Democratic consolidation

Last updated

Democratic consolidation is the process by which a new democracy matures, in a way that it becomes unlikely to revert to authoritarianism without an external shock, and is regarded as the only available system of government within a country. [1] [2] A country can be described as consolidated when the current democratic system becomes “the only game in town”, [3] meaning no one in the country is trying to act outside of the set institutions. [4] 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. [5] [6]

Contents

Since 1992 the number of democratic countries has been greater than the number of dictatorships, and this number continues to grow as countries go through the process of consolidation. [7] The notion of democratic consolidation is contested because it is not clear that there is anything substantive that happens to new democracies that secures their continuation, beyond those factors that simply make it 'more likely' that they continue as democracies. Many scholars have attempted to explain the factors that are responsible for democracies consolidating, which has led to the emergence of different ‘consolidation theories’ in political science. Unconsolidated democracies often suffer from formalized but intermittent elections and clientelism. [8]

Indicators of Consolidation

A democracy is widely considered consolidated when several or all of the following conditions are met. Firstly, there must be a durability or permanence of democracy over time, including (but by no means limited to) adherence to democratic principles such as rule of law, independent judiciary, competitive and fair elections, and a developed civil society. [5] Some theorists believe that this secondary process of instilling democracy into the institutions of government is how consolidation occurs. The democracy must also be accepted by its citizens as the ruling form of government, thus ensuring stability and, again, minimizing the risk of reverting to an enforcement or advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom regime. [5] Another indicator is two consecutive turnovers of power. The presence of political parties is also an indicator of the promotion of democratic consolidation. [9] Scholars have argued that political parties are the number one way to mobilize voter support and bolster political participation in the competition for office. [10] In order for political parties to be reaching their full potential in benefiting their country through political consolidation, the parties must develop their structures and frameworks to promote political publicity. [9] Additionally, Terry Clark argues that to fully benefit democratic consolidation, a party system must consist of more than one party, yet not be too fragmented or polarized. [11]

Socioeconomic factors can also be a key indicator in democratic consolidation. [12] Strong economic development has historically been found to increase democratic ideals throughout a country. [13]

Consolidation Theories

Institutionalization

Some scholars think that the process by which a democracy becomes consolidated involves the creation and improvement of secondary institutions of the democracy. Linz and Stepan's [5] thesis, for example, is that democracy is consolidated by the presence of the institutions supporting and surrounding elections. They distinct five conditions that must be present in a state, in order for a democracy to be consolidated; First, there needs to be a ‘civil society’, which Linz & Stepan describe as an “arena of the polity where self-organizing and relatively autonomous groups, movements, and individuals attempt to articulate values, to create associations and solidarities, and to advance their interests”. [5] Secondly, there must be a relatively autonomous 'political society', which is the arena in which political actors can compete with one another for the legitimate right to rule. The third condition is that all actors throughout the state’s territory are subject to the rule of law. Fourthly, there must be an existing system of state bureaucracy that is ready for the democratic government to use. Lastly, there must be an institutionalized economic society, by which Linz & Stepan mean that consolidated democracies cannot co-exist alongside a command economy, nor alongside a pure free-market economy. So in order for democracies to be able to consolidate, there needs to be a set of economic norms, institutions, and regulations that mediates between the state and the market, according to Linz & Stepan. [5]

Informal rules

O'Donnell believes that the institutionalization of electoral rules is not the most interesting feature of democratic consolidation. He thinks that scholars focus too much on the formal institutions as drivers of consolidation, while the informal institutions and rules in a state are often overlooked. It’s the informal rules and norms that often shape the behaviour and expectations of all sorts of political actors. His approach is to compare the formal institutional rules (for example the constitution) with the informal practices of actors, arguing that in many countries exists a ‘gap’ between the two. Consolidation on this view is when the actors in a system follow (have informally institutionalised) the formal rules of the democratic institution. [8]

Civic culture

Political culture is linked to democratic consolidation. Scholars Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba, in The Civic Culture (1963), argued that public participation in government and attitudes toward government were significant in democratic transition and consolidation. [14] Some scholars identify political tolerance and trust in institutions as important to democratic consolidation. [15]

Labour Migration

One of the suggested obstacles to democratic consolidation is brain drain in which high skilled workers from developing countries migrate to high-income and capital-rich countries. This leaves many new democracies in the developing world problems in terms of steering effective governance due to the lack of high-skilled professionals. [16]

Example(s)

Mexico

Whether Mexico is a fully consolidated democracy is the source of much debate, but the process has clearly begun in the country. After over 70 years of authoritarian rule under the Mexican PRI party, Mexican politics have transitioned into a competitive, multi-party system. [17] Their courts are independent and may check the powers of other branches of government, and media censorship is slowly loosening its grip. Recent political results, such as those of the 2018 presidential election, suggest that the PRI is unlikely to regain sole power over the country.

Western Europe

In general, the countries of western Europe serve as examples of fully consolidated democracies. The United Kingdom and the Netherlands, for example, are both very unlikely to revert to authoritarian monarchies, because they have adopted the aspects that are often associated with fully consolidated democracies: There is adherence to the rule of law, they frequently organize fair and competitive elections and they have a developed civil society.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dictatorship</span> Form of government

A dictatorship is an autocratic form of government which is characterized by a leader, or a group of leaders, who hold governmental powers with few to no limitations. Politics in a dictatorship are controlled by a dictator, and they are facilitated through an inner circle of elites that includes advisers, generals, and other high-ranking officials. The dictator maintains control by influencing and appeasing the inner circle and repressing any opposition, which may include rival political parties, armed resistance, or disloyal members of the dictator's inner circle. Dictatorships can be formed by a military coup that overthrows the previous government through force or they can be formed by a self-coup in which elected leaders make their rule permanent. Dictatorships are authoritarian or totalitarian, and they can be classified as military dictatorships, one-party dictatorships, personalist dictatorships, or absolute monarchies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of Indonesia</span> Political system of Indonesia

The politics of Indonesia take place in the framework of a presidential representative democratic republic whereby the President of Indonesia is both head of state and head of government and of a multi-party system. Executive power is exercised by the government. Legislative power is vested in both the government and the bicameral People's Consultative Assembly. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature.

Autocracy is a system of government in which absolute power is held by the ruler, known as an autocrat. It includes most forms of monarchy and dictatorship, while it is contrasted with democracy and feudalism. Various definitions of autocracy exist. They may restrict autocracy to cases where power is held by a single individual, or they may define autocracy in a way that includes a group of rulers who wield absolute power. The autocrat has total control over the exercise of civil liberties within the autocracy, choosing under what circumstances they may be exercised, if at all. Governments may also blend elements of autocracy and democracy, forming an anocracy. The concept of autocracy has been recognized in political philosophy since ancient times.

In politics, a regime is the form of government or the set of rules, cultural or social norms, etc., that regulate the operation of a government or institution and its interactions with society. The two broad categories of regimes that appear in most literature are democratic and autocratic. However, autocratic regimes can be broken down into a subset of many different types. The key similarity between all regimes are the presence of rulers, and either formal or informal institutions.

In political science, a political system means the type of political organization that can be recognized, observed or otherwise declared by a state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratization</span> Society becoming more democratic

Democratization, or democratisation, is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.

Direct election is a system of choosing political officeholders in which the voters directly cast ballots for the persons or political party that they desire to see elected. The method by which the winner or winners of a direct election are chosen depends upon the electoral system used. The most commonly used systems are the plurality system and the two-round system for single-winner elections, such as a presidential election, and proportional representation for the election of a legislature or executive.

The term "illiberal democracy" describes a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures". There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists.

Juan José Linz Storch de Gracia was a German-born Spanish sociologist and political scientist specializing in comparative politics. He was Sterling Professor Emeritus of Sociology and Political Science at Yale University and an honorary member of the Scientific Council at the Juan March Institute. He is best known for his work on authoritarian political regimes and democratization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic transition</span> Specific phase in a political system

A democratic transition describes a phase in a countries political system as a result of an ongoing change from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one. The process is known as democratisation, political changes moving in a democratic direction. 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. Although transitional regimes experience more civil unrest, they may be considered stable in a transitional phase for decades at a time. Since the end of the Cold War transitional regimes have become the most common form of government. Scholarly analysis of the decorative nature of democratic institutions concludes that the opposite democratic backsliding (autocratization), a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of modern hybrid regimes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democracy promotion</span> Domestic or foreign policy to increase democratic rule

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 of democracy as a system of government. Among the reasons for supporting democracy include the belief that countries with a democratic system of governance are less likely to go to war, are likely to be economically better off and socially more harmonious. In democracy building, the process includes the building and strengthening of democracy, in particular the consolidation of democratic institutions, including courts of law, police forces, and constitutions. Some critics have argued that the United States has used democracy promotion to justify military intervention abroad.

Defective democracy is a concept that was proposed by the political scientists Wolfgang Merkel, Hans-Jürgen Puhle and Aurel S. Croissant at the beginning of the 21st century to subtilize the distinctions between totalitarian, authoritarian, and democratic political systems. It is based on the concept of embedded democracy. While there are four forms of defective democracy, how each nation reaches the point of defectiveness varies. One recurring theme is the geographical location of the nation, which includes the effects of the influence of surrounding nations in the region. Other causes for defective democracies include their path of modernization, level of modernization, economic trends, social capital, civil society, political institutions, and education.

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of democracy and political plurality. It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting. Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.

Anocracy, or semi-democracy, is a form of government that is loosely defined as part democracy and part dictatorship, or as a "regime that mixes democratic with autocratic features". Another definition classifies anocracy as "a regime that permits some means of participation through opposition group behavior but that has incomplete development of mechanisms to redress grievances." The term "semi-democratic" is reserved for stable regimes that combine democratic and authoritarian elements. Scholars distinguish anocracies from autocracies and democracies in their capability to maintain authority, political dynamics, and policy agendas. Similarly, the regimes have democratic institutions that allow for nominal amounts of competition. Such regimes are particularly susceptible to outbreaks of armed conflict and unexpected or adverse changes in leadership.

A hybrid regime is a type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one. Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections. Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states. Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time. There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Embedded democracy</span>

Embedded democracy is a form of government in which democratic governance is secured by democratic partial regimes. The term "embedded democracy" was coined by political scientists Wolfgang Merkel, Hans-Jürgen Puhle, and Aurel Croissant, who identified "five interdependent partial regimes" necessary for an embedded democracy: electoral regime, political participation, civil rights, horizontal accountability, and the power of the elected representatives to govern. The five internal regimes work together to check the power of the government, while external regimes also help to secure and stabilize embedded democracies. Together, all the regimes ensure that an embedded democracy is guided by the three fundamental principles of freedom, equality, and control.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic backsliding</span> National decline in democracy

Democratic backsliding is a process of regime change towards autocracy that makes the exercise of political power by the public more arbitrary and repressive. This process typically restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection. Democratic decline involves the weakening of democratic institutions, such as the peaceful transition of power or free and fair elections, or the violation of individual rights that underpin democracies, especially freedom of expression. Democratic backsliding is the opposite of democratization.

In political science, delegative democracy is a mode of governance close to Caesarism, Bonapartism or caudillismo with a strong leader in a newly created otherwise democratic government. The concept arose from Argentinian political scientist Guillermo O'Donnell, who notes that representative democracy as it exists is usually linked solely to highly developed capitalist countries. However, newly installed democracies do not seem to be on a path of becoming fully representative democracies. O'Donnell calls the former delegative democracies, for they are not fully consolidated democracies but may be enduring.

The Asian Barometer Survey is a comparative survey of 18 Asian states and territories. These include Japan, Mongolia, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal. It is organised by the Academia Sinica and National Taiwan University. Its founders are members of the Global Barometer Survey group. The data is gathered with face-to-face interviews, which cover topics ranging from economic conditions and social capital, to political participation, partisanship, traditionalism, and trust in institutions.

Democracy in Venezuela refers to the system of governance that has prevailed in Venezuela since direct election at the presidential level and later in the 1990s at the regional level. Democracy as a system of government in the country has had a history interrupted by coups d'état, some in the name of democracy itself. From 1958 onward, Venezuela was considered to be a relatively stable democracy within a continent that was facing a wave of military dictatorship, consuming almost all Latin American countries in the 1970s. By 1977, Venezuela was the only one of three democracies in Latin America, along with Colombia and Costa Rica. With the election of Hugo Chávez in the 1998 presidential election, the country started experiencing democratic backsliding. In 2008, Venezuela was ranked the least democratic nation in South America in The Economist Democracy Index, and by 2022 it ranked 147th out of 167 countries, with a rating of an authoritarian regime.

References

  1. ↑ 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.
  2. ↑ 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.
  3. ↑ 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.
  4. ↑ 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.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 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)
  6. ↑ 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. eISSN   1460-3578. ISSN   0022-3433. JSTOR   44510457 . Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  7. ↑ Clark, William Roberts, 1962- (31 August 2018). Foundations of comparative politics. ISBN   978-1-5063-6074-4. OCLC   1240711766.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  8. 1 2 O'Donnell, Guillermo A. (April 1996). "Illusions about Consolidation". Journal of Democracy. 7 (2): 34–51. doi:10.1353/jod.1996.0034. S2CID   153457880 – via Project Muse.
  9. 1 2 Alquraan, Sultan Naser Fares; Adouse, Haytham (2021-12-01). "The Role of Political Parties in Supporting the Process of Democratic Consolidation". Contemporary Arab Affairs. 14 (4): 20–39. doi:10.1525/caa.2021.14.4.20. ISSN   1755-0912.
  10. ↑ O., Olukoshi, Adebayo (1998). The politics of opposition in contemporary Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet. ISBN   91-7106-419-2. OCLC   39944933.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. ↑ Clark, Terry D. (December 1994). "The Lithuanian Political Party System: A Case Study of Democratic Consolidation". East European Politics and Societies: And Cultures. 9 (1): 41–62. doi:10.1177/0888325495009001004. ISSN   0888-3254. S2CID   143474988.
  12. ↑ GASIOROWSKI, MARK J.; POWER, TIMOTHY J. (December 1998). "The Structural Determinants of Democratic Consolidation". Comparative Political Studies. 31 (6): 740–771. doi:10.1177/0010414098031006003. ISSN   0010-4140. S2CID   154335523.
  13. ↑ Geddes, Barbara (June 1999). "What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?". Annual Review of Political Science. 2 (1): 115–144. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115 . ISSN   1094-2939.
  14. ↑ Russell J. Dalton and Doh Chull Shin , Reassessing The Civic Culture Model (2011).
  15. ↑ Carlos Garcia-Rivero, Hennie Kotzé & Pierre Du Toit, Political culture and democracy: The South African case. Politikon: South African Journal of Political Studies, pp. 163-181, Vol. 29, 2002.
  16. ↑ RRegilme Jr, Salvador Santino F. "Is International Labor Migration Good for Democratic Consolidation?." Peace Review 25.1 (2013): 97-103.
  17. ↑ "Mexico: Democracy and the Future" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-01-15.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.