Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

Democratic transition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Specific phase in a political system
Since 1900, the number of countries democratizing (yellow) has been higher than thoseautocratizing (blue), except in the late 1920s through 1940s and since 2010.

Ademocratic transition describes a phase in a country'spolitical system as a result of an ongoing change from anauthoritarian regime to ademocratic one.[1][2][3] The process is known asdemocratisation, political changes moving in a democratic direction.[4]Democratization waves have been linked to sudden shifts in the distribution of power among the great powers, which created openings and incentives to introduce sweeping domestic reforms.[5][6] Although transitional regimes experience more civil unrest,[7][8] they may be considered stable in a transitional phase for decades at a time.[9][10][11] Since the end of theCold War transitional regimes have become the most common form of government.[12][13] Scholarly analysis of the decorative nature of democratic institutions concludes that the oppositedemocratic backsliding (autocratization), a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of modernhybrid regimes.[14][15][16]

Typology

[edit]

Autocratization

[edit]
Main article:Autocratization
Further information:Democratic backsliding by country
Countries autocratizing (red) ordemocratizing (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020), according toV-Dem Institute. Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.[17]
Democratic backsliding[a] is a form ofautocratization, a process ofregime change towardauthoritarianism in which the exercise of political power becomes less limited and more arbitrary andrepressive.[24][25][26] Democratic backsliding specifically assumes a starting point of ademocratic system. The process typically restricts the space forpublic contest andpolitical participation in the process of government selection.[27][28] Democratic decline involves the weakening of democratic institutions, such as thepeaceful transition of power orfree and fair elections, or the violation of individual rights that underpin democracies, especiallyfreedom of expression.[29][30] Democratic backsliding is the opposite ofdemocratization.

Democratisation

[edit]
Main article:Democratization
Map showing democratization of countries after theCold War
Democratization, or democratisation, is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic politicalregime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.[31][32]

Factors

[edit]

Decolonization

[edit]
Main article:Decolonization
Decolonization is the undoing ofcolonialism, the latter being the process wherebyimperial nations establish and dominate foreign territories, often overseas.[33] The meanings and applications of the term are disputed. Some scholars of decolonization focus especially onindependence movements in thecolonies and the collapse of globalcolonial empires.[34][35]
Except for a few absolute monarchies, most post-colonial states are eitherrepublics orconstitutional monarchies. These new states had to deviseconstitutions,electoral systems, and other institutions ofrepresentative democracy.

Democratic globalization

[edit]
Main article:Democratic globalization
Democratic globalization is asocial movement towards an institutional system of globaldemocracy.[36] One of its proponents is the British political thinkerDavid Held. In the last decade, Held published a dozen books regarding the spread of democracy from territorially defined nation states to a system ofglobal governance that encompasses the entire world. For some, democratic mundialisation (from the French term mondialisation) is a variant of democratic globalisation that emphasizes the need for citizens worldwide to directly elect world leaders and members of global institutions; for others, it is just democratic globalization by another name.[37]

Democracy promotion

[edit]
Main article:Democracy promotion
Democracy promotion, also referred to as democracy building, can be domestic policy to increase the quality of already existing democracy or a strand of foreign policy adopted by governments and international organizations that seek to support the spread ofdemocracy as asystem of government. In practice, it entails consolidating and building democratic institutions.

Outcomes

[edit]

Democratic consolidation

[edit]
Main article:Democratic consolidation
Democratic consolidation is the process by which a newdemocracy matures, in a way that it becomes unlikely to revert toauthoritarianism without an external shock, and is regarded as the only available system of government within a country.[38][39] A country can be described as consolidated when the current democratic system becomes “the only game in town”,[40] meaning no one in the country is trying to act outside of the set institutions.[41] This is the case when no significant political group seriously attempts to overthrow the democratic regime, the democratic system is regarded as the most appropriate way to govern by the vast majority of the public, and all political actors are accustomed to the fact that conflicts are resolved through established political and constitutional rules.[42][43]

Stalled transition

[edit]

Hybrid regime

[edit]
Main article:Hybrid regime
Ahybrid regime[b] is a type ofpolitical system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from anauthoritarian regime to ademocratic one (or vice versa).[c] Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination ofautocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously holdpolitical repressions and regularelections.[c] According to some definitions and measures, hybrid regimes are commonly found indeveloping countries with abundant natural resources such aspetro-states.[53][51][54] Although these regimes experiencecivil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time.[c] There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of theCold War.[55][56]

Measurement

[edit]
Main article:Democracy indices
Global trend reportBertelsmann Transformation Index 2022[57]
The democracy indices differ in whether they are categorical, such as classifying countries into democracies,hybrid regimes, andautocracies,[58][59] or continuous values.[60] The qualitative nature of democracy indices enables data analytical approaches for studyingcausal mechanisms of regime transformation processes.

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^Other names include autocratization, democratic decline,[18] de-democratization,[19] democratic erosion,[20] democratic decay,[21] democratic recession,[22] democratic regression,[18] and democratic deconsolidation.[23]
  2. ^Scholars use a variety of terms to encompass the "grey zones" between fullautocracies and fulldemocracies.[44] Such terms include: competitive authoritarianism, semi-authoritarianism, hybrid authoritarianism, electoral authoritarianism,liberal autocracy,delegative democracy,illiberal democracy,guided democracy,semi-democracy, deficient democracy,defective democracy, and hybrid democracy.[45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]
  3. ^abcDebates over what can be called "hybrid" still exist, see#Definition section for details.

References

[edit]
  1. ^Arugay, Aries A. (2021). "Democratic Transitions".The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–7.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_190-1.ISBN 978-3-319-74336-3.S2CID 240235199.
  2. ^Munck, G.L. (2001). "Democratic Transitions".International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier. pp. 3425–3428.doi:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/01135-9.ISBN 9780080430768.
  3. ^Cassani, Andrea; Tomini, Luca (2019). "Authoritarian resurgence: towards a unified analytical framework".Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica.49 (2). Cambridge University Press (CUP):115–120.doi:10.1017/ipo.2019.14.hdl:2434/666535.ISSN 0048-8402.S2CID 199298876.
  4. ^Huntington, Samuel P. (2009)."How Countries Democratize".Political Science Quarterly.124 (1). [The Academy of Political Science, Wiley]:31–69.doi:10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00641.x.ISSN 0032-3195.JSTOR 25655609. Retrieved2023-04-17.
  5. ^Gunitsky, Seva (2014)."From Shocks to Waves: Hegemonic Transitions and Democratization in the Twentieth Century".International Organization.68 (3):561–597.doi:10.1017/S0020818314000113.ISSN 0020-8183.S2CID 232254486.
  6. ^Gunitsky, Seva (2017).Aftershocks. Princeton University Press.ISBN 978-0-691-17233-0.
  7. ^Cook, Scott J; Savun, Burcu (2016). "New democracies and the risk of civil conflict".Journal of Peace Research.53 (6). SAGE Publications:745–757.doi:10.1177/0022343316660756.ISSN 0022-3433.S2CID 114918000.
  8. ^Crocker, C.A.; Hampson, F.O.; Aall, P. (2016).Managing Conflict in a World Adrift. McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 156.ISBN 978-1-928096-48-1. Retrieved2023-04-23.
  9. ^Sönmez, Hakan (2020-09-30)."Democratic Backsliding or Stabilization?".Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science.46. International Association for Political Science Students:54–78.doi:10.22151/politikon.46.3.ISSN 2414-6633.
  10. ^Geddes, Barbara (1999)."What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?".Annual Review of Political Science.2 (1). Annual Reviews:115–144.doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115.ISSN 1094-2939.
  11. ^Törnberg, Anton (2018)."Combining transition studies and social movement theory: towards a new research agenda".Theory and Society.47 (3). Springer Science and Business Media LLC:381–408.doi:10.1007/s11186-018-9318-6.ISSN 0304-2421.S2CID 255015393.
  12. ^Leonardo Morlino; Dirk Berg-Schlosser; Bertrand Badie (6 March 2017).Political Science: A Global Perspective. SAGE. pp. 112–.ISBN 978-1-5264-1303-1.OCLC 1124515503.
  13. ^Brownlee, Jason (2009)."Portents of Pluralism: How Hybrid Regimes Affect Democratic Transitions".American Journal of Political Science.53 (3). [Midwest Political Science Association, Wiley]:515–532.doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00384.x.ISSN 0092-5853.JSTOR 25548135.
  14. ^"Home - IDEA Global State of Democracy Report".International IDEA. RetrievedNov 26, 2022.
  15. ^Hameed, Dr. Muntasser Majeed (Jun 30, 2022)."Hybrid regimes: An Overview".IPRI Journal.22 (1). Islamabad Policy Research Institute - IPRI:1–24.doi:10.31945/iprij.220101.ISSN 1684-9787.S2CID 251173436.
  16. ^Caballero-Anthony, M. (2009).Political Change, Democratic Transitions and Security in Southeast Asia. Routledge Security in Asia Pacific Series. Taylor & Francis. p. 7.ISBN 978-1-135-26840-4. Retrieved2023-04-27.
  17. ^Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute.https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdfArchived 14 September 2021 at theWayback Machine
  18. ^abMietzner, Marcus (2021). "Sources of resistance to democratic decline: Indonesian civil society and its trials".Democratization.28 (1):161–178.doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1796649.S2CID 225475139.
  19. ^Mudde, Cas and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira (2017)Populism: a Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.86-96.ISBN 978-0-19-023487-4
  20. ^Laebens, Melis G.; Lührmann, Anna (2021). "What halts democratic erosion? The changing role of accountability".Democratization.28 (5):908–928.doi:10.1080/13510347.2021.1897109.S2CID 234870008.
  21. ^Daly, Tom Gerald (2019). "Democratic Decay: Conceptualising an Emerging Research Field".Hague Journal on the Rule of Law.11:9–36.doi:10.1007/s40803-019-00086-2.S2CID 159354232.
  22. ^Huq, Aziz Z (2021). "How (not) to explain a democratic recession".International Journal of Constitutional Law.19 (2):723–737.doi:10.1093/icon/moab058.
  23. ^Chull Shin, Doh (2021). "Democratic deconsolidation in East Asia: exploring system realignments in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan".Democratization.28 (1):142–160.doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1826438.S2CID 228959708.
  24. ^Hyde, Susan D. (2020). "Democracy's backsliding in the international environment".Science.369 (6508):1192–1196.Bibcode:2020Sci...369.1192H.doi:10.1126/science.abb2434.PMID 32883862.S2CID 221472047.
  25. ^Skaaning, Svend-Erik (2020)."Waves of autocratization and democratization: a critical note on conceptualization and measurement"(PDF).Democratization.27 (8):1533–1542.doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1799194.S2CID 225378571.Archived(PDF) from the original on 6 February 2023. Retrieved7 November 2022.
  26. ^Lührmann, Anna; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2019)."A third wave of autocratization is here: what is new about it?".Democratization.26 (7):1095–1113.doi:10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029.S2CID 150992660.The decline of democratic regime attributes – autocratization
  27. ^Cassani, Andrea; Tomini, Luca (2019). "What Autocratization Is".Autocratization in post-Cold War Political Regimes. Springer International Publishing. pp. 15–35.ISBN 978-3-030-03125-1.
  28. ^Walder, D.; Lust, E. (2018)."Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding".Annual Review of Political Science.21 (1):93–113.doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628.Backsliding entails deterioration of qualities associated with democratic governance, within any regime. In democratic regimes, it is a decline in the quality of democracy; in autocracies, it is a decline in democratic qualities of governance.
  29. ^Lindberg, Staffan I."The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe".Carnegie Europe.Archived from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved2021-01-27.
  30. ^Rocha Menocal, Alina; Fritz, Verena; Rakner, Lise (June 2008)."Hybrid regimes and the challenges of deepening and sustaining democracy in developing countries1".South African Journal of International Affairs.15 (1):29–40.doi:10.1080/10220460802217934.ISSN 1022-0461.S2CID 55589140.Archived from the original on 21 January 2020.
  31. ^Arugay, Aries A. (2021). "Democratic Transitions".The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–7.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_190-1.ISBN 978-3-319-74336-3.S2CID 240235199.
  32. ^Lindenfors, Patrik; Wilson, Matthew; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2020)."The Matthew effect in political science: head start and key reforms important for democratization".Humanities and Social Sciences Communications.7 (106) 106.doi:10.1057/s41599-020-00596-7.
  33. ^Note however discussion of (for example) the Russian and Nazi empires below.
  34. ^Hack, Karl (2008).International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Detroit: Macmillan Reference. pp. 255–257.ISBN 978-0028659657.
  35. ^John Lynch, ed.Latin American Revolutions, 1808–1826: Old and New World Origins (1995).
  36. ^Rosow, S.J.; George, J. (2014).Globalization and Democracy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 2.ISBN 978-1-4422-1810-9. Retrieved2023-04-23.
  37. ^Fisher, Stephen (2016-01-01). "Democratic Support and Globalization".Globalization and Domestic Politics. Oxford University Press. pp. 209–234.doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198757986.003.0011.ISBN 978-0-19-875798-6.
  38. ^Schedler, Andreas (1998). "What is Democratic Consolidation?".Journal of Democracy.9 (2). Project Muse:91–107.doi:10.1353/jod.1998.0030.ISSN 1086-3214.
  39. ^Encarnacion, Omar G.; Gunther, Richard; Diamandourous, P. Nikiforos; Puhle, Hans-Jurgen; Mainwaring, Scott; Scully, Timothy; Buchanan, Paul G.; Jelin, Elizabeth; Hershberg, Eric; Morlino, Leonardo (2000). "Beyond Transitions: The Politics of Democratic Consolidation".Comparative Politics.32 (4). JSTOR: 479.doi:10.2307/422390.ISSN 0010-4159.JSTOR 422390.
  40. ^Linz, Juan J. (Juan Jose); Stepan, Alfred C. (1996). "Toward Consolidated Democracies".Journal of Democracy.7 (2). Project Muse:14–33.doi:10.1353/jod.1996.0031.ISSN 1086-3214.
  41. ^Przeworski, Adam (1992).Democracy and the market : political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge University Press.ISBN 0-521-41225-0.OCLC 476230396.
  42. ^Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. C. (April 1996)."Toward consolidated democracies".Journal of Democracy.7 (2):14–33.doi:10.1353/jod.1996.0031.S2CID 154644233 – via Project MUSE.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  43. ^Cook, Scott J; Savun, Burcu (2016)."New democracies and the risk of civil conflict: The lasting legacy or military rule".Journal of Peace Research.53 (6). Sage Publications, Ltd.:745–757.doi:10.1177/0022343316660756.eISSN 1460-3578.ISSN 0022-3433.JSTOR 44510457. Retrieved2023-04-23.
  44. ^Gagné, Jean-François (Mar 10, 2015),Hybrid Regimes, Oxford University Press (OUP),doi:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0167
  45. ^Plattner, Marc F. (1969-12-31)."Is Democracy in Decline?".kipdf.com.Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved2022-12-27.
  46. ^"Hybrid Concepts and the Concept of Hybridity".European Consortium for Political Research. 2019-09-07.Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved2022-11-18.
  47. ^Urribarri, Raul A. Sanchez (2011)."Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court".Law & Social Inquiry.36 (4). Wiley:854–884.doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01253.x.ISSN 0897-6546.JSTOR 41349660.S2CID 232400805.Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved2022-11-16.
  48. ^Göbel, Christian (2011). "Semiauthoritarianism".21st Century Political Science: A Reference Handbook. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States: SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 258–266.doi:10.4135/9781412979351.n31.ISBN 9781412969017.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  49. ^Tlemcani, Rachid (2007-05-29)."Electoral Authoritarianism".Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved2022-11-16.
  50. ^"What is Hybrid Democracy?".Digital Society School. 2022-05-19.Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved2022-11-16.
  51. ^abZinecker, Heidrun (2009)."Regime-Hybridity in Developing Countries: Achievements and Limitations of New Research on Transitions".International Studies Review.11 (2). [Oxford University Press, Wiley, The International Studies Association]:302–331.doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00850.x.ISSN 1521-9488.JSTOR 40389063.Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved2022-11-18.
  52. ^"Index".Dem-Dec. 2017-09-23.Archived from the original on 2022-11-21. Retrieved2022-11-21.
  53. ^Croissant, A.; Kailitz, S.; Koellner, P.; Wurster, S. (2015).Comparing autocracies in the early Twenty-first Century: Volume 1: Unpacking Autocracies - Explaining Similarity and Difference. Taylor & Francis. p. 212.ISBN 978-1-317-70018-0.Archived from the original on December 9, 2022. RetrievedNov 27, 2022.
  54. ^Carothers, Christopher (2018)."The Surprising Instability of Competitive Authoritarianism".Journal of Democracy.29 (4):129–135.doi:10.1353/jod.2018.0068.ISSN 1086-3214.S2CID 158234306.
  55. ^Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2002). "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism".Journal of Democracy.13 (2). Project Muse:51–65.doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026.ISSN 1086-3214.S2CID 6711009.
  56. ^"Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War".Department of Political Science.Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved2022-11-16.
  57. ^"Global Dashboard".BTI 2022. RetrievedApr 17, 2023.
  58. ^Dobratz, B. A. (2015).Power, Politics, and Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology. Taylor & Francis. p. 47.ISBN 978-1-317-34529-9. RetrievedApr 30, 2023.
  59. ^Michie, J. (2014).Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences. Taylor & Francis. pp. 95–97.ISBN 978-1-135-93226-8. Retrieved2023-04-03.
  60. ^"Democracy data: how do researchers measure democracy?".Our World in Data. Jun 17, 2022. RetrievedApr 17, 2023.

Further reading

[edit]

External links

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democratic_transition&oldid=1306529822"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp