Causes[ edit ] There is considerable debate about the factors which affect or ultimately limit democratization. A great many things, including economics, culture, and history, have been cited as impacting on the process. Economic development and modernization[ edit ] Scholars such as Seymour Lipset,  Carles Boix, Susan Stokes,  Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Evelyne Stephens, and John Stephens  argue that economic development increases the likelihood of democratization. According to Daniel Treisman, there is "a strong and consistent relationship between higher income and both democratization and democratic survival in the medium term 10—20 years , but not necessarily in shorter time windows. There is also the general observation that democracy was very rare before the industrial revolution. Empirical research thus lead many to believe that economic development either increases chances for a transition to democracy modernization theory , or helps newly established democracies consolidate.
|Published (Last):||15 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||3.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.47 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Causes[ edit ] There is considerable debate about the factors which affect or ultimately limit democratization. A great many things, including economics, culture, and history, have been cited as impacting on the process. Economic development and modernization[ edit ] Scholars such as Seymour Lipset,  Carles Boix, Susan Stokes,  Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Evelyne Stephens, and John Stephens  argue that economic development increases the likelihood of democratization.
According to Daniel Treisman, there is "a strong and consistent relationship between higher income and both democratization and democratic survival in the medium term 10—20 years , but not necessarily in shorter time windows.
There is also the general observation that democracy was very rare before the industrial revolution. Empirical research thus lead many to believe that economic development either increases chances for a transition to democracy modernization theory , or helps newly established democracies consolidate.
This is because development may entrench the incumbent leader but make it more difficult for him deliver the state to a son or trusted aide when he exits. They explain how these structure changes have been called out to be one of the main reasons several European countries became democratic.
When their socioeconomic structures shifted because modernization made the agriculture sector more efficient, bigger investments of time and resources were used for the manufacture and service sectors.
In England, for example, members of the gentry began investing more on commercial activities that allowed them to become economically more important for the state. This new kind of productive activities came with new economic power were assets became more difficult for the state to count and hence more difficult to tax.
Because of this, predation was no longer possible and the state had to negotiate with the new economic elites to extract revenue. A sustainable bargain had to be reached because the state became more dependent of its citizens remaining loyal and, with this, citizens had now leverage to be taken into account in the decision making process for the country. In a highly unequal society for example, South Africa under Apartheid , the redistribution of wealth and power in a democracy would be so harmful to elites that these would do everything to prevent democratization.
Democratization is more likely to emerge somewhere in the middle, in the countries, whose elites offer concessions because 1 they consider the threat of a revolution credible and 2 the cost of the concessions is not too high. This view is likely to be ethnocentric. Typically, it is Western culture which is cited as "best suited" to democracy, with other cultures portrayed as containing values which make democracy difficult or undesirable. This argument is sometimes used by undemocratic regimes to justify their failure to implement democratic reforms.
Today, however, there are many non-Western democracies. Barro have linked Islam to undemocratic outcomes. Putnam argues that communities with denser horizontal networks of civic association are able to better build the "norms of trust, reciprocity, and civic engagement" that lead to democratization and well-functioning participatory democracies. Putnam contrasts communities with dense horizontal networks to communities with vertical networks and patron-client relations , and asserts that the latter are unlikely to build the culture of civic engagement necessary for democratization.
They do so to prevent revolution, motivate citizens to fight wars, incentivize governments to provide public goods , outbid elite rivals, or limit factional violence.
Common mistakes include: calling elections or starting military conflicts, only to lose them; ignoring popular unrest and being overthrown; initiating limited reforms that get out of hand; and selecting a covert democrat as leader.
These mistakes reflect well-known cognitive biases such as overconfidence and the illusion of control. They argue that low levels of inequality and weak identity cleavages are necessary for liberal democracy to emerge. Monarchic and civilian dictatorships seek to remain in power indefinitely through hereditary rule in the case of monarchs or through oppression in the case of civilian dictators.
A military dictatorship seizes power to act as a caretaker government to replace what they consider a flawed civilian government. Military dictatorships are more likely to transition to democracy because at the onset, they are meant to be stop-gap solutions while a new acceptable government forms.
According to Seva Gunitsky, these waves are caused by "abrupt shifts in the distribution of power among leading states create unique and powerful incentives for sweeping domestic reforms. Huntington defined three waves of democratization that have taken place in history. It was followed by a rise of dictatorships during the Interwar period.
The second wave began after World War II , but lost steam between and the mids. The latest wave began in and is still ongoing. Democratization of Latin America and the former Eastern Bloc is part of this third wave. An example of a region which passed through all the three waves of democratization is the Middle East. During the 15th century it was a part of the Ottoman Empire.
In the 19th century, "when the empire finally collapsed [ However, what Posusney and Angrist argue is that, "the ethnic divisions [ This raises interesting questions about the role of combined foreign and domestic factors in the process of democratization. Moreover, he states that "the Middle East and North Africa lack the prerequisites of democratization". Thomas Risse wrote in , "there is a consensus in the literature on Eastern Europe that the EU membership perspective had a huge anchoring effects for the new democracies.
Olson suggests that this occurs when constituencies or identity groups are mixed within a geographic region. He asserts that this mixed geographic constituencies requires elites to for democratic and representative institutions to control the region, and to limit the power of competing elite groups. Dunning proposes that there are situations where natural resource rents, such as those acquired through oil, reduce the risk of distributive or social policies to the elite because the state has other sources of revenue to finance this kind of policies that is not the elite wealth or income.
A study found that about a quarter of all cases of democracy protests between — lead to democratization. A study found that drought-induced riots in Sub-Saharan Africa lead regimes, fearing conflict, to make democratic concessions.
While adherents of the democratic peace theory believe that democracy comes before peace, historical evidence shows the opposite. In almost all cases, peace has come before democracy. Some scholars have argued that there is little support for the hypothesis that democracy causes peace, but strong evidence for the opposite hypothesis that peace leads to democracy. The so-called regality theory finds that people develop a psychological preference for a strong leader and an authoritarian form of government in situations of war or perceived collective danger.
On the other hand, people will support egalitarian values and a preference for democracy in situations of peace and safety. The consequence of this is that a society will develop in the direction of autocracy and an authoritarian government when people perceive collective danger, while the development in the democratic direction requires collective safety.
Schmitter and Dankwart A. Rustow have argued against the notion that there are structural "big" causes of democratization. These scholars instead emphasize how the democratization process occurs in a flukey manner which depends on the unique characteristics and circumstances of the elites who ultimately oversee the shift from authoritarianism to democracy.
Basho Democratization Democratization covers several key themes including: Measuring Democracy and Democratization Patrick Bernhagen 4. Comments and reviews What are comments? Inglehart, and Christian Welzel. Democratic and Undemocratic States Richard Rose 3.