Suchergebnisse

A government‐interest group model is presented. Voters are neither always rationally ignorant nor always fully informed. Voters' information is variable. Unlike other models that assume a vote production function, this model considers the voter's utility and shows how rational voters with limited information can sometimes vote for inefficient policies.If voters can be informed inexpensively, then democracies are efficient. If the cost of informing voters is prohibitive, then pressure groups efficiently extract rent. If the cost of informing voters is low for efficient direct handouts, but high for inefficient policies, then inefficient redistributions will occur.

Democracies and authoritarian regimes have different approaches to international law, grounded in their different forms of government. As the balance of power between democracies and non-democracies shifts, it will have consequences for international legal order. Human rights may face severe challenges in years ahead, but citizens of democratic countries may still benefit from international legal cooperation in other areas. Ranging across several continents, this volume surveys the state of democracy-enhancing international law, and provides ideas for a way forward in the face of rising authoritarianism.

Democracies and Authoritarian Regimes provides a broad, accessible overview of the key institutions and political dynamics in democracies and dictatorships, enabling students to assess the benefits and risks associated with democracy, and the growing challenges to it. Comprehensive coverage of the full spectrum of political systems enhances students' understanding of the relevance of contemporary global trends, including the nature of democratic backsliding and authoritarian resurgence, the rise of populism and identity politics, and the impact of cultural and socio-economic drivers of democracy. Each chapter features a broad range of case studies complemented by boxes that illustrate key terms, ensuring relevant research is translated in a clear, engaging format for students.This text is supported by a range of online resources, to encourage deeper engagement with the subject matter.

This week we ask: Is the link between LGBTQ rights and democracy as strong as is often thought?

AbstractThis paper analyzes how ethnic diversity affects the provision of public goods in democratic and non‐democratic societies when political parties compete for voter support by offering a mix of private and public goods. Our model implies that increasing diversity that leads to more heterogeneous preferences for public goods decreases the provision of public goods in democracies, where political power is distributed equally among citizens, while there is a weaker or no effect in non‐democracies, where political power is distributed unequally among citizens. When measuring diversity by ethnic fractionalization and public good provision by either levels of government expenses, expenditures on health, or life expectancy, we indeed observe a negative association between diversity and the provision of public goods in democracies but no or only a weak association in non‐democracies.

Populism has become a favourite catchword for mass media and politicians faced with the challenge of protest parties or movements. It has often been equated with radical right leaders or parties. This volume offers a different perspective and underlines that populism is an ambiguous but constitutive component of democratic systems torn between their ideology (government of the people, by the people, for the people) and their actual functioning, characterised by the role of the elites and the limits put on the popular will by liberal constitutionalism.