1,721,076 research outputs found
Hybrid what? : Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes
No full textDespite initial scepticism about their very existence, hybrid regimes have increasingly attracted scholarly
attention. The rapid development of the debate, however, is in striking contrast with its often inconclusive
results. The goals of this article are to identify the causes of this impasse and to seek a solution for it. In
particular, the article focuses on a crucial point of contention: how to define hybrid regimes. The analysis
shows why divergences on this issue hamper dialogue among researchers, as well as the accumulation
of knowledge. We suggest shifting attention from regimes to institutions and propose a “consensus-sensitive”
indicator to establish which regimes can be defined as hybrid regardless of disagreement on their
conceptualisation. The new measure is used to replicate the contrasting results of two recent studies. The
conclusion is that by going beyond conceptual barriers, we can successfully shed light on the “grey zone”
The great convergence: post-Cold War transitions to hybrid regimes across waves and ebbs
No full textThe ‘waves and ebbs’ model proposed by Huntington in his 1991's The Third Wave has profoundly shaped how scholars interpret global trends of democratization and autocratization, but has also received criticisms, especially concerning its ability to explain regime change in the three decades following the end of the Cold War. I contend that, rather than an alternation between democratization waves and authoritarian ebbs, the post-Cold War period could be more fruitfully described as a phase of ‘regime convergence’ characterized by a tendency of both democracies and autocracies to shift towards hybrid forms of political regime. By showing that between 1990 and 2023 transitions to hybrid regimes significantly exceeded transitions in other directions, I demonstrate the empirical relevance of hybridization as a process affecting both democracies and autocracies, and I encourage renewed attention to this phenomenon distinct from both democratization and autocratization
Reassessing the wave of autocratization hypothesis
No full textWhile autocratization has attracted much scholarly attention
over the past years, there is little agreement regarding how to meas-
ure autocratization and, relatedly, the actual empirical relevance of
this phenomenon. Some authors explicitly claim that we are in the
middle of an outright global wave of autocratization, yet others are
more sceptical. This paper aims to make three main contributions.
First, it reconstructs the debate on the “wave of autocratization” hy-
pothesis. Second, it reassesses empirically this hypothesis using alter-
native measurement approaches, showing that, despite some differ-
ences, autocratization always emerges as an empirically relevant phe-
nomenon of this period. Third, based on a new measurement strategy
that builds on and combines several existing indicators and indexes,
the paper examines comparatively a sample of autocratization cases.
Keywords: autocratization; democracy; autocracy; regime change;
measurement
Social services to claim legitimacy : comparing autocracies’ performance
No full textAutocrats cannot rule by repression and co-optation alone, and need to instil some sense of legitimacy in the populace. Lacking democratic legitimacy, and being in shortage of other identity-based sources of diffuse support, legitimation claims in post-Cold War autocracies increasingly rests on rulers’ ability to achieve concrete outcomes, including the improvement of citizen living conditions. However, autocracies differ from each other, and different institutional arrangements could influence a leader’s ability to deliver social services, and chase performance-based legitimation. Accordingly, this article compares the social service performance of different post-Cold War authoritarian regimes. The analysis demonstrates that so-called electoral autocracies outperform single-party and military regimes, although they show a capacity to provide for their citizens that is similar to hereditary regimes. These findings suggest that the legitimacy returns of introducing semi-competitive and participatory institutions could grow exponentially. Besides procedural legitimacy, these institutions could help rulers pursue legitimation through social services
Was it worth the trouble? Limited competition and citizen well-being under authoritarian rule
No full textThe last part of 20th century saw the collapse of a dramatic number of dictatorships. Rather than democracy, several of these transitions brought regimes where limited political competition coexists with persistently authoritarian practices. The diffusion of this form of authoritarianism in the developing world raises several questions about its broader consequences. Most importantly, does political change short of democratization matter for ordinary citizens? Recent research demonstrates that nominally democratic institutions, even in the absence of people empowerment, can result in better living conditions. The paper adds to this debate by formulating and testing new hypotheses. I compare electoral authoritarianism with democracy and full dictatorship, including specific subtypes of the latter, and focus on both policy outputs and outcomes
Do All Bad Things Go Together? Electoral Authoritarianism and the Consequences of Political Change Short of Democratisation
No full textThe article surveys the literature on electoral authoritarianism, paying special attention to the social consequences of the phenomenon. Autocrats have learnt to use elections, legislatures and multipartyism to their own advantage. Hence, nominally democratic institutions can turn into instruments of authoritarian consolidation, rather than citizen emancipation. Challenging this overly pessimistic scenario, recent research reveals that bad things do not necessarily go together. Electoral authoritarian rulers have both the incentives and the capabilities to improve citizen living conditions. Political change short of democratisation, that is, transition from closed to electoral forms of authoritarian rule, may thus generate mutual returns, and benefit both rulers and citizens, at least from a strictly socio-economic viewpoint. Yet this area of study is only in its infancy. The paper identifies and discusses a few issues that future research should address
Oltre il trend illiberale: I processi di autocratizzazione nel XXI secolo
Full text linkLiberal democracy is in crisis and an increasing number of countries are at risk of sliding back to authoritarianism, according to several scholars. This paper aims to analyse the possible risks that contemporary democratic regimes face. Most importantly, is the crisis of liberal democracy a temporary malaise, or does it represent the first stage of an outright process of regime change towards autocracy? To address this question, we re-examine the ongoing illiberal trend in light of the processes of autocratization that have occurred in several world regions since the beginning of the 21st century. The research highlights a “goodμ and a “badμ news. On one hand, the backsliding of liberal democracy towards defective forms of democracy does represent a worrisome sign, given that defective democracies are fragile regimes and thus likely candidates to suffer democratic breakdown and to be replaced by some form of autocracy. On the other hand, several cases show that, similarly to democratization, autocratization can fail, or be reversed
Among the events, EVENTS: Milan Expo 2015, Ravenna European Capital of culture 2019. Editorial
No full textAfrica’s lame ducks: Second-term presidents and the rule of law
Full text linkThe vast majority of sub-Saharan countries have adopted constitutional clauses establishing that elected presidents cannot serve more than two mandates. While an extensive literature has examined why African leaders comply with or else try to manipulate term limits, the policy implications of the latter remain unexplored. Existing studies of other world regions suggest that setting a maximum number of terms presidents can serve tends to make them 'lame ducks' during their final mandate. We reconsider this argument, and posit and demonstrate empirically that constitutional limits can actually induce positive effects on second-term presidents' actions compared to their first terms. More specifically, the absence of electoral pressures, the concern for their post-presidential future and legacy-building motivations may lead to improvements in the rule of law, especially regarding the functioning of the judiciary. This article represents the first empirical investigation of the performance of Africa's second-term lame-duck presidents
- …
