Suchergebnisse

This research note contributes to the emerging debate on the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for democracy, autocracy and regime change. Following a review of the literature on the short-term impact of the pandemic on citizen freedoms, I conduct a preliminary test showing that COVID-19 has widened the freedom divide between democracy and autocracy. I propose a prudential interpretation of this new finding and of its implications for medium- to long-term regime change dynamics. In an age of advancing autocratization, regaining awareness that democracies and autocracies treat citizens differently could help marginalize antisystem political forces in democratic countries. However, increased levels of repression in regimes that are already authoritarian are no good news in terms of prospective democratization. Moreover, the management of the social and economic consequences of the pandemic is likely to represent a key driver of future regime change, duo to its impact on the legitimacy and stability of both democracies and autocracies.

AbstractBesides elections, the sub-Saharan wave of political reforms of the 1990s led several countries to introduce limits to the number of terms that a chief executive can serve, even though several leaders managed to bypass them. While Africa's executive term limits (ETLs) politics has gained scholarly attention, the literature mostly consists of in-depth small-N analyses. Systematic comparative research is rare. To contribute filling this gap, this article presents a new Africa Executive Term Limits (AETL) dataset. Covering 49 sub-Saharan polities throughout the 1990–2019 period, AETL represents the most complete and updated collection of data on Africa's ETLs politics, and a versatile research tool to address several questions on the present and future of this continent. A preliminary assessment of the new data finds ETLs to be increasingly respected, and to have positive returns for government alternation and development. These findings point to new research avenues that AETL may help travel.

The 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.

Despite 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'. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright, the International Political Science Association.]

Despite 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".

Although term limit violation is a widely examined form of autocratisation in sub-Saharan Africa, this research focuses on the relatively understudied but increasingly frequent cases in which term limits prove resilient. We distinguish two forms of term limit resilience, namely, compliance and enforcement, and we offer the first regional-level study of its determinants using qualitative comparative analysis. We find democracy – that is, the factor that is often considered the strongest predictor of term limit resilience – to be decisive when term limits are threatened or likely to be threatened. However, other mechanisms resulting from the interplay of factors that can be present in both democratic and non-democratic regimes stand out for their explanatory power – most notably, path dependence, regime legacies and opposition. Conversely, factors such as the international promotion of democracy and military autonomy appear to play a secondary role, at least from a comparative viewpoint.

AbstractThe 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.

Contemporary processes of autocratization attract growing attention, but their trajectories and modes remain relatively understudied. To contribute filling this gap, we offer one of the first case-oriented comparative analyses of twenty-first century autocratization. First, we examine a global set of cases. Hence, we focus on four typical cases from different regions – namely, Ecuador, Moldova, Thailand and Rwanda – representing different forms of contemporary autocratization. The analysis confirms that autocratization is an empirically relevant phenomenon in this historical phase. Moreover, an evolution is occurring in how this political syndrome unfolds, in the regimes it tends to hit, and in its outcomes. More specifically, the main threat that liberal democracies currently face is a process of sequential autocratization, perpetrated by elected rulers wishing to expand and prolong their power through the loosening of the mechanisms of horizontal accountability and the manipulation of the electoral process. However, we also highlight that an ongoing process of autocratization could be interrupted or reversed. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published