Suchergebnisse

Cover -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1 Motivation -- 1.2 Research questions and objectives -- 1.3 Methods and case selection -- 1.4 Roadmap -- 2. Theoretical considerations -- 2.1 Hybrid regimes (democratization studies) -- 2.1.1 The debate -- 2.1.1.1 From a bipolar world order … -- 2.1.1.2 … to democracy with adjectives … -- 2.1.1.3 … towards hybrid regimes -- 2.1.2 Defining hybrid regimes -- 2.1.2.1 Their context of origin: The third wave -- 2.1.2.2 Their features: An ambiguous political nature -- 2.1.2.3 Their prospects: Persistence -- 2.1.3 Empirical evidence and proliferation -- 2.1.4 Current questions and research gaps (bringing in civil society) -- 2.2 Civil society organizations (CSOs) -- 2.2.1 Fundamentals -- 2.2.2 An inextricable link? CSOs and democracy -- 2.2.3 A paradox? CSOs in nondemocratic settings -- 2.2.3.1 The civil society approach: CSOs as agents of democratization -- 2.2.3.2 Global third sector research: The heterogeneity of civic organization -- 2.2.3.3 The regime approach: Civic organization in authoritarian regimes -- 2.2.4 Conclusion: Context matters! -- 2.3 Synthesis -- 2.3.1 Research gaps -- 2.3.2 Definitions -- 2.3.3 Further procedure -- 3. Research design -- 3.1 A qualitative approach -- 3.1.1 Qualitative case studies -- 3.1.2 Selecting a case: Nicaragua -- 3.1.3 Procedure: A field study split in two phases -- 3.2 Data collection -- 3.2.1 Methods used -- 3.2.2 Selection of interview partners -- 3.2.2.1 Part I: Background study (expert interviews) -- 3.2.2.2 Part II: Interviews with CSO leaders -- 3.2.3 Problems and pitfalls encountered during data collection -- 3.3 Data evaluation -- 3.3.1 Qualitative content analysis -- 3.3.2 CAQDAS / MAXQDA -- 3.3.3 The coding process -- 4. Introduction to the case -- 4.1 Historical background: From independence to the Sandinista Revolution

Civil society organisations (CSOs) in Nicaragua: challenging or maintaining the status quo? This book explores the challenges, functions and potential of CSOs in the "hybrid" regime of Nicaragua, which is characterised by the coexistence of formal democratic structures and autocratic practices. Based on a comprehensive empirical study of the Nicaraguan civil society sector, this study identifies different types of CSOs in terms of their influence, representation and autonomy. Thereby, it critically examines the general hopes placed in both local and international CSOs in terms of their potential to foster democratisation and societal change.Katharina Obuch works as a research assistant at the institute of political science (IfPol) at Münster University. Her research interests include comparative politics, civil society and democratisation.

Is civil society's influence favorable to the evolvement of democratic structures and democratic gender relations? While traditional approaches would answer in the affirmative, the authors highlight the ambivalences. Focusing on women's organizations in authoritarian and hybrid regimes, they cover the full spectrum of civil society's possible performance: from its important role in the overcoming of power relations to its reinforcement as backers of government structures or the distribution of antifeminist ideas.

Is civil society's influence favorable to the evolvement of democratic structures and democratic gender relations? While traditional approaches would answer in the affirmative, the authors highlight the ambivalences. Focusing on women's organizations in authoritarian and hybrid regimes, they cover the full spectrum of civil society's possible performance: from its important role in the overcoming of power relations to its reinforcement as backers of government structures or the distribution of antifeminist ideas.

Is civil society's influence favorable to the evolvement of democratic structures and democratic gender relations? While traditional approaches would answer in the affirmative, the authors highlight the ambivalences. Focusing on women's organizations in authoritarian and hybrid regimes, they cover the full spectrum of civil society's possible performance: from its important role in the overcoming of power relations to its reinforcement as backers of government structures or the distribution of antifeminist ideas. The revival of authoritarianism in comparative politics has currently been reflected within gender studies, encouraged by the idea that women tend to be the first and most vulnerable to suffer in authoritarian societies. However, traditional approaches focusing on institutions and quotas still dominate in spite of proving insufficient to explain persisting inequities. In an attempt to fill existing research gaps this publication takes a bottom-up perspective analyzing gender relations as societal power structures in nondemocratic regimes - from the perspective that this pledges multitudinous links and theoretical potential for feminist theory as well as democratization studies. The specific focus is on civil society as a societal sphere, traditionally seen as antagonistic to undemocratic and patriarchal state structures and important for societal modernization and democratization. Countering this, this text argues that the role of civil society is an ambivalent one, evolving between two different theoretical conceptualizations; the "Gramscian" and the "Tocquevillian" perspective on civic organization. The central argument is that civil society can play both: an important role in the overcoming of power relations as well as in their reinforcement - in the form of conservative and unprogressive (antifeminist) movements, dubious entanglements with government structures or simply as depoliticized service providers.