| 1. |
- Boese, Vanessa Alexandra, et al.
(författare)
-
Waves of autocratization and democratization: a rejoinder
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Democratization. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1351-0347 .- 1743-890X. ; 28:6, s. 1202-1210
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This is a response to Luca Tomini's "Don't think of a wave!" and Svend-Erik Skaaning's "Waves of autocratization and democratization". With this rejoinder we make three arguments: First, the question how global waves shape autocratization processes and regime transformations is now more urgent than ever. Since 1994, civil liberties and political rights of one third of the global population have been substantially and increasingly reduced due to autocratization. Second, waves of any concept can only be studied meaningfully if the underlying concepts as well as the waves are clearly defined. We argue that the conceptualization of episodes of regime transformations (ERT) in the ERT dataset provides exactly such a clear state-of-the-art empirical mapping of processes of democratization and autocratization at the national level. In addition, we highlight how our conceptualization of waves builds upon Huntington, 1993. It even improves upon it by allowing for overlap and modelling it closer to its real world counterpart. Third, we view the present debate as a prime example of fruitful scholastic argument. Ultimately, this is what will generate a better understanding of global trends of democratization and autocratization.
|
|
| 2. |
- Grahn, Sandra, et al.
(författare)
-
Good seed makes a good crop? The relationship between civil society and post-independence democracy levels
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Civil Society. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1744-8689 .- 1744-8697. ; 17:3-4, s. 297-322
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The impact of civil society on democracy is contested. Some argue that Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are important 'schools of democracy' and may foster democratic consolidation. Others emphasize that antidemocratic CSOs may undermine democracy. This debate is particularly relevant in the context of newly independent states. At that critical juncture, both democratic and authoritarian regime trajectories are possible. Societal preconditions - such as the state of civil society - can therefore be particularly relevant for the way forward. To what extent does the nature of CSOs prior to independence has an impact on the subsequent level of democracy? We argue that the existence of democratic CSOs prior to independence strengthens post-independence democracy whereas non-democratic CSOs have a detrimental effect. For the first time, this argument is empirically tested, using Varieties of Democracy (VDem) data on 91 cases of independence since 1905. The empirical results demonstrate that the presence of democratic CSOs prior to independence is positively correlated, whereas non-democratic CSOs are negatively correlated to democracy levels following independence.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hellmeier, Sebastian, 1989, et al.
(författare)
-
State of the world 2020: autocratization turns viral
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Democratization. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1351-0347 .- 1743-890X. ; 28:6, s. 1053-1074
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article analyses the state of democracy in 2020. The world is still more democratic than it was in the 1970s and 1980s, but a trend of autocratization is ongoing and affecting 25 countries in 2020, home to 34% of the world's population. At the same time, the number of democratizing countries has dwindled by nearly half, reducing to 16 countries, home to a mere 4% of the global population. Freedom of expression, deliberation, rule of law and elections show the most substantial net declines in the last decade. A major change is that India, formerly the world's largest democracy, turned into an electoral autocracy. The V-Dem data suggests that direct effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on levels of liberal democracy were limited in 2020. Still, the longer-term consequences may be worse and must be monitored closely. Due to the pandemic and state restrictions on the freedom of assembly, mass mobilization declined to its lowest level in over a decade, yet the decline in pro-democracy protests in 2020 may well prove to be short-lived once the pandemic subdues.
|
|
| 4. |
- Laebens, Melis G., et al.
(författare)
-
What halts democratic erosion? The changing role of accountability
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Democratization. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1351-0347 .- 1743-890X. ; 28:5, s. 908-928
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Worldwide, democratic erosion is on the rise, with incumbents slowly undermining the pillars of democratic competition such as political freedoms, clean elections, and a free press. While such gradual erosion frequently culminates in democratic breakdown, this is not always the case. How can accountability mechanisms contribute to halting democratic erosion before breakdown, even if they could not prevent the onset of erosion? To study this question, we use the V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index to systematically identify three recent cases–Benin (2007–2012), Ecuador (2008–2010), and South Korea (2008–2016)–where substantial democratic erosion happened but democracy did not break down. Studying these cases in depth we find that accountability mechanism–parliamentary and judicial oversight (horizontal accountability), pressures from civil society and the media (diagonal accountability), or electoral competition between parties and within parties (vertical accountability)–played a part in halting democratic erosion in all of them. They effectively halted erosion when institutional constraints–such as presidential term limits or judicial independence–and contextual factors–in particular economic downturns and public outrage about corruption scandals–worked together to create simultaneous pressures on the incumbents from civil society and from vertical or horizontal accountability actors.
|
|
| 5. |
- Lührmann, Anna, 1983, et al.
(författare)
-
Autocratization by Decree: States of Emergency and Democratic Decline
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Comparative politics. - 0010-4159. ; 53:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- States of emergency grant chief executives the power to bypass democratic constraints in order to combat existential threats. As such, they are ideal tools to erode democratic institutions while maintaining the illusion of constitutional legitimacy. Therefore, states of emergency should be associated with a heightened risk of autocratization––a decline in a regime’s democratic attributes. Despite this theoretical link and the contemporary relevance of both autocratization and states of emergency, no prior study has empirically tested this relationship. This article tests this relationship using data on sixty democracies for 1974 to 2016. We find that democracies are 75 percent more likely to erode under a state of emergency. This evidence strongly suggests that states of emergency circumvent democratic processes in ways that might promote democratic decline.
|
|
| 6. |
- Lührmann, Anna, 1983
(författare)
-
Disrupting the autocratization sequence: towards democratic resilience
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Democratization. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1351-0347 .- 1743-890X. ; 28:5, s. 1017-1039
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Contemporary autocratization is typically the result of a long sequence of events and gradual processes. How can democratic actors disrupt such autocratization sequences in order to enhance democratic resilience? To address this question, this conclusion presents an ideal-typical autocratization sequence and entry points for democratic resilience. It builds on the findings of this special issue, extant research and a novel descriptive analysis of V-Party data. In the first autocratization stage, citizens' discontent with democratic institutions and parties mounts. Remedies lie in the areas of a better supply of democratic parties and processes as well as in civic education. During the second stage, anti-pluralists - actors lacking commitment to democratic norms - exploit and fuel such discontent to rise to power. In order to avoid the pitfalls of common response strategies, this article suggests "critical engagement", which balances targeted sanctions against radicals with attempts to persuade moderate followers; and has the aim of decreasing the salience of anti-pluralists' narratives by means of democratic (voter) mobilization. Thirdly, once autocratization begins, weak accountability mechanisms and opposition actors enable democratic breakdown. Thus, resilient institutions and a united and creative opposition are the last line of democratic defense.
|
|
| 7. |
- Tannenberg, Marcus, 1987, et al.
(författare)
-
Claiming the right to rule: regime legitimation strategies from 1900 to 2019
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Political Science Review. - 1755-7739 .- 1755-7747. ; 13:1, s. 77-94
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Governments routinely justify why the regime over which they preside is entitled to rule. These claims to legitimacy are both an expression of and shape of how a rule is being exercised. In this paper, we introduce new expert-coded measures of regime legitimation strategies (RLS) for 183 countries in the world from 1900 to 2019. Country experts rated the extent to which governments justify their rule based on performance, the person of the leader, rational-legal procedures, and ideology. They were also asked to qualify the ideology of the regime. The main purposes of this paper are to present the conceptual basis for the measure, describe the data, and provide convergent, content, and construct validity tests for new measures. Our measure of regime legitimation performs well in all these three validation tests, most notably, the construct validity exercise which explores commonly held beliefs about leadership under populist rule.
|
|
