Democratic transition

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 [1][2][3] The process is known as democratisation, political changes moving in a democratic direction.[4] 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.[5][6] Although transitional regimes experience more civil unrest,[7][8] they may be considered stable in a transitional phase for decades at a time.[9][10][11] Since the end of the Cold War transitional regimes have become the most common form of government.[12][13] 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.[14][15][16]

Since c. 2010, the number of countries autocratizing (blue) is higher than those democratizing (yellow).

Typology

Autocratization
Main article: Autocratization
Further information: Democratic backsliding by country
Countries autocratizing (red) or democratizing (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020), according to V-Dem Institute. Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.[17]

Democratic backsliding[lower-alpha 1] is a process of regime change towards autocracy that makes the exercise of political power in a democracy more arbitrary and repressive.[24][25][26] This process typically restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection.[27][28] 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 democracy, especially freedom of expression.[29][30]

Proposed causes of democratic backsliding include lack of public support for democracy, economic inequality, culturally conservative reactions to societal changes, populist or personalist politics, and external influence from great power politics. During crises, backsliding can occur when leaders impose autocratic rules during states of emergency that are either disproportionate to the severity of the crisis or remain in place after the situation has improved.[31]

While regime change through military coups has declined since the end of the Cold War, more subtle forms of backsliding have increased. During the third wave of democratization in the late twentieth century, many new, weakly institutionalized democracies were established; these regimes have been most vulnerable to democratic backsliding.[32][30] The third wave of autocratization has been ongoing since 2010, when the number of liberal democracies was at an all-time high.[33][34] One quarter of the world's population lives under democratically backsliding hybrid regimes as of 2021.[35]

Democratisation
Main article: Democratization
Map showing democratization of countries after the Cold War

Democratization, or democratisation, is the democratic transition to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.[36][37]

Whether and to what extent democratization occurs can be influenced by various factors, including economic development, historical legacies, civil society, and international processes. Some accounts of democratization emphasize how elites drove democratization, whereas other accounts emphasize grassroots bottom-up processes.[38] How democratization occurs has also been used to explain other political phenomena, such as whether a country goes to a war or whether its economy grows.[39]

The opposite process is known as democratic backsliding or autocratization.

Factors

Decolonization
Main article: Decolonization
Decolonization[lower-alpha 2] or decolonisation[lower-alpha 3] is the undoing of colonialism, the latter being the process whereby imperial nations establish and dominate foreign territories, often overseas.[40] The meanings and applications of the term are disputed. Some scholars of decolonization focus especially on independence movements in the colonies and the collapse of global colonial empires.[41][42] Other scholars extend the meaning to include economic, cultural and psychological aspects of the colonial experience.[43]
Except for a few absolute monarchies, most post-colonial states are either republics or constitutional monarchies. These new states had to devise constitutions, electoral systems, and other institutions of representative democracy.

Democratic globalization
Main article: Democratic globalization
Democratic globalization is a social movement towards an institutional system of global democracy.[44] One of its proponents is the British political thinker David Held. In the last decade, Held published a dozen books regarding the spread of democracy from territorially defined nation states to a system of global governance that encapsulates the entire world. For some, democratic mundialisation (from the French term mondialisation) is a variant of democratic globalisation stressing the need for the direct election of world leaders and members of global institutions by citizens worldwide; for others, it is just another name for democratic globalisation.[45]

Democracy promotion
Main article: Democracy promotion
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.[46] 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.[47] Some critics have argued that the United States has used democracy promotion to justify military intervention abroad.[48][49]

Outcomes

Democratic consolidation
Main article: Democratic consolidation
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.[50][51] A country can be described as consolidated when the current democratic system becomes “the only game in town”,[52] meaning no one in the country is trying to act outside of the set institutions.[53] 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.[54][55]

Hybrid regime
Main article: Hybrid regime
A hybrid regime[lower-alpha 4] is a type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one (or vice versa).[lower-alpha 5] Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections.[lower-alpha 5] Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states.[74][63][75] Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time.[lower-alpha 5] There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.[76][77]

Measurement
Main article: Democracy indices
Global trend report Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2022[78]

The democracies indices differ in whether they are categorical, such as classifying countries into democracies, hybrid regimes, and autocracies,[79][80] or continuous values.[81] The qualitative nature of democracy indices enables data analytical approaches for studying causal mechanisms of regime transformation processes.

Democracy indices differ in scope and weighting of different aspects of democracy, including the breadth of core democratic institutions, competitiveness and inclusiveness of polyarchy, freedom of expression, various aspects of governance, democratic norm transgressions, co-option of opposition, electoral system manipulation, electoral fraud, and popular support of anti-democratic alternatives.[82][83][84]

See also

Notes
  1. Other names include autocratization, democratic decline,[18] de-democratization,[19] democratic erosion,[20] democratic decay,[21] democratic recession,[22] democratic regression,[18] and democratic deconsolidation.[23]
  2. American, Canadian, and Oxford English
  3. British English and Commonwealth English
  4. Scholars uses a variety of terms to encompass the "greyzones" between full autocracies and full democracies:[56] such as competitive authoritarianism or semi-authoritarianism or hybrid authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism or liberal autocracy or delegative democracy or illiberal democracy or guided democracy or semi-democracy or deficient democracy or defective democracy or hybrid democracy.[57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64]
  5. "Some scholars argue that deficient democracies and deficient autocracies can be seen as examples of hybrid regimes, whereas others argue that hybrid regimes combine characteristics of both democratic and autocratic regimes."[58] Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system.[65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73]

References
  1. Arugay, Aries A. (2021). "Democratic Transitions". The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–7. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_190-1. ISBN 978-3-319-74336-3. S2CID 240235199.
  2. Munck, G.L. (2001). "Democratic Transitions". International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier. pp. 3425–3428. doi:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/01135-9. ISBN 9780080430768.
  3. Cassani, Andrea; Tomini, Luca (2019). "Authoritarian resurgence: towards a unified analytical framework". Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica. Cambridge University Press (CUP). 49 (2): 115–120. doi:10.1017/ipo.2019.14. hdl:2434/666535. ISSN 0048-8402. S2CID 199298876.
  4. Huntington, Samuel P. (2009). "How Countries Democratize". Political Science Quarterly. [The Academy of Political Science, Wiley]. 124 (1): 31–69. doi:10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00641.x. ISSN 0032-3195. JSTOR 25655609. Retrieved 2023-04-17.
  5. Gunitsky, Seva (2014). "From Shocks to Waves: Hegemonic Transitions and Democratization in the Twentieth Century". International Organization. 68 (3): 561–597. doi:10.1017/S0020818314000113. ISSN 0020-8183. S2CID 232254486.
  6. Gunitsky, Seva (2017). Aftershocks. ISBN 978-0-691-17233-0.
  7. Cook, Scott J; Savun, Burcu (2016). "New democracies and the risk of civil conflict". Journal of Peace Research. SAGE Publications. 53 (6): 745–757. doi:10.1177/0022343316660756. ISSN 0022-3433. S2CID 114918000.
  8. Crocker, C.A.; Hampson, F.O.; Aall, P. (2016). Managing Conflict in a World Adrift. McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 156. ISBN 978-1-928096-48-1. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  9. Sönmez, Hakan (2020-09-30). "Democratic Backsliding or Stabilization?". Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science. International Association for Political Science Students. 46: 54–78. doi:10.22151/politikon.46.3. ISSN 2414-6633.
  10. Geddes, Barbara (1999). "What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?". Annual Review of Political Science. Annual Reviews. 2 (1): 115–144. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115. ISSN 1094-2939.
  11. Törnberg, Anton (2018). "Combining transition studies and social movement theory: towards a new research agenda". Theory and Society. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. 47 (3): 381–408. doi:10.1007/s11186-018-9318-6. ISSN 0304-2421. S2CID 255015393.
  12. Leonardo Morlino; Dirk Berg-Schlosser; Bertrand Badie (6 March 2017). Political Science: A Global Perspective. SAGE. pp. 112–. ISBN 978-1-5264-1303-1. OCLC 1124515503.
  13. Brownlee, Jason (2009). "Portents of Pluralism: How Hybrid Regimes Affect Democratic Transitions". American Journal of Political Science. [Midwest Political Science Association, Wiley]. 53 (3): 515–532. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00384.x. ISSN 0092-5853. JSTOR 25548135. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  14. "Home - IDEA Global State of Democracy Report". International IDEA. Retrieved Nov 26, 2022.
  15. Hameed, Dr. Muntasser Majeed (Jun 30, 2022). "Hybrid regimes: An Overview". IPRI Journal. Islamabad Policy Research Institute - IPRI. 22 (1): 1–24. doi:10.31945/iprij.220101. ISSN 1684-9787. S2CID 251173436.
  16. Caballero-Anthony, M. (2009). Political Change, Democratic Transitions and Security in Southeast Asia. Routledge Security in Asia Pacific Series. Taylor & Francis. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-135-26840-4. Retrieved 2023-04-27.
  17. Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute. https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf Archived 14 September 2021 at the Wayback Machine
  18. Mietzner, Marcus (2021). "Sources of resistance to democratic decline: Indonesian civil society and its trials". Democratization. 28 (1): 161–178. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1796649. S2CID 225475139.
  19. Mudde, Cas and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira (2017) Populism: a Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.86-96. ISBN 978-0-19-023487-4
  20. Laebens, Melis G.; Lührmann, Anna (2021). "What halts democratic erosion? The changing role of accountability". Democratization. 28 (5): 908–928. doi:10.1080/13510347.2021.1897109. S2CID 234870008.
  21. Daly, Tom Gerald (2019). "Democratic Decay: Conceptualising an Emerging Research Field". Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 11: 9–36. doi:10.1007/s40803-019-00086-2. S2CID 159354232.
  22. Huq, Aziz Z (2021). "How (not) to explain a democratic recession". International Journal of Constitutional Law. 19 (2): 723–737. doi:10.1093/icon/moab058.
  23. Chull Shin, Doh (2021). "Democratic deconsolidation in East Asia: exploring system realignments in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan". Democratization. 28 (1): 142–160. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1826438. S2CID 228959708.
  24. Hyde, Susan D. (2020). "Democracy's backsliding in the international environment". Science. 369 (6508): 1192–1196. Bibcode:2020Sci...369.1192H. doi:10.1126/science.abb2434. PMID 32883862. S2CID 221472047.
  25. Skaaning, Svend-Erik (2020). "Waves of autocratization and democratization: a critical note on conceptualization and measurement" (PDF). Democratization. 27 (8): 1533–1542. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1799194. S2CID 225378571. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 February 2023. Retrieved 7 November 2022.
  26. Lührmann, Anna; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2019). "A third wave of autocratization is here: what is new about it?". Democratization. 26 (7): 1095–1113. doi:10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029. S2CID 150992660. The decline of democratic regime attributes – autocratization
  27. Cassani, Andrea; Tomini, Luca (2019). "What Autocratization Is". Autocratization in post-Cold War Political Regimes. Springer International Publishing. pp. 15–35. ISBN 978-3-030-03125-1.
  28. Walder, D.; Lust, E. (2018). "Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding". Annual Review of Political Science. 21 (1): 93–113. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628. Backsliding entails a deterioration of qualities associated with democratic governance, within any regime. In democratic regimes, it is a decline in the quality of democracy; in autocracies, it is a decline in democratic qualities of governance.
  29. Lindberg, Staffan I. "The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe". Carnegie Europe. Archived from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved 2021-01-27.
  30. Rocha Menocal, Alina; Fritz, Verena; Rakner, Lise (June 2008). "Hybrid regimes and the challenges of deepening and sustaining democracy in developing countries1". South African Journal of International Affairs. 15 (1): 29–40. doi:10.1080/10220460802217934. ISSN 1022-0461. S2CID 55589140. Archived from the original on 21 January 2020. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
  31. "Pandemic Backsliding". www.v-dem.net. V-Dem. Archived from the original on 21 December 2020. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
  32. Bermeo, Nancy (January 2016). "On Democratic Backsliding" (PDF). Journal of Democracy. 27 (1): 5–19. doi:10.1353/jod.2016.0012. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 155798358. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 March 2021. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
  33. Maerz, Seraphine F.; Lührmann, Anna; Hellmeier, Sebastian; Grahn, Sandra; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2020-05-18). "State of the world 2019: autocratization surges – resistance grows". Democratization. 27 (6): 909–927. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1758670. ISSN 1351-0347.
  34. Boese, Vanessa A.; Lundstedt, Martin; Morrison, Kelly; Sato, Yuko; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2022). "State of the world 2021: autocratization changing its nature?". Democratization. 29 (6): 983–1013. doi:10.1080/13510347.2022.2069751. ISSN 1351-0347. S2CID 249031421.
  35. The Global State of Democracy 2021 Archived 9 August 2022 at the Wayback Machine, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
  36. Arugay, Aries A. (2021). "Democratic Transitions". The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–7. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_190-1. ISBN 978-3-319-74336-3. S2CID 240235199.
  37. Lindenfors, Patrik; Wilson, Matthew; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2020). "The Matthew effect in political science: head start and key reforms important for democratization". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1): 1–4. doi:10.1057/s41599-020-00596-7.
  38. Schmitz, Hans Peter (2004). "Domestic and Transnational Perspectives on Democratization". International Studies Review. [International Studies Association, Wiley]. 6 (3): 403–426. doi:10.1111/j.1521-9488.2004.00423.x. ISSN 1521-9488. JSTOR 3699697.
  39. Bogaards, Matthijs (2010). "Measures of Democratization: From Degree to Type to War". Political Research Quarterly. [University of Utah, Sage Publications, Inc.] 63 (2): 475–488. doi:10.1177/1065912909358578. ISSN 1065-9129. JSTOR 20721505. S2CID 154168435.
  40. Note however discussion of (for example) the Russian and Nazi empires below.
  41. Hack, Karl (2008). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Detroit: Macmillan Reference. pp. 255–257. ISBN 978-0028659657.
  42. John Lynch, ed. Latin American Revolutions, 1808–1826: Old and New World Origins (1995).
  43. Betts, Raymond F. (2012). "Decolonization a brief history of the word". Beyond Empire and Nation. Brill. pp. 23–37. doi:10.1163/9789004260443_004. ISBN 978-90-04-26044-3. JSTOR 10.1163/j.ctt1w8h2zm.5.
  44. Rosow, S.J.; George, J. (2014). Globalization and Democracy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-4422-1810-9. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  45. Fisher, Stephen (2016-01-01). "Democratic Support and Globalization". Globalization and Domestic Politics. Oxford University Press. pp. 209–234. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198757986.003.0011. ISBN 978-0-19-875798-6.
  46. see Peter Burnell, From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion, Political Studies Association, Political Studies 2008 VOL 56
  47. "Democracy Building and Conflict Management: Overview". International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). n.d. Archived from the original on 2006-02-09. Retrieved 2006-01-18.
  48. Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de (Spring 2004). "Why Gun-Barrel Democracy Doesn't Work". Hoover Digest. 2. Archived from the original on 2008-07-05. Also see this page.
  49. Meernik, James (1996). "United States Military Intervention and the Promotion of Democracy". Journal of Peace Research. 33 (4): 391–402. doi:10.1177/0022343396033004002. S2CID 51897214.
  50. Schedler, Andreas (1998). "What is Democratic Consolidation?". Journal of Democracy. Project Muse. 9 (2): 91–107. doi:10.1353/jod.1998.0030. ISSN 1086-3214.
  51. 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. JSTOR. 32 (4): 479. doi:10.2307/422390. ISSN 0010-4159.
  52. Linz, Juan J. (Juan Jose); Stepan, Alfred C. (1996). "Toward Consolidated Democracies". Journal of Democracy. Project Muse. 7 (2): 14–33. doi:10.1353/jod.1996.0031. ISSN 1086-3214.
  53. 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.
  54. 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)
  55. Cook, Scott J; Savun, Burcu (2016). "New democracies and the risk of civil conflict: The lasting legacy or military rule". Journal of Peace Research. Sage Publications, Ltd. 53 (6): 745–757. eISSN 1460-3578. ISSN 0022-3433. JSTOR 44510457. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  56. Gagné, Jean-François (Mar 10, 2015), Hybrid Regimes, Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0167
  57. Plattner, Marc F. (1969-12-31). "Is Democracy in Decline?". kipdf.com. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  58. "Hybrid Concepts and the Concept of Hybridity". European Consortium for Political Research. 2019-09-07. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  59. Urribarri, Raul A. Sanchez (2011). "Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court". Law & Social Inquiry. Wiley. 36 (4): 854–884. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01253.x. ISSN 0897-6546. JSTOR 41349660. S2CID 232400805. Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  60. Göbel, Christian (2011). "Semiauthoritarianism". 21st Century Political Science: A Reference Handbook. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States: SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 258–266. doi:10.4135/9781412979351.n31. ISBN 9781412969017.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  61. Tlemcani, Rachid (2007-05-29). "Electoral Authoritarianism". Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  62. "What is Hybrid Democracy?". Digital Society School. 2022-05-19. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  63. Zinecker, Heidrun (2009). "Regime-Hybridity in Developing Countries: Achievements and Limitations of New Research on Transitions". International Studies Review. [Oxford University Press, Wiley, The International Studies Association]. 11 (2): 302–331. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00850.x. ISSN 1521-9488. JSTOR 40389063. Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  64. "Index". Dem-Dec. 2017-09-23. Archived from the original on 2022-11-21. Retrieved 2022-11-21.
  65. Sönmez, Hakan (2020-09-30). "Democratic Backsliding or Stabilization?". Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science. International Association for Political Science Students. 46: 54–78. doi:10.22151/politikon.46.3. ISSN 2414-6633. S2CID 224846248.
  66. Ekman, Joakim (2009). "Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes". International Political Science Review. SAGE Publications. 30 (1): 7–31. doi:10.1177/0192512108097054. ISSN 0192-5121. S2CID 145077481.
  67. Baker, A. (2021). Shaping the Developing World: The West, the South, and the Natural World. SAGE Publications. p. 202. ISBN 978-1-0718-0709-5. Archived from the original on 2023-04-23. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  68. "Why Parties and Elections in Dictatorships?". How Dictatorships Work. Cambridge University Press. 2018. pp. 129–153. doi:10.1017/9781316336182.006. ISBN 9781316336182.
  69. Riaz, Ali (2019). "What is a Hybrid Regime?". Voting in a Hybrid Regime. Politics of South Asia. Singapore: Springer Singapore. pp. 9–19. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7956-7_2. ISBN 978-981-13-7955-0. ISSN 2523-8345. S2CID 198088445.
  70. Schmotz, Alexander (2019-02-13). "Hybrid Regimes". The Handbook of Political, Social, and Economic Transformation. Oxford University Press. pp. 521–525. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198829911.003.0053. ISBN 978-0-19-882991-1.
  71. Morlino, Leonardo (2011-11-01). "Are There Hybrid Regimes?". Changes for DemocracyActors, Structures, Processes. Oxford University Press. pp. 48–69. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199572533.003.0004. ISBN 978-0-19-957253-3.
  72. Подлесный, Д. В. (2016). Политология: Учебное пособие [Political Science: Textbook] (in Russian). Kharkiv: ХГУ НУА. pp. 62–65/164. Archived from the original on 2023-04-22. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  73. Schulmann, Ekaterina (15 August 2014). "Царство политической имитации" [The kingdom of political imitation]. vedomosti.ru. Archived from the original on 2019-07-30. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  74. Croissant, A.; Kailitz, S.; Koellner, P.; Wurster, S. (2015). Comparing autocracies in the early Twenty-first Century: Volume 1: Unpacking Autocracies - Explaining Similarity and Difference. Taylor & Francis. p. 212. ISBN 978-1-317-70018-0. Archived from the original on December 9, 2022. Retrieved Nov 27, 2022.
  75. Carothers, Christopher (2018). "The Surprising Instability of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 29 (4): 129–135. doi:10.1353/jod.2018.0068. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 158234306.
  76. Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2002). "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. Project Muse. 13 (2): 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 6711009.
  77. "Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War". Department of Political Science. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  78. "Global Dashboard". BTI 2022. Retrieved Apr 17, 2023.
  79. Dobratz, B.A. (2015). Power, Politics, and Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology. Taylor & Francis. p. 47. ISBN 978-1-317-34529-9. Retrieved Apr 30, 2023.
  80. Michie, J. (2014). Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences. Taylor & Francis. pp. 95–97. ISBN 978-1-135-93226-8. Retrieved 2023-04-03.
  81. "Democracy data: how do researchers measure democracy?". Our World in Data. Jun 17, 2022. Retrieved Apr 17, 2023.
  82. "The 'Varieties of Democracy' data: how do researchers measure democracy?". Our World in Data. 2022-11-30. Retrieved 2023-04-03.
  83. "Breaking Down Democracy". Freedom House. Retrieved 2023-04-03.
  84. Democracy and Autocracy, Why do Democracies Develop and Decline, Vol. 21(1) June 2023, Democracy and Autocracy Section, American Political Science Association

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.