice president automatically succeeds to the presidency. Vice presidents are usually chosen by the president, whether as a running mate who elected alongside the president or appointed by a sitting president, so that when a vice president succeeds to the presidency it is probable that he will continue many or all the policies of the former president. A prominent example of such an accession would be the elevation of Vice President Gerald Ford to the U.S. Presidency after Richard Nixon agreed to resign in the face of virtually certain impeachment and removal, a succession that took place notwithstanding the fact that Ford had only assumed the Vice Presidency after being appointed by Nixon to replace Spiro Agnew, who had also resigned due to scandal. In some cases, particularly when the would-be successor to a presidency is seen by legislators as no better (or even worse) than a president they wish to see removed, there may be a strong incentive to abstain from pursuing impeachment proceedings even if there are legal grounds to do so.
Since prime ministers in parliamentary systems must always retain the confidence of the legislature, in cases where a prime minister suddenly leaves office there is little point in anyone without a reasonable prospect of gaining that legislative confidence attempting to assume the premiership. This ensures that whenever a premiership becomes vacant (or is about to become vacant), legislators from the premier's party will always play a key role in determining the leader's permanent successor. In theory this could be interpreted to support an argument that a parliamentary party ought to have the power to elect their party leader directly, and indeed, at least historically, parliamentary system parties' leadership electoral procedures usually called for the party's legislative caucus to fill a leadership vacancy by electing a new leader directly by and from amongst themselves, and for the whole succession process to be completed within as short a time frame as practical. Today, however, such a system is not commonly practiced and most parliamentary system parties' rules provide for a leadership election in which the general membership of the party is permitted to vote at some point in the process (either directly for the new leader or for delegates who then elect the new leader in a convention), though in many cases the party's legislators are allowed to exercise a disproportionate influence in the final vote. Whenever a leadership election becomes necessary on account of a vacancy arising suddenly, an interim leader (often informally called the interim prime minister in cases where this involves a governing party) will be selected by the parliamentary party, usually with the stipulation or expectation that the interim leader will not be a candidate for the permanent leadership. Some parties, such as the British Conservative Party, employ some combination of both aforementioned electoral processes to select a new leader. In any event, a prime minister who is forced to leave office due to scandal or similar circumstance will usually have little if any ability to influence his party on the final selection of a new leader and anyone seen to be having close ties to such a prime minister will have limited if any serious prospect of being elected the new leader. Even in cases when an outgoing prime minister is leaving office voluntarily, it is often frowned on for an outgoing or former premier to engage in any overt attempt to influence the election (for example, by endorsing a candidate in the leadership election), in part because a party in the process of selecting a new leader usually has a strong incentive to foster a competitive leadership election in order to stimulate interest and participation in the election, which in turn encourages the sale of party memberships and support for the party in general.
Walter Bagehot criticized presidentialism because it does not allow a transfer in power in the event of an emergency.
“ Under a cabinet constitution at a sudden emergency the people can choose a ruler for the occasion. It is quite possible and even likely that he would not be ruler before the occasion. The great qualities, the imperious will, the rapid energy, the eager nature fit for a great crisis are not required—are impediments—in common times. A Lord Liverpool is better in everyday politics than a Chatham—a Louis Philippe far better than a Napoleon. By the structure of the world we want, at the sudden occurrence of a grave tempest, to change the helmsman—to replace the pilot of the calm by the pilot of the storm.
But under a presidential government you can do nothing of the kind. The American government calls itself a government of the supreme people; but at a quick crisis, the time when a sovereign power is most needed, you cannot find the supreme people. You have got a congress elected for one fixed period, going out perhaps by fixed installments, which cannot be accelerated or retarded—you have a president chosen for a fixed period, and immovable during that period: ..there is no elastic element... you have bespoken your government in advance, and whether it is what you want or not, by law you must keep it...[8]
”
Opponents[who?] of the presidential system note that years later, Bagehot's observation came to life during World War II, when Neville Chamberlain was replaced with Winston Churchill.
However, supporters of the presidential system question the validity of the point. They argue that if presidents were not able to command some considerable level of security in their tenures, their direct mandates would be worthless. They further counter that republics such as the United States have successfully endured war and other crises without the need to change heads of state. Supporters argue that presidents elected in a time of peace and prosperity have proven themselves perfectly capable of responding effectively to a serious crisis, largely due to their ability to make the necessary appointments to his cabinet and elsewhere in government or by creating new positions to deal with new challenges. One prominent, recent example would be the appointment of a Secretary of Homeland Security following the September 11 attacks in the United States.
Some supporters of the presidential system counter that impediments to a leadership change, being that they are little more than an unavoidable consequence of the direct mandate afforded to a president, are thus a strength instead of a weakness in times of crisis. In such times, a prime minister might hesitate due to the need to keep parliament's support, whereas a president can act without fear of removal from office by those who might disapprove of his actions. Furthermore, even if a prime minister does manage to successfully resolve a crisis (or multiple crises), that does not guarantee and he or she will possess the political capital needed to remain in office for a similar, future crisis. Unlike what would be possible in a presidential system, a perceived crisis in the parliamentary system might give disgruntled backbenchers or rivals an opportunity to launch a vexing challenge for a prime minister's leadership. As noted above, in such situations a prime minister often resigns if they even moderately doubt their ability to endure a challenge. When the prime minister chooses to face such a challenger, they typically expect (and are expected) to win by an overwhelming majority - should the prime minister defeat his or her challenger but by a majority he or she privately deems insufficient to be able and willing to continue to effectively govern, the prime minister will often resign nonetheless. In such circumstances, there is no guarantee that the sudden accession of an unproven prime minister during a crisis will be a change for the better—the ouster of Thatcher (who, after successfully prosecuting the Falklands War, was nevertheless compelled to resign in the midst of the Persian Gulf Crisis) is seen as an example by those who argue her successor, John Major, proved less able to defend British interests in the ensuing Gulf War.
Finally, many[who?] have criticized presidential systems for their alleged slowness to respond to their citizens' needs. Often, the checks and balances make action difficult. Walter Bagehot said of the American system, "the executive is crippled by not getting the law it needs, and the legislature is spoiled by having to act without responsibility: the executive becomes unfit for its name, since it cannot execute what it decides on; the legislature is demoralized by liberty, by taking decisions of others [and not itself] will suffer the effects".[8]
Defenders of Presidential systems argue that a parliamentary system operating in a jurisdiction with strong ethnic or sectarian tensions will tend to ignore the interests of minorities or even treat them with contempt - the first half century of government in Northern Ireland is often cited as an example - whereas presidential systems ensure that minority wishes and rights cannot be disregarded, thus preventing a "Tyranny of the majority" and vice versa protect the wishes and rights of the majority from abuse by a legislature or an executive that holds a contrary viewpoint especially when there are frequent, scheduled elections.[citation needed] On the other hand, supporters of parliamentary systems contend that the strength and independence of the judiciary is the more decisive factor when it comes to protection of minority rights.
British-Irish philosopher and MP Edmund Burke stated that an official should be elected based on "his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience", and therefore should reflect on the arguments for and against certain policies before taking positions and then act out on what an official would believe is best in the long run for one's constituents and country as a whole even if it means short-term backlash. Thus Defenders of Presidential systems hold that sometimes what is wisest may not always be the most popular decision and vice versa.
Differences from a parliamentary system[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
A number of key theoretical differences exist between a presidential and a parliamentary system:
In a presidential system, the central principle is that the legislative and executive branches of government are separate. This leads to the separate election of president, who is elected to office for a fixed term, and only removable for gross misdemeanor by impeachment and dismissal. In addition he or she does not need to choose cabinet members commanding the support of the legislature. By contrast, in parliamentarianism, the executive branch is led by a council of ministers, headed by a Prime Minister, who are directly accountable to the legislature and often have their background in the legislature (regardless of whether it is called a "parliament", an "assembly", a "diet", or a "chamber").
As with the president's set term of office, the legislature also exists for a set term of office and cannot be dissolved ahead of schedule. By contrast, in parliamentary systems, the prime minister needs to survive a vote of confidence otherwise a new election must be called. The legislature can typically be dissolved at any stage during its life by the head of state, usually on the advice of either Prime Minister alone, by the Prime Minister and cabinet, or by the cabinet.
In a presidential system, the president usually has special privileges in the enactment of legislation, namely the possession of a power of veto over legislation of bills, in some cases subject to the power of the legislature by weighted majority to override the veto. The legislature and the president are thus expected to serve as checks and balances on each other's powers.
Presidential system presidents may also be given a great deal of constitutional authority in the exercise of the office of Commander in Chief, a constitutional title given to most presidents. In addition, the presidential power to receive ambassadors as head of state is usually interpreted as giving the president broad powers to conduct foreign policy. Though semi-presidential systems may reduce a president's power over day-to-day government affairs, semi-presidential systems commonly give the president power over foreign policy.
Presidential systems also have fewer ideological parties than parliamentary systems. Sometimes in the United States, the policies preferred by the two parties have been very similar (but see also polarization). In the 1950s, during the leadership of Lyndon B. Johnson, the Senate Democrats included the right-most members of the chamber—Harry Byrd and Strom Thurmond, and the left-most members—Paul Douglas and Herbert Lehman. This pattern does not prevail in Latin American presidential democracies.
Overlapping elements[edit]
In practice, elements of both systems overlap. Though a president in a presidential system does not have to choose a government under the legislature, the legislature may have the right to scrutinize his or her appointments to high governmental office, with the right, on some occasions, to block an appointment. In the United States, many appointments must be confirmed by the Senate, although once confirmed an appointee can only be removed against the president's will through impeachment. By contrast, though answerable to parliament, a parliamentary system's cabinet may be able to make use of the parliamentary 'whip' (an obligation on party members in parliament to vote with their party) to control and dominate parliament, reducing parliament's ability to control the government.
Republics with a presidential system of government[edit]
Main article: List of countries by system of government § Presidential systems
Italics indicate states with limited recognition.
Afghanistan
Angola
Argentina
Artsakh
Benin
Bolivia
Brazil
Burundi
Chile
Colombia
Comoros
Costa Rica
Cyprus
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Gambia
Ghana
Guatemala
Honduras
Indonesia
Iran[9]
Kenya
Liberia
Malawi
Maldives
Mexico
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Palau
Panama
Paraguay
Philippines
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somaliland
South Sudan
Turkmenistan
United States
Uruguay
Venezuela
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Presidential systems with a prime minister[edit]
The following countries have presidential systems where a post of prime minister exists alongside with that of president. Differently from other systems, however, the president is still both the head state and government and the prime minister's roles are mostly to assist the president. Belarus and Kazakhstan, where the prime minister is effectively the head of government and the president the head of state, are exceptions.
Belarus
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Chad
Djibouti
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
Guinea (Guinea-Conakry)
Guyana
Ivory Coast (Côte d'Ivoire)
Kazakhstan[10]
Rwanda
South Korea
Sudan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Togo
Uganda
Uzbekistan
See also[edit]
List of countries by system of government
Parliamentary system & Westminster system
Semi-presidential system
Coalition government
Notes and references[edit]
Jump up ^ The "presidential" model implies that the Chief Executive is elected by all those members of the electoral body: Buonomo, Giampiero (2003). "Titolo V e "forme di governo": il caso Abruzzo (dopo la Calabria)". Diritto&Giustizia edizione online. – via Questia (subscription required)
Jump up ^ "Presidentialism versus Parliamentarism: Implications for Representativeness and Legitimacy". International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale De Science Politique. 18 (3): 258. 1997.
Jump up ^ "Conceptual homogenization of a heterogeneous field: Presidentialism in comparative perspective". Comparing Nations: Concepts, Strategies, Substance: 72–152. 1994.
Jump up ^ Nelson, Dana D. (2008). Bad for Democracy: How the Presidency Undermines the Power of the People. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. p. 248. ISBN 978-0-8166-5677-6.
^ Jump up to: a b David Sirota (August 22, 2008). "Why cult of presidency is bad for democracy". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2009-09-20.
Jump up ^ Sundquist, James (1992). Constitutional Reform and Effective Government. Brookings Institution Press. p. 11.
Jump up ^ Balfour. "Introduction". The English Constitution.
^ Jump up to: a b Balfour. "The Cabinet". The English Constitution.
Jump up ^ Iran combines the forms of a presidential republic, with a president elected by universal suffrage, and a theocracy, with a Supreme Leader who is ultimately responsible for state policy, chosen by the elected Assembly of Experts. Candidates for both the Assembly of Experts and the presidency are vetted by the appointed Guardian Council.
Jump up ^ "Nazarbaev Signs Kazakh Constitutional Amendments Into Law". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 10 March 2017. Retrieved 10 March 2017. For more information: please see Abdurasulov, Abdujalil (6 March 2017). "Kazakhstan constitution: Will changes bring democracy?". BBC News. Retrieved 7 March 2017.
External links[edit]
The Great Debate: Parliament versus Congress
Castagnola, Andrea/Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal: Presidential Control of High Courts in Latin America: A Long-term View (1904-2006), in: Journal of Politics in Latin America, Hamburg 2009.
Authority control
GND: 4175552-2
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Presidential_system&oldid=826537189"
Categories:
Forms of government
Political systems
Presidents
Republicanism
Separation of powers
Hidden categories:
Subscription required using via
Pages containing links to subscription-only content
Articles needing additional references from November 2010
All articles needing additional references
Articles that may contain original research from January 2018
All articles that may contain original research
Articles with multiple maintenance issues
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from September 2016
Articles that may contain original research from December 2015
All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from March 2017
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from September 2016
Articles with unsourced statements from February 2017
Articles that may contain original research from January 2012
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from January 2012
Articles with unsourced statements from February 2016
Articles with unsourced statements from August 2012
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from August 2012
Articles needing additional references from November 2017
Articles with unsourced statements from January 2015
Articles needing additional references from December 2015
Pages using div col with deprecated parameters
Wikipedia articles with GND identifiers
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
Asturianu
Avañe'ẽ
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
Boarisch
Català
Čeština
Corsu
Dansk
Deutsch
ދިވެހިބަސް
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Kurdî
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Lingála
Lumbaart
Magyar
მარგალური
مصرى
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
नेपाली
日本語
Norsk
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Scots
Shqip
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Basa Sunda
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Vèneto
Tiếng Việt
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 19 February 2018, at 18:20.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: class role tabindex

values: mw-collapsible-toggle button 0

value: small

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Refimprove

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Original_research

values:
mw-collapsible
width:95%; margin: 0.2em 0;

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-multiple_issues compact-ambox

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #3355dd; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: -webkit-column-break-inside: avoid;page-break-inside: avoid;break-inside: avoid-column

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #f0e847; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #66bb66; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #ff9a33; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #e75353; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #ee1af9; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #801a80; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #6b8e23; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #aa6f33; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: display:inline-block; width:1.5em; height:1.5em; margin:1px 0; border:1px solid black; background-color: #b9b9b9; color:black; font-size:100%; text-align:center;

values: border:1px solid #CEDAF2; clear:right; width:340px; margin-left:1em; margin-bottom:0,5em; bgcolor:#FFFFFF

values: padding:0.2em 0 0.4em;padding:0.4em 0 0.4em;

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle1
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
/wiki/Politics_by_country
mw-redirect
Politics by country

values: font-size: 105%; padding: 0.2em 0px 0.4em; text-align: center; display: none;

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle2
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle3
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values: padding:0.2em 0.4em; line-height:1.2em; line-height:1.15em;

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle4
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle5
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle6
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle7
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values:
NavToggle
NavToggle8
#
color: rgb(58, 95, 205);

values: padding:0.2em 0.4em 0.2em;padding-top:0;font-size:145%;line-height:1.2em;background:#efefef;padding-top:0.2em;padding:0.2em 0.2em 0.3em;

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%;border-collapse:collapse; border-spacing:0px; border:none; width:100%; margin:0px; font-size:100%; clear:none; float:none

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;text-align:left;border-top:#ddd 1px solid;text-align:center;padding-bottom:0.7em;;padding:0.4em 0.2em 0.6em;

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;text-align:left;border-top:#ddd 1px solid;text-align:center;padding-bottom:0.7em;;padding-top:0.3em;border-top:none;

values:
/wiki/Intergovernmental_organisation
mw-redirect
Intergovernmental organisation

values:
/wiki/System_of_government
mw-redirect
System of government

values:
/wiki/Legislative_branch
mw-redirect
Legislative branch

values: History of the United States (1789–1849)

values:
/wiki/British_monarchy
mw-redirect
British monarchy

values:
/wiki/Vote_of_confidence
mw-redirect
Vote of confidence

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (September 2016)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Commutation_of_sentence
mw-redirect
Commutation of sentence

values: Edit section: Subnational governments of the world

values:
/wiki/Council-manager_government
mw-redirect
Council-manager government

values:
/wiki/Vote_of_no_confidence
mw-redirect
Vote of no confidence

values: The material near this tag possibly uses too-vague attribution or weasel words. (March 2017)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch

values: The material near this tag possibly uses too-vague attribution or weasel words. (September 2016)

values:
/wiki/Algerian_War_of_Independence
mw-redirect
Algerian War of Independence

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (February 2017)

values:
/wiki/Cabinet_shuffle
mw-redirect
Cabinet shuffle

values:
/wiki/United_States_Cabinet
mw-redirect
United States Cabinet

values: Edit section: Criticism and disadvantages

values: Edit section: Tendency towards authoritarianism

values: width: 20px; vertical-align: top; border: none; color: #B2B7F2; font-size: 40px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-weight: bold; line-height: .6em; text-align: left; padding: 10px 10px;

values: vertical-align: top; border: none; padding: 4px 10px;

values: width: 20px; vertical-align: bottom; border: none; color: #B2B7F2; font-size: 40px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-weight: bold; line-height: .6em; text-align: right; padding: 10px 10px;

values: margin:auto; border-collapse: collapse; border: none; background-color: transparent; width: auto;

values:
/wiki/Plurality_voting_system
mw-redirect
Plurality voting system

values: The material near this tag may use weasel words or too-vague attribution. (January 2012)

values: How Democratic Is the American Constitution?

values:
/wiki/Reserve_powers
mw-redirect
Reserve powers

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (February 2016)

values: The material near this tag possibly uses too-vague attribution or weasel words. (January 2012)

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (August 2012)

values: The material near this tag possibly uses too-vague attribution or weasel words. (August 2012)

values:
/wiki/US_public_debt
mw-redirect
US public debt

values: Edit section: Impediments to leadership change

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Unreferenced

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (January 2015)

values:
/wiki/Secretary_of_Homeland_Security
mw-redirect
Secretary of Homeland Security

values: Edit section: Differences from a parliamentary system

values:
/wiki/Prime_Minister
mw-redirect
Prime Minister

values:
/wiki/Checks_and_balances
mw-redirect
Checks and balances

values:
/wiki/Commander_in_Chief
mw-redirect
Commander in Chief

values:
/wiki/Herbert_Lehman
mw-redirect
Herbert Lehman

values: Edit section: Republics with a presidential system of government

values: List of countries by system of government

values: -moz-column-width: 20em; -webkit-column-width: 20em; column-width: 20em;

values: Edit section: Presidential systems with a prime minister

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1601343

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
https://d-nb.info/gnd/4175552-2

values: Category:Subscription required using via

values: Category:Pages containing links to subscription-only content

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from November 2010

values: Category:All articles needing additional references

values: Category:Articles that may contain original research from January 2018

values: Category:All articles that may contain original research

values: Category:Articles with multiple maintenance issues

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from September 2016

values: Category:Articles that may contain original research from December 2015

values: Category:All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases

values: Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from March 2017

values: Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from September 2016

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2017

values: Category:Articles that may contain original research from January 2012

values: Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from January 2012

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2016

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from August 2012

values: Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from August 2012

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from November 2017

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from January 2015

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from December 2015

values: Category:Pages using div col with deprecated parameters

values: Category:Wikipedia articles with GND identifiers

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Presidential_system
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: نظام رئاسي – Arabic

values: Прэзідэнцкая рэспубліка – Belarusian

values: Прэзыдэнцкая рэспубліка – Belarusian (Taraškievica orthography)

values: Президентска република – Bulgarian

values: Präsidentiells Regiarungssysdem – Bavarian

values: Präsidentielles Regierungssystem – German

values: ރިޔާސީ ނިޒާމު – Divehi

values: Προεδρική δημοκρατία – Greek

values: نظام ریاستی – Persian

values: 대통령중심제 – Korean

values: Նախագահական համակարգ – Armenian

values: अध्यक्षीय प्रणाली – Hindi

values: משטר נשיאותי – Hebrew

values: საპრეზიდენტო რესპუბლიკა – Georgian

values: Президенттік республика – Kazakh

values: საპრეზიდენტო რესპუბლიკა – Mingrelian

values: သမ္မတစနစ် – Burmese

values: राष्ट्रपतीय शासन प्रणाली – Nepali

values: Президентская республика – Russian

values: Предсједнички систем – Serbian

values: Presidenttijohtoinen järjestelmä – Finnish

values: தலைவர் ஆளும் அரசு முறைமை – Tamil

values: Президент җөмһүрияте – Tatar

values: ระบบประธานาธิบดี – Thai

values: Президентська республіка – Ukrainian

values: صدارتی نظام – Urdu

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Presidential_system rootpage-Presidential_system skin-vector action-view


text:
Forbes' list of the most valuable football clubs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This is a list of the richest football clubs in the world as ranked by Forbes magazine on their worth in United States dollar.
Contents
[hide]
1 Current ranking
2 Historical rankings
2.1 2016 rankings
2.2 2015 rankings
2.3 2014 rankings
2.4 2013 rankings
2.5 2012 rankings
2.6 2011 rankings
2.7 2010 rankings
2.8 2009 rankings
2.9 2008 rankings
2.10 2007 rankings
3 See also
4 References
Current ranking
Rankings as of 1 June 2017.[1]
Rank
Team
Country
Value
In millions
Debt as
% of value[2]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Manchester United England 4,583 6 11 850
2 Barcelona Spain 3,635 6 2 688
3 Real Madrid Spain 3,580 3 -2 688
4 Bayern Munich Germany 2,713 0 1 657
5 Manchester City England 2,083 5 8 650
6 Arsenal England 1,932 16 -4 572
7 Chelsea England 1,845 0 11 583
8 Liverpool England 1,492 7 -4 523
9 Juventus Italy 1,258 7 -3 379
10 Tottenham Hotspur England 1,058 17 4 377
11 Paris Saint-Germain France 841 0 3 578
12 Borussia Dortmund Germany 808 0 -3 315
13 A.C. Milan Italy 802 73 -3 238
14 Atlético Madrid Spain 732 9 16 234
15 West Ham United England 634 11 17 213
16 Schalke 04 Germany 629 7 -4 249
17 Roma Italy 569 3 -2 242
18 Inter Milan Italy 537 37 -4 199
19 Leicester City England 413 0 - 191
20 Napoli Italy 379 0 -4 158
Historical rankings
2016 rankings
Rankings as of 1 May 2016.[3]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
% of value[5]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Real Madrid Spain 3,645 3 12 694
2 Barcelona Spain 3,549 2 12 675
3 Manchester United England 3,317 20 7 625
4 Bayern Munich Germany 2,678 0 14 570
5 Arsenal England 2,017 17 54 524
6 Manchester City England 1,921 0 40 558
7 Chelsea England 1,661 0 21 505
8 Liverpool England 1,548 5 58 471
9 Juventus Italy 1,299 4 55 390
10 Tottenham Hotspur England 1,017 2 69 310
11 Borussia Dortmund Germany 836 0 19 338
12 A.C. Milan Italy 825 32 6 240
13 Paris Saint-Germain France 814 0 28 578
14 Schalke 04 Germany 655 21 15 264
15 Atlético Madrid Spain 633 22 45 225
16 Inter Milan Italy 559 43 27 198
17 West Ham United England 542 6 76 194
18 Roma Italy 508 36 N/A 217
19 Napoli Italy 396 0 12 151
20 Newcastle United England 383 0 10 104
2015 rankings
Rankings as of 6 May 2015.[6]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
% of value[7]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Real Madrid Spain 3,260 4 -5 746
2 Barcelona Spain 3,160 3 -1 657
3 Manchester United England 3,100 20 10 703
4 Bayern Munich Germany 2,350 0 27 661
5 Manchester City England 1,380 0 60 562
6 Chelsea England 1,370 0 58 526
7 Arsenal England 1,310 30 -2 487
8 Liverpool England 982 10 39 415
9 Juventus Italy 837 9 -2 379
10 A.C. Milan Italy 775 44 -9 339
11 Borussia Dortmund Germany 700 6 17 355
12 Paris Saint-Germain France 634 0 53 643
13 Tottenham Hotspur England 600 9 17 293
14 Schalke 04 Germany 572 0 -1 290
15 Inter Milan Italy 439 56 -9 222
16 Atlético Madrid Spain 436 53 33 231
17 Napoli Italy 353 0 19 224
18 Newcastle United England 349 0 N/A 210
19 West Ham United England 309 12 N/A 186
20 Galatasaray Turkey 294 17 -15 220
2014 rankings
Rankings as of 15 July 2014.[8]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Real Madrid Spain 3,440 4 675
2 Barcelona Spain 3,200 23 627
3 Manchester United England 2,810 -11 551
4 Bayern Munich Germany 1,850 41 561
5 Arsenal England 1,331 0 370
6 Chelsea England 868 -4 394
7 Manchester City England 863 25 411
8 A.C. Milan Italy 856 -9 343
9 Juventus Italy 850 22 354
10 Liverpool England 704 8 313
11 Borussia Dortmund Germany 599 31 333
12 Schalke 04 Germany 580 16 258
13 Tottenham Hotspur England 514 -1 224
14 Inter Milan Italy 483 20 219
15 Paris Saint-Germain France 415 N/A 518
16 Galatasaray Turkey 347 N/A 204
17 Atlético Madrid Spain 328 33 156
18 Hamburg Germany 326 9 176
19 Roma Italy 307 19 162
20 Napoli Italy 296 -10 156
2013 rankings
Rankings as of 17 April 2013.[9]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Real Madrid Spain 3,300 76 650
2 Manchester United England 3,165 61 502
3 Barcelona Spain 2,600 99 613
4 Arsenal England 1,326 3 368
5 Bayern Munich Germany 1,309 6 468
6 A.C. Milan Italy 945 -4 326
7 Chelsea England 901 18 409
8 Juventus Italy 694 17 248
9 Manchester City England 689 56 362
10 Liverpool England 651 5 296
11 Tottenham Hotspur England 520 -8 226
12 Schalke 04 Germany 498 -15 221
13 Borussia Dortmund Germany 436 11 240
14 Inter Milan Italy 401 -18 236
15 Lyon France 368 -4 167
16 Corinthians Brazil 358 - 119
17 Napoli Italy 330 17 188
18 Hamburg Germany 300 -15 154
19 Marseille France 285 -18 167
20 Newcastle United England 263 9 146
2012 rankings
Rankings as of 19 April 2012.[10]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Manchester United England 1,965 5 532
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,877 34 695
3 Barcelona Spain 1,307 34 653
4 Arsenal England 1,292 8 364
5 Bayern Munich Germany 1,235 12 466
6 A.C. Milan Italy 989 18 341
7 Chelsea England 761 16 362
8 Liverpool England 619 12 295
9 Juventus Italy 591 -6 223
10 Schalke 04 Germany 587 56 293
11 Tottenham Hotspur England 564 37 262
12 Inter Milan Italy 490 11 307
13 Manchester City England 443 52 246
14 Borussia Dortmund Germany 394 52 197
15 Lyon France 385 8 193
16 Hamburg Germany 355 4 187
17 Roma Italy 354 38 208
18 Marseille France 349 26 218
19 Valencia Spain 288 - 186
20 Napoli Italy 283 - 167
2011 rankings
Rankings as of 20 April 2011.[11]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
1 Manchester United England 1,864 1 428
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,400 10 537
3 Arsenal England 1,200 1 336
4 Bayern Munich Germany 1,100 6 396
5 Barcelona Spain 975 -2 488
6 A.C. Milan Italy 838 5 289
7 Chelsea England 658 2 313
8 Juventus Italy 628 -4 251
9 Liverpool England 552 -33 276
10 Inter Milan Italy 441 7 275
11 Tottenham Hotspur England 412 11 179
12 Schalke Germany 377 -2 171
13 Lyon France 358 8 179
14 Hamburg Germany 340 3 179
15 Manchester City England 291 13 153
16 Stuttgart Germany 281 0 141
17 Werder Bremen Germany 279 2 147
18 Marseille France 277 6 173
19 Atlético Madrid Spain 275 6 153
20 Borussia Dortmund Germany 260 -1 124
2010 rankings
Rankings as of April 2010.[12][13]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
% of value[14]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
Operating
income ($m)[15]
1 Manchester United England 1,835 46 -2 459 150
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,323 54 -2 563 130
3 Arsenal England 1,181 41 -2 369 102
4 Barcelona Spain 1,000 58 4 513 113
5 Bayern Munich Germany 990 14 -11 406 61
6 Liverpool England 822 47 -19 304 37
7 A.C. Milan Italy 800 0 -19 276 41
8 Juventus Italy 656 3 9 285 57
9 Chelsea England 646 8 -19 340 -73
10 Inter Milan Italy 413 0 12 276 -14
11 Schalke Germany 384 50 -25 175 -7
12 Tottenham Hotspur England 372 29 -16 186 35
13 Lyon France 333 10 -21 196 5
14 Hamburg Germany 329 0 0 206 41
15 Roma Italy 308 0 -19 205 25
16 Werder Bremen Germany 274 0 -6 161 24
17 Marseille France 262 0 9 187 19
18 Borussia Dortmund Germany 261 32 -20 145 8
19 Manchester City England 258 0 -17 143 -56
20 Newcastle United England 198 8 -30 142 -49
2009 rankings
Rankings as of April 2009.[16]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
% of value[14]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
Operating
income ($m)[15]
1 Manchester United England 1,870 54 4 512 160
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,353 23 5 576 81
3 Arsenal England 1,200 107 0 349 80
4 Bayern Munich Germany 1,110 0 21 465 59
5 Liverpool England 1,010 59 -4 332 50
6 A.C. Milan Italy 990 0 24 330 58
7 Barcelona Spain 960 43 22 487 108
8 Chelsea England 800 92 5 424 -13
9 Juventus Italy 600 5 18 264 46
10 Schalke Germany 510 38 9 234 41
11 Tottenham Hotspur England 445 29 12 228 70
12 Lyon France 423 18 4 245 94
13 Roma Italy 381 9 -12 276 69
14 Inter Milan Italy 370 77 -8 272 27
15 Hamburg Germany 330 0 13 202 44
16 Borussia Dortmund Germany 325 33 1 183 9
17 Manchester City England 310 0 62 164 -16
18 Werder Bremen Germany 292 0 12 177 27
19 Newcastle United England 285 96 -5 198 -13
20 Stuttgart Germany 264 0 not reported 176 18
21 Aston Villa England 240 10 26 150 1
21 Marseille France 240 0 28 200 20
23 Celtic Scotland 218 14 -4 145 11
24 Everton England 207 49 5 151 14
25 Rangers Scotland 194 86 not reported 128 15
2008 rankings
This is the April 2008 list.[17]
Rank
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
%of value[14]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
Operating
income($m)[15]
1 Manchester United England 1,800 60 24 394 111
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,285 27 24 474 112
3 Arsenal England 1,200 43 31 329 77
4 Liverpool England 1,050 65 131 269 60
5 Bayern Munich Germany 917 0 9 302 72
6 A.C. Milan Italy 798 0 -3 307 54
7 Barcelona Spain 784 27 47 392 92
8 Chelsea England 764 0 42 382 -5
9 Juventus Italy 510 5 -10 196 35
10 Schalke Germany 470 48 0 154 36
11 Roma Italy 434 12 94 213 48
12 Tottenham Hotspur England 414 15 70 207 64
13 Lyon France 408 7 19 190 15
14 Inter Milan Italy 403 0 -27 207 21
15 Borussia Dortmund Germany 323 57 63 122 31
16 Newcastle United England 300 43 16 175 12
17 Hamburg Germany 293 0 32 163 41
18 Werder Bremen Germany 262 0 n/a 131 11
19 Valencia Spain 254 159 31 145 -45
20 Celtic Scotland 227 11 23 151 48
21 Everton England 197 30 24 103 -1
22 West Ham United England 195 23 25 115 -22
23 Manchester City England 191 63 -8 114 27
24 Aston Villa England 190 12 36 106 -40
25 Marseille France 187 0 19 134 13
Manchester United increased from $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion still remaining at top. While Real Madrid remains second due to an increase of $400 million. Arsenal also remain third after an approximate increase of $350 million.
2007 rankings
This is the list released in March 2007.
#
Team
Country
Value ($M)[4]
Debt as
%of value[14]
% change
on year
Revenue ($M)
Operating
income($m)[15]
1 Manchester United England 1,453 84 6 310 92
2 Real Madrid Spain 1,036 10 2 000 83
3 Arsenal England 915 53 9 246 20
4 Bayern Munich Germany 838 0 9 262 62
5 A.C. Milan Italy 824 0 -10 305 46
6 Juventus Italy 567 17 -18 321 45
7 Inter Milan Italy 555 n/a 10 264 26
8 Chelsea England 537 28 6 283 -37
9 Barcelona Spain 535 12 22 331 12
10 Schalke Germany 471 53 45 157 37
11 Liverpool England 454 18 28 225 37
12 Lyon France 343 n/a 65 163 10
13 Newcastle United England 260 46 -14 159 11
14 Tottenham Hotspur England 243 0 27 137 9
15 Roma Italy 224 0 -15 162 53
16 Hamburg Germany 221 n/a n/a 130 31
17 Manchester City England 208 83 -6 114 9
18 Borussia Dortmund Germany 199 126 61 114 1
19 Ajax Netherlands 196 0 13 95 9
20 Celtic Scotland 185 14 18 106 -8
21 Everton England 165 32 34 107 -15
22 Marseille France 157 n/a n/a 105 6
23 West Ham United England 156 27 n/a 111 6
24 Rangers Scotland 147 7 32 113 12
25 Aston Villa England 140 16 16 91 -21
See also
Deloitte Football Money League
List of Premier League football club owners
List of professional sports leagues by revenue
Forbes' list of the most valuable sports teams
List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports teams
References
Jump up ^ Ozanian, Mike. "The World's Most Valuable Soccer Teams 2017". Forbes. Retrieved 2017-07-09.
Jump up ^ "The business of Soccer". Forbes. Retrieved 23 May 2015.
Jump up ^ Nick DeSantis (11 May 2016). "The 20 Most Valuable Soccer Teams Of 2016, Visualized". Forbes.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Estimated by Forbes based on past transactions, market value, debt, and stadium.
Jump up ^ "The business of Soccer". Forbes. Retrieved 23 May 2015.
Jump up ^ Mike Ozanian (6 May 2015). "Real Madrid Tops Ranking Of The World's Most Valuable Soccer Teams". Forbes. Forbes, Inc. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
Jump up ^ "The business of Soccer". Forbes. Retrieved 23 May 2015.
Jump up ^ Mike Ozanian (7 May 2014). "The World's Most Valuable Soccer Teams". Forbes. Forbes. Retrieved 8 May 2014.
Jump up ^ Mike Ozanian (2 March 2014). "Soccer's Most Valuable Teams: At $3.3 Billion, Real Madrid Knocks Manchester United From Top Spot". Forbes. Forbes. Retrieved 2 March 2014.
Jump up ^ Dan Bigman (19 April 2012). "The World’s Most Valuable Soccer Teams". Forbes. Forbes. Retrieved 20 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Dan Bigman (20 April 2011). "The World’s Most Valuable Soccer Teams". Forbes. Forbes. Retrieved 29 May 2011.
Jump up ^ "The Business Of Soccer". Forbes.com. 21 April 2010. Retrieved 4 May 2013.
Jump up ^ "2010 Soccer Team Valuations". Forbes.com. 30 June 2009. Retrieved 4 May 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Includes stadium debt
^ Jump up to: a b c d Revenue before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.
Jump up ^ "2009 Soccer Team Valuations". Forbes.com. Retrieved 4 May 2013.
Jump up ^ "2008 Soccer Team Valuations". Forbes.com. 30 June 2007. Retrieved 4 May 2013.
[hide]
v
t
e
Forbes magazine lists
Companies
Global 2000
People
General
Celebrity 100
30 Under 30
China Celebrity 100
Fictional 15
Korea Power Celebrity
World's 100 Most Powerful Women
World's Most Powerful People
Richest
The World's Billionaires
Forbes 400
Forbes Asia Australia's 50 Richest
Places
America's Best Colleges
Sports
Highest-paid athletes
Most valuable sports teams
Most valuable football clubs
Technology
Midas List (Tech's Top Deal Makers)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Forbes%27_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs&oldid=802432976"
Categories:
Lists of association football clubs
Association football rankings
Forbes lists
Association football teams
Hidden categories:
Use dmy dates from February 2017
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
বাংলা
Italiano
Lietuvių
Magyar
日本語
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Português
Română
Русский
Türkçe
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 26 September 2017, at 03:54.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href title

value: b

value: i

value: p

attrs: role tabindex class

values: button 0 togglelink

value: span

value: li

values:
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values:
/wiki/Manchester_United
mw-redirect
Manchester United

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/Manchester_City
mw-redirect
Manchester City

values:
/wiki/S.C.C_Napoli
mw-redirect
S.C.C Napoli

values:
/wiki/Real_Madrid
mw-redirect
Real Madrid

values: List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports teams (page does not exist)

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: Forbes list of The World's 100 Most Powerful Women

values: Forbes list of The World's Most Powerful People

values: Forbes Magazine's List of America's Best Colleges

values: Forbes' list of world's highest-paid athletes

values: nowraplinks collapsible expanded navbox-inner

values: Category:Lists of association football clubs

values: Category:Use dmy dates from February 2017

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: قائمة فوربس لأغنى أندية كرة القدم في العالم – Arabic

values: ধনী ফুটবল ক্লাবের তালিকা – Bangla

values: Società calcistiche più ricche del mondo secondo Forbes – Italian

values: Forbes vertingiausių futbolo klubų sąrašas – Lithuanian

values: Leggazdagabb labdarúgócsapatok listája – Hungarian

values: スポーツチームの資産価値順リスト – Japanese

values: Forbes jurnalining eng boy futbol klublari roʻyxati – Uzbek

values: Clubes de futebol mais ricos – Portuguese

values: Lista Forbes a celor mai scumpe cluburi de fotbal – Romanian

values: Богатейшие футбольные клубы мира – Russian

values: Forbes en değerli futbol kulüpleri listesi – Turkish

values: Danh sách câu lạc bộ bóng đá giá trị nhất theo Forbes – Vietnamese

values: 福布斯足球俱乐部财富排行榜 – Chinese

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Forbes_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs rootpage-Forbes_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs vector-experimental-print-styles vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view


text:
Symbion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the term 'symbiont', see Symbiosis. For the US power company, see Symbion Power.
Not to be confused with Symbian or Sybian.
Symbion
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
(unranked): Platyzoa
Phylum: Cycliophora
Class: Eucycliophora
Funch & Kristensen, 1995
Order: Symbiida
Funch & Kristensen, 1995
Family: Symbiidae
Funch & Kristensen, 1995
Genus: Symbion
Funch & Kristensen, 1995
Species
Symbion americanus Obst, Funch & Kristensen, 2005
Symbion pandora Funch & Kristensen, 1995
and at least one other
Symbion is the name of a genus of aquatic animals, less than 0.5 mm wide, found living attached to the bodies of cold-water lobsters. They have sac-like bodies, and three distinctly different forms in different parts of their two-stage life-cycle. They appear so different from other animals that they were assigned their own, new phylum Cycliophora shortly after they were discovered in 1995. This was the first new phylum of multicelled organism to be discovered since the Loricifera in 1983.[1]
Contents
[hide]
1 Taxonomy
2 Description
3 Reproduction
4 References
5 External links
Taxonomy[edit]
See also: List of bilaterial animal orders
Symbion was discovered in 1995 by Reinhardt Kristensen and Peter Funch[2] on the mouthparts of the Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), and other, related, species have since been discovered on:
the American lobster (Homarus americanus, host to Symbion americanus)[3][4]
the European lobster (Homarus gammarus, host to an as yet unnamed species of Symbion)
The genus is so named because of its commensal relationship with the lobster (a form of symbiosis) – it feeds on the leftovers from the lobster's own meals.[5]
The genus Symbion are peculiar microscopic animals, with no obvious close relatives, and which was therefore given its own phylum, called Cycliophora. The phylogenetic position of Symbion remains unclear: originally the phyla Ectoprocta and Entoprocta were considered possible relatives of Symbion, based on structural similarities.[6] However, genetic studies suggest that Symbion may be more closely related to Gnathifera.
Description[edit]
Symbion pandora has a bilateral, sac-like body with no coelom. There are three basic life stages:
Asexual Feeding Stage – At this stage, S. pandora is neither male nor female. It has a length of 347 μm and a width of 113 μm. On the posterior end of the sac-like body is a stalk with an adhesive disc, which attaches itself to the host. On the anterior end is a ciliated funnel (mouth) and an anus.
Sexual Stage
Male – S. pandora has a length of 84 μm and a width of 42 μm during this stage. It has no mouth or anus, which signifies the absence of a digestive system. It also has two reproductive organs.
Female – S. pandora is the same size as the male in this stage. It does, however, have a digestive system which collapses and reconstitutes itself as a larva.[2]
Reproduction[edit]
Symbion can reproduce both asexually by budding and sexually. In sexual reproduction the male attaches to a feeding stage and impregnates a budding female. The female then separates from the feeding stage and attaches herself to another host, where the larva in her develops. The female dies, and the larva escapes. The larval stage may be unscientifically referred to as sea worms. The sexual reproductive cycle is triggered when the host crustacean molts its skin in order to grow.[7]
References[edit]
Jump up ^ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18834-zoologger-the-most-bizarre-life-story-on-earth/
^ Jump up to: a b P. Funch & R. M. Kristensen (1995). "Cycliophora is a new phylum with affinities to Entoprocta and Ectoprocta". Nature. 378 (6558): 711–714. doi:10.1038/378711a0.
Jump up ^ M. Obst; P. Funch & G. Giribet (2005). "Hidden diversity and host specificity in cycliophorans: a phylogeographic analysis along the North Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea". Molecular Ecology. 14 (14): 4427–4440. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02752.x. PMID 16313603.
Jump up ^ Neves RC, Kristensen RM, Wanninger A (March 2009). "Three-dimensional reconstruction of the musculature of various life cycle stages of the cycliophoran Symbion americanus". J. Morphol. 270 (3): 257–70. doi:10.1002/jmor.10681. PMID 18937332.
Jump up ^ P. Funch; P. Thor & M. Obst (2008). "Symbiotic relations and feeding biology of Symbion pandora (Cycliophora) and Triticella flava (Bryozoa)". Vie et Milieu. 58: 185–188.
Jump up ^ "Cycliophorans - Cycliophora - Details - Encyclopedia of Life". Encyclopedia of Life. Retrieved 2017-09-02.
Jump up ^ Piper, Ross (2007), Extraordinary Animals: An Encyclopedia of Curious and Unusual Animals, Greenwood Press.
External links[edit]
Wikispecies has information related to Symbion
A lobster's microscopic friend
[show]
v
t
e
Extant Animal phyla
Domain
Archaea
Bacteria
Eukaryota
(Supergroup
Plant
Hacrobia
Heterokont
Alveolata
Rhizaria
Excavata
Amoebozoa
Opisthokonta
Animal
Fungi)
A
n
i
m
a
l
i
a
Porifera (sponges)
Diploblasts
(Eumetazoa)
Ctenophora (comb jellies)
ParaHoxozoa
Cnidaria (jellyfish and relatives)
Placozoa (Trichoplax)
Bilateria
(Triploblasts)
(see below↓)
[hide]
Bilateria
Xenacoelomorpha
Xenoturbellida (Xenoturbella)
Acoelomorpha
acoels
nemertodermatids
N
e
p
h
r
o
z
o
a
Deuterostomia
Chordata
lancelets
tunicates
craniates / vertebrates
Ambulacraria
Echinodermata (starfish and relatives)
Hemichordata
acorn worms
pterobranchs
P
r
o
t
o
s
t
o
m
i
a
Ecdysozoa
Scalidophora
Kinorhyncha (mud dragons)
Priapulida (penis worms)
N+L+P
Nematoida
Nematoda (roundworms)
Nematomorpha (horsehair worms)
L+P
Loricifera
Panarthropoda
Arthropoda (arthropods)
Tardigrada (waterbears)
Onychophora (velvet worms)
S
p
i
r
a
l
i
a
Gnathifera¹
Chaetognatha (arrow worms)
Gnathostomulida (jaw worms)
Micrognathozoa (Limnognathia)
Syndermata
Rotifera
Acanthocephala
Platytrochozoa
R+M
Mesozoa
Orthonectida
Dicyemida or Rhombozoa
Rouphozoa¹
Platyhelminthes (flatworms)
Gastrotricha (hairybacks)
Lophotrochozoa
Cycliophora (Symbion)
Mollusca (molluscs)
A+N
Annelida (ringed worms)
Nemertea (ribbon worms)
Lophophorata
Bryozoa
Entoprocta or Kamptozoa
Ectoprocta (moss animals)
Brachiozoa
Brachiopoda (lamp shells)
Phoronida (horseshoe worms)
Major groups
within phyla
Sponges
Calcareous
Hexactinellid
Demosponge
Homoscleromorpha
Cnidarians
Anthozoa inc. corals
Medusozoa inc. jellyfish
Myxozoa
Vertebrates
Jawless fish
Cartilaginous fish
Bony fish
Amphibians
Reptiles
Birds
Mammals
Echinoderms
Sea lilies
Asterozoa inc. starfish
Echinozoa
Nematodes
Chromadorea
Enoplea
Secernentea
Arthropods
Chelicerates/Arachnids
Myriapods
Crustaceans
Hexapods/Insects
Platyhelminths
Turbellaria
Trematoda
Monogenea
Cestoda
Bryozoans
Phylactolaemata
Stenolaemata
Gymnolaemata
Annelids
Polychaetes
Clitellata
Echiura
Molluscs
Gastropods
Cephalopods
Bivalves
Chitons
Tusk shells
Phyla with ≥5000 extant species bolded
See also
Diploblasts
Monoblastozoa (nomen dubium)
¹Platyzoa
Taxon identifiers
Wd: Q502012
ADW: Symbion
EoL: 1922
Fossilworks: 67159
iNaturalist: 151828
IRMNG: 240
ITIS: 563958
NCBI: 69815
WoRMS: 22586
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Symbion&oldid=836967483"
Categories:
Platyzoa genera
Parasites of crustaceans
Hidden categories:
Articles with 'species' microformats
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikispecies
Languages
Azərbaycanca
Български
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Diné bizaad
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
Қазақша
Limburgs
Nederlands
日本語
Nordfriisk
Norsk
Occitan
Polski
Português
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Српски / srpski
Svenska
Tagalog
Українська
Winaray
中文
26 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 17 April 2018, at 22:39.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: th

attrs: colspan style

value: tr

value: img

attrs: alt src width height data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: class style

values: font-size:smaller; float:right; padding-right:0.4em; margin-left:-3em;

values: min-width:15em; text-align: center; background-color: rgb(235,235,210)

values: Symbion americanus (page does not exist)

values: text-align: left; width: 200px; font-size: 100%

values:
/wiki/List_of_bilaterial_animal_orders
mw-redirect
List of bilaterial animal orders

values:
/wiki/Norway_lobster
mw-redirect
Norway lobster

values:
/wiki/European_lobster
mw-redirect
European lobster

values:
/wiki/Phylum_(biology)
mw-redirect
Phylum (biology)

values:
/wiki/Gnathifera_(phylum)
mw-redirect
Gnathifera (phylum)

values:
/wiki/Digestive_system
mw-redirect
Digestive system

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1038%2F378711a0

values:
/wiki/PubMed_Identifier
mw-redirect
PubMed Identifier

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16313603

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1002%2Fjmor.10681

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18937332

values:
nofollow
external text
http://eol.org/pages/1922/details

values:
/wiki/Greenwood_Press_(publisher)
mw-redirect
Greenwood Press (publisher)

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

values: nowraplinks collapsible uncollapsed navbox-subgroup

values:
row
navbox-group
width:1%;background-color: #f0f0f0

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values:
row
navbox-group
width:1%;text-align: left;

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/151828

values: National Center for Biotechnology Information

values: Category:Articles with 'species' microformats

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Symbion
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values:
/w/index.php?title=Symbion&action=edit
Edit this page [ctrl-alt-e]
e

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-az
display: none;

values: Циклиофори – Bulgarian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-bg
display: none;

values:
https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Catalan
ca
ca
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ca
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cs
display: none;

values: Chʼoshtsoh bíláshgaantsohí biyaʼ (chʼosh doo yitʼíinii) – Navajo

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-nv
display: none;

values:
https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Esperanto
eo
eo
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-eo
display: none;

values:
https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Basque
eu
eu
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-eu
display: none;

values: دایره‌دارتباران – Persian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fa
display: none;

values:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – French
fr
fr
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fy
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-gl
display: none;

values:
https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Indonesian
id
id
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ia
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-it
display: none;

values: Циклиофоралар – Kazakh

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-kk
display: none;

values:
https://li.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kransdere
Kransdere – Limburgish
li
li
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-li
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-nl
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-frr
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-no
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-oc
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-pl
display: none;

values:
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Portuguese
pt
pt
interlanguage-link-target

values: Циклиофоры – Russian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-simple
display: none;

values:
https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbion
Symbion – Slovak
sk
sk
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sk
display: none;

values: Циклиофора – Serbian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sr
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sv
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-tl
display: none;

values: Цикліофори – Ukrainian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-uk
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-war
display: none;

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Symbion rootpage-Symbion skin-vector action-view