fbpx
Wikipedia

Hybrid regime

April 20, 2024

A hybrid regime[a] 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).[b] Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections.[b] Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states.[18][8][19] Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time.[b] There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.[20][21]

The term hybrid regime arises from a polymorphic view of political regimes that opposes the dichotomy of autocracy or democracy.[22] Modern scholarly analysis of hybrid regimes focuses attention on the decorative nature of democratic institutions (elections do not lead to a change of power, different media broadcast the government point of view and the opposition in parliament votes the same way as the ruling party, among others),[23] from which it is concluded that democratic backsliding, a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of hybrid regimes.[b][24] Some scholars also contend that hybrid regimes may imitate a full dictatorship.[25][26]

Definition edit

Scholars vary on the definition of hybrid regimes based on their primary academic discipline.[27] "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."[3] Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system.[10]

In 1995 Terry Karl introduced the notion of "hybrid" regime, which was simply defined as "combining democratic and authoritarian elements".[28]

According to professor Matthijs Bogaards hybrid types are:[29]

not diminished subtypes, since they do not lack the full development of a characteristic, but rather they exhibit a mixture of characteristics of both basic types, so that they simultaneously combine autocratic and democratic dimensions or institutions

Pippa Norris defined hybrid regimes as:[30]

a system characterized by weak checks and balances on executive powers, flawed or even suspended elections, fragmented opposition forces, state restrictions on media freedoms, intellectuals, and civil society organizations, curbs on the independence of the judiciary and disregard for rule of law, the abuse of human rights by the security forces, and tolerance of authoritarian values.

Henry E. Hale defined hybrid regimes as;[31]

a political regime that combines some democratic and some autocratic elements in a significant manner. It is not, however, a mere half-way category: hybrid regimes have their own distinct dynamics that do not simply amount to half of what we would see in a democracy plus half of what we would see in an autocracy.

Leonardo Morlino defined hybrid regimes as;[32]

a set of institutions that have been persistent, be they stable or unstable, for about a decade, have been preceded by authoritarianism, a traditional regime (possibly with colonial characteristics), or even a minimal democracy and are characterized by the break-up of limited pluralism and forms of independent, autonomous participation, but the absence of at least one of the four aspects of a minimal democracy

Professor Jeffrey C. Isaac defined hybrid regimes as:[33]

Hybrid regimes have the common feature that they all have competition, although the political elite in power deliberately rearranges state regulations and the political arena as to grant itself undue advantages

History edit

 
Countries autocratizing (red) or democratizing (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020). Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.[34]

The third wave of democratization from the 1970s onward has led to the emergence of hybrid regimes that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian.[35] Neither the concept of illiberal democracy, nor the concept of electoral authoritarianism fully describes these hybrid regimes.[36][37]

Since the end of the Cold War, such regimes have become the most common among undemocratic countries.[38][39] At the end of the process of transformation of authoritarian regimes, limited elections appear in one way or another when liberalization occurs. Liberal democracy has always been assumed while in practice this process basically froze "halfway".[40]

In relation to regimes that were previously called "transitional" in the 1980s, the term hybrid regime began to be used and was strengthened according to Thomas Carothers because the majority of "transitional countries" are neither completely dictatorial nor aspiring to democracy and by and large they can not be called transitional. They are located in the politically stable gray zone, changes in which may not take place for decades".[verification needed][16] Thus, he stated that hybrid regimes must be considered without the assumption that they will ultimately become democracies. These hybrid regimes were called semi-authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism.[40]

Hybrid regimes have evolved to lean more authoritarian while keeping some democratic traits.[41] One of the main issues with authoritarian rule is the ability to control the threats from the masses, and democratic elements in hybrid regimes can reduce social tension between the masses and the elite.[42] After the third wave of democratization, some regimes became stuck in the transition to democracy, causing the creation of weak democratic institutions.[43] This results from a lack of institutional ownership during critical points in the transition period leading the regime into a gray zone between democracy and autocracy.[44]

These developments have caused some scholars to believe that hybrid regimes are not poorly functioning democracies, but rather new forms of authoritarian regimes.[45] Defective democratic stability is an indicator to explain and measure these new forms of autocracies.[46] Additionally, approval ratings of political leaders play an important role in these types of regimes, and democratic elements can drive up the ratings of a strongman leader creating a tool not utilized previously.[47] Today, 'hybrid regime' is a term used to explain a growing field of political development where authoritarian leaders incorporate elements of democracy that stabilize their regimes.[48]

Indicators edit

 
Global trend report Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2022[49]

According to Guillermo O'Donnell, Philippe C. Schmitter, Larry Diamond and Thomas Carothers, signs of a hybrid regime include:[16][50]

  1. The presence of external attributes of democracy (elections, multi-party system, legal opposition).
  2. A low degree of representation of the interests of citizens in the process of political decision-making (incapacity of associations of citizens, for example trade unions, or that they are in state control).
  3. A low level of political participation.
  4. The declarative nature of political rights and freedoms (formally there is in fact difficult implementation).
  5. A low level of trust in political institutions by the citizenry.

Transition types edit

Further information: Democratic transition

Autocratization edit

 
Since c. 2010, the number of countries autocratizing (blue) is higher than those democratizing (yellow)
Democratic backsliding[c] is a process of regime change toward autocracy that makes the exercise of political power by the public more arbitrary and repressive.[57][58][59] This process typically restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection.[60][61] 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 democracies, especially freedom of expression.[62][63] Democratic backsliding is the opposite of democratization.

Democratisation edit

Democratization, or democratisation, is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.[64][65]

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.[66] 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.[67]

Measurement edit

Main article: Democracy indices
Further information: Democratic backsliding by country

There are various democratic freedom indices produced by intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations that publish assessments of the worlds political systems, according to their own definitions.[68]

Democracy Index edit

 
Democracy index types

According to the Democracy Index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit there are 34 hybrid regimes, representing approximately 20% of countries, encompassing 17.2% to 20.5% of the world's population.[69]

"The EIU Democracy Index is based on ratings across 60 indicators, grouped into five categories: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation and political culture."[68] The Democracy Index defines hybrid regimes with the following characteristics:[69]

  • Electoral fraud or irregularities occur regularly
  • Pressure is applied to political opposition
  • Corruption is widespread and rule of law tends to be weak
  • Media is pressured and harassed
  • There are issues in the functioning of governance
 
The 2021 Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index[69]

As of 2021 the countries considered hybrid regimes by the "Democracy Index" are:[69]

Global State of Democracy Report edit

According to the "Global State of Democracy Report" by International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), there are 20 hybrid regimes.[70] "International IDEA compiles data from 12 different data sources, including expert surveys and observational data includes the extent to which voting rights are inclusive, political parties are free to form and campaign for office, elections are free, and political offices are filled through elections."[68] IDEA defined hybrid regimes as:[71]

Combination of the elements of authoritarianism with democracy ... These often adopt the formal characteristics of democracy (while allowing little real competition for power) with weak respect for basic political and civil rights

As of 2021 the countries considered hybrid regimes by the "Global State of Democracy Report" are:[72]

V-Dem Democracy Indices edit

 
Map of V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index in 2023[73]

According to the V-Dem Democracy Indices compiled by the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg there are 65 hybrid regimes.[74] V-Dem's "Regimes of the World" indicators identify four political regimes: closed autocracies, electoral autocracies, electoral democracies, and liberal democracies.[75]

According to the V-Dem Institute:[76]

In 2021, 70% of the world population – 5.4 billion people – live in closed or electoral autocracies. A mere 13% of the world's population reside in liberal democracies, and 16% in electoral democracies.

Freedom House edit

 
Freedom House ratings for European Union and surrounding states, in 2019.[77]
  Free
  Partly free
  Not free

Freedom House measures the level of political and economic governance in 29 countries from Central Europe to Central Asia.[78]

"Freedom House assign scores to countries and territories across the globe on 10 indicators of political rights (e.g., whether there is a realistic opportunity for opposition parties to gain power through elections) and 15 indicators of civil liberties (e.g., whether there is a free and independent media)."[68] Freedom House classifies transitional or hybrid regimes as:[78]

Countries that are typically electoral democracies where democratic institutions are fragile, and substantial challenges to the protection of political rights and civil liberties exist

In 2022, Freedom House classified 11 of 29 countries analyzed as "Transitional or Hybrid Regimes":[78]

Typology edit

Further information: List of countries by system of government and List of forms of government
 
Countries in green claim to be a type of democracy while countries in red do not. Only Saudi Arabia, Oman, the UAE, Qatar, Brunei, Afghanistan, and the Vatican do not claim to be democratic.

According to Yale professor Juan José Linz there a three main types of political systems today: democracies, totalitarian regimes and, sitting between these two, authoritarian regimes with many different terms that describe specific types of hybrid regimes.[b][a][79][16][80][81][1]

Academics generally refer to a full dictatorship as either a form of authoritarianism or totalitarianism over a "hybrid system".[82][80][83] Authoritarian governments that conduct elections are in many scholars view not hybrids, but are successful well-institutionalized stable authoritarian regimes.[b][84][85][86] Democratic elements can simultaneously serve authoritarian purposes and contribute to democratization.[87]

Electoral authoritarianism edit

Electoral authoritarianism means that democratic institutions are imitative and, due to numerous systematic violations of liberal democratic norms, in fact adhere to authoritarian methods.[88] Electoral authoritarianism can be competitive and hegemonic, and the latter does not necessarily mean election irregularities.[40] A. Schedler calls electoral authoritarianism a new form of authoritarian regime, not a hybrid regime or illiberal democracy.[40] Moreover, a purely authoritarian regime does not need elections as a source of legitimacy[89] while non-alternative elections, appointed at the request of the ruler, are not a sufficient condition for considering the regime conducting them to be hybrid.[88]

Electoral autocracy edit

Electoral autocracy is a hybrid regime, in which democratic institutions are imitative and adhere to authoritarian methods. In these regimes, regular elections are held, but they are accused of failing to reach democratic standards of freedom and fairness.[90][91]

Illiberal democracy edit

The term "illiberal democracy" describes a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures".[92] There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists.[93]

The rulers of an illiberal democracy may ignore or bypass constitutional limits on their power.[94] While liberal democracies protect individual rights and freedoms, illiberal democracies do not.[95] Elections in an illiberal democracy are often manipulated or rigged, being used to legitimize and consolidate the incumbent rather than to choose the country's leaders and policies.[96]

According to jurist András Sajó, illiberal democracy should be counted as a type of democracy because it is "democratic in a plebiscitarian sense",[97] while political scientist Ulrich Wagrandl argues that "illiberal democracy is actually more true to democracy’s roots".[98] Other theorists say that classifying illiberal democracy as democratic is overly sympathetic to the illiberal regimes[99] and therefore prefer terms such as electoral authoritarianism,[100] competitive authoritarianism,[101] or soft authoritarianism.[102][103]

Dominant-party system edit

A dominant-party system, or one-party dominant system, is a political occurrence in which a single political party continuously dominates election results over running opposition groups or parties.[104] Any ruling party staying in power for more than one consecutive term may be considered a dominant party (also referred to as a predominant or hegemonic party).[105] Some dominant parties were called the natural governing party, given their length of time in power.[106][107][108]

Delegative democracy edit

In political science, delegative democracy is a mode of governance close to Caesarism, Bonapartism or caudillismo with a strong leader in a newly created otherwise democratic government. The concept arose from Argentinian political scientist Guillermo O'Donnell, who notes that representative democracy as it exists is usually linked solely to highly developed capitalist countries. However, newly installed democracies do not seem to be on a path of becoming fully representative democracies.[109] O'Donnell calls the former delegative democracies, for they are not fully consolidated democracies but may be enduring.

For a representative democracy to exist, there must be an important interaction effect. The successful cases have featured a decisive coalition of broadly supported political leaders who take great care in creating and strengthening democratic political institutions.[109] By contrast, the delegative form is partially democratic, for the president has a free rein to act and justify his or her acts in the name of the people. The president can "govern as he sees fit" even if it does not resemble promises made while running for election. The president claims to represent the whole nation rather than just a political party, embodying even the legislature and the judiciary.[110]

O'Donnell's notion of delegative democracy has been criticized as being misleading, because he renders the delegative model that is core to many current democratic governments worldwide into a negative concept.[111]

Dictablanda edit

Dictablanda is a dictatorship in which civil liberties are allegedly preserved rather than destroyed. The word dictablanda is a pun on the Spanish word dictadura ("dictatorship"), replacing dura, which by itself is a word meaning 'hard', with blanda, meaning 'soft'.

The term was first used in Spain in 1930 when Dámaso Berenguer replaced Miguel Primo de Rivera y Orbaneja as the head of the ruling dictatorial government, and attempted to reduce tensions in the country by repealing some of the harsher measures that Primo de Rivera had introduced. It was also used to refer to the later years of Francisco Franco's Spanish State,[112] and to the hegemonic 70-year rule of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) in Mexico.[113] Augusto Pinochet used the term when he was asked about his regime and the accusations about his government.[citation needed]

Analogously, the same pun is made in Portuguese as ditabranda or ditamole. In February 2009, the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S.Paulo ran a controversial editorial classifying the military dictatorship in Brazil (1964–1985) as a ditabranda.[114]

Guided democracy edit

Guided democracy, also called managed democracy,[115] is a formally democratic government that functions as a de facto authoritarian government or, in some cases, as an autocratic government. Such hybrid regimes are legitimized by elections, but do not change the state's policies, motives, and goals.[116] The concept is also related to semi-democracy, also known as anocracy.

In a guided democracy, the government controls elections such that the people can exercise democratic rights without truly changing public policy. While they follow basic democratic principles, there can be major deviations towards authoritarianism. Under managed democracy, the state's continuous use of propaganda techniques prevents the electorate from having a significant impact on policy.[117]

After World War II, the term was used in Indonesia for the approach to government under the Sukarno administration from 1959 to 1966. It is today widely employed in Russia, where it was introduced into common practice by Kremlin theorists, in particular Gleb Pavlovsky.[118]

Liberal autocracy edit

A liberal autocracy is a non-democratic government that follows the principles of liberalism.[119] Until the 20th century, most countries in Western Europe were "liberal autocracies, or at best, semi-democracies".[120] One example of a "classic liberal autocracy" was the Austro-Hungarian Empire.[121] According to Fareed Zakaria, a more recent example is Hong Kong until 1 July 1997, which was ruled by the British Crown. He says that until 1991 "it had never held a meaningful election, but its government epitomized constitutional liberalism, protecting its citizens' basic rights and administering a fair court system and bureaucracy".[122]

Semi-democracy edit

Anocracy, or semi-democracy,[123] is a form of government that is loosely defined as part democracy and part dictatorship,[124][125] or as a "regime that mixes democratic with autocratic features".[125] Another definition classifies anocracy as "a regime that permits some means of participation through opposition group behavior but that has incomplete development of mechanisms to redress grievances."[126][127] The term "semi-democratic" is reserved for stable regimes that combine democratic and authoritarian elements.[128][129] Scholars distinguish anocracies from autocracies and democracies in their capability to maintain authority, political dynamics, and policy agendas.[130] Similarly, the regimes have democratic institutions that allow for nominal amounts of competition.[124] Such regimes are particularly susceptible to outbreaks of armed conflict and unexpected or adverse changes in leadership.[131]

Defective democracy edit

Defective democracy is a concept that was proposed by the political scientists Wolfgang Merkel, Hans-Jürgen Puhle and Aurel S. Croissant at the beginning of the 21st century to subtilize the distinctions between totalitarian, authoritarian, and democratic political systems.[132][133] It is based on the concept of embedded democracy. While there are four forms of defective democracy, how each nation reaches the point of defectiveness varies.[134] One recurring theme is the geographical location of the nation, which includes the effects of the influence of surrounding nations in the region. Other causes for defective democracies include their path of modernization, level of modernization, economic trends, social capital, civil society, political institutions, and education.

Embedded democracy edit

Embedded democracy is a form of government in which democratic governance is secured by democratic partial regimes.[135][136][137] The term "embedded democracy" was coined by political scientists Wolfgang Merkel, Hans-Jürgen Puhle, and Aurel Croissant, who identified "five interdependent partial regimes" necessary for an embedded democracy: electoral regime, political participation, civil rights, horizontal accountability, and the power of the elected representatives to govern.[138] The five internal regimes work together to check the power of the government, while external regimes also help to secure and stabilize embedded democracies.[139] Together, all the regimes ensure that an embedded democracy is guided by the three fundamental principles of freedom, equality, and control.[140][141]

Competitive authoritarian regimes edit

Competitive Authoritarian Regimes (or Competitive Authoritarianism) is a subtype of Authoritarianism and of the wider Hybrid Regime regime type. This regime type was created to encapsulate states that contained formal democratic institutions that rulers viewed as the principal means of obtaining and exercising legitimate political authority with a meaningful opposition and other semblances of democratic political society. However officials violate elections frequently and interfere with opposition organisations causing the regime to miss the minimum conventional standard for democracy.[142] [143][144][145]

Three main instruments are used within Competitive Authoritarian Regimes to maintain political power: the self-serving use of state institutions (regarding abuses of electoral and judicial institutions such as voter intimidation and voter fraud); the overuse of state resources (to gain influence and/or power over proportional representation media, and use legal resources to disturb constitutional change); and the disruption of civil liberties (such as freedom of speech/press and association).[146]

Currently, within the political sphere, Competitive Authoritarianism has become a crucial regime type that has grown exponentially since the Post-Soviet era in multiple world regions without signs of slowing. On the contrary, there has been growth of Competitive Authoritarianism within previously steadfast democratic regimes, which has been attributed to the recent phenomenon of democratic backsliding.[147] [148]

See also edit

Notes edit

  1. ^ a b Scholars uses a variety of terms to encompass the "greyzones" between full autocracies and full democracies:[1] 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.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]
  2. ^ a b c d e f "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."[3] Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]
  3. ^ Other names include autocratization, democratic decline,[51] de-democratization,[52] democratic erosion,[53] democratic decay,[54] democratic recession,[55] democratic regression,[51] and democratic deconsolidation.[56]

References edit

  1. ^ a b Gagné, Jean-François (Mar 10, 2015), Hybrid Regimes, Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0167
  2. ^ Plattner, Marc F. (1969-12-31). "Is Democracy in Decline?". kipdf.com. from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  3. ^ a b c "Hybrid Concepts and the Concept of Hybridity". European Consortium for Political Research. 2019-09-07. from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  4. ^ Urribarri, Raul A. Sanchez (2011). "Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court". Law & Social Inquiry. 36 (4). Wiley: 854–884. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01253.x. ISSN 0897-6546. JSTOR 41349660. S2CID 232400805. from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  5. ^ 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)
  6. ^ Tlemcani, Rachid (2007-05-29). "Electoral Authoritarianism". Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  7. ^ "What is Hybrid Democracy?". Digital Society School. 2022-05-19. from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  8. ^ a b Zinecker, Heidrun (2009). "Regime-Hybridity in Developing Countries: Achievements and Limitations of New Research on Transitions". International Studies Review. 11 (2). [Oxford University Press, Wiley, The International Studies Association]: 302–331. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00850.x. ISSN 1521-9488. JSTOR 40389063. from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  9. ^ "Index". Dem-Dec. 2017-09-23. from the original on 2022-11-21. Retrieved 2022-11-21.
  10. ^ a b Ekman, Joakim (2009). "Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes". International Political Science Review. 30 (1): 7–31. doi:10.1177/0192512108097054. ISSN 0192-5121. S2CID 145077481.
  11. ^ Baker, A. (2021). Shaping the Developing World: The West, the South, and the Natural World. SAGE. p. 202. ISBN 978-1-0718-0709-5. from the original on 2023-04-23. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  12. ^ "Why Parties and Elections in Dictatorships?". How Dictatorships Work. Cambridge University Press. 2018. pp. 129–153. doi:10.1017/9781316336182.006. ISBN 9781316336182.
  13. ^ Riaz, Ali (2019). "What is a Hybrid Regime?". Voting in a Hybrid Regime. Politics of South Asia. Singapore: Springer. pp. 9–19. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7956-7_2. ISBN 978-981-13-7955-0. ISSN 2523-8345. S2CID 198088445.
  14. ^ 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.
  15. ^ 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.
  16. ^ a b c d Подлесный, Д. В. (2016). Политология: Учебное пособие [Political Science: Textbook] (in Russian). Kharkiv: ХГУ НУА. pp. 62–65/164. from the original on 2023-04-22. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  17. ^ Schulmann, Ekaterina (15 August 2014). "Царство политической имитации" [The kingdom of political imitation]. Ведомости. from the original on 2019-07-30. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  18. ^ 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. from the original on December 9, 2022. Retrieved Nov 27, 2022.
  19. ^ 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.
  20. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2002). "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2). Project Muse: 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 6711009.
  21. ^ "Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War". Department of Political Science. from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  22. ^ "Hybrid Regimes". obo. from the original on 2019-07-29. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  23. ^ Mufti, Mariam (Jun 22, 2018). "What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship?". Politics and Governance. 6 (2). Cogitatio: 112–119. doi:10.17645/pag.v6i2.1400. ISSN 2183-2463. S2CID 158943827.
  24. ^ "Home - IDEA Global State of Democracy Report". International IDEA. from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved Nov 26, 2022.
  25. ^ Schedler, Andreas (Aug 1, 2013). "Shaping the Authoritarian Arena". The Politics of Uncertainty. Oxford University Press. pp. 54–75. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680320.003.0003. ISBN 978-0-19-968032-0.
  26. ^ Brooker, P. (2013). Non-Democratic Regimes. Comparative Government and Politics. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 222. ISBN 978-1-137-38253-5. from the original on December 9, 2022. Retrieved Nov 27, 2022.
  27. ^ Cassani, Andrea (September 3, 2013). "Hybrid what? Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes". International Political Science Review. 35 (5). SAGE: 542–558. doi:10.1177/0192512113495756. ISSN 0192-5121. S2CID 144881011.
  28. ^ Colomer, J. M.; Beale, A. L. (2020). Democracy and Globalization: Anger, Fear, and Hope. Taylor & Francis. p. 180. ISBN 978-1-000-05363-0. from the original on 2023-04-04. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  29. ^ Bogaards, Matthijs (2009). "How to classify hybrid regimes? Defective democracy and electoral authoritarianism". Democratization. 16 (2): 399–423. doi:10.1080/13510340902777800. ISSN 1351-0347. S2CID 145315763.
  30. ^ Norris, Pippa (2017). "Is Western Democracy Backsliding? Diagnosing the Risks". SSRN Electronic Journal. Elsevier. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2933655. ISSN 1556-5068. S2CID 157117940. from the original on 2023-04-04. Retrieved 2022-12-09.
  31. ^ Hale, Henry E. (2010). "Eurasian Polities as Hybrid Regimes: The Case of Putin's Russia". Journal of Eurasian Studies. 1 (1). SAGE Publications: 33–41. doi:10.1016/j.euras.2009.11.001. ISSN 1879-3665.
  32. ^ Hameed, Dr. Muntasser Majeed (2022-06-30). "Hybrid regimes: An Overview". IPRI Journal. 22 (1): 1–24. doi:10.31945/iprij.220101.
  33. ^ Isaac, J. C. (1998). Democracy in Dark Times. Cornell University Press. p. 199. ISBN 978-0-8014-8454-4.
  34. ^ Newton, Kenneth; van Deth, Jan W. (2021). Foundations of comparative politics: democracies of the modern world. Cambridge, United Kingdom. ISBN 978-1-108-92494-8. OCLC 1156414956.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  35. ^ Huntington, S. P. (2012). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late 20th Century. The Julian J. Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series. University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 978-0-8061-8604-7. Retrieved November 16, 2022.
  36. ^ Matthijs Bogaards. 2009. *How to Classify Hybrid Regimes? Defective Democracy and Electoral Authoritarianism". Democratization 16 (2): 399–423.
  37. ^ Gagné, Jean-François (2019-05-02). "Hybrid Regimes". obo. from the original on 2019-07-29. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
  38. ^ Morlino, Leonardo; Berg-Schlosser, Dirk; Badie, Bertrand (6 March 2017). Political Science: A Global Perspective. SAGE. pp. 112ff. ISBN 978-1-5264-1303-1. OCLC 1124515503. from the original on 16 November 2022. Retrieved 16 November 2022.
  39. ^ Andreas Schedler, ed. (2006). Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner.
  40. ^ a b c d Yonatan L. Morse (January 2012). "Review: The Era of Electoral Authoritarianism". World Politics 64(1). pp. 161—198. 2021-07-29 at the Wayback Machine.
  41. ^ Authoritarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. 2018-09-04. ISBN 978-0-19-088020-0. from the original on 2023-03-03. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  42. ^ "Foundations of Comparative Politics". VitalSource (4th ed.). ISBN 9781108831826. from the original on 2023-03-02. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  43. ^ Rocha Menocal, Alina; Fritz, Verena; Rakner, Lise (2008-06-01). "Hybrid regimes and the challenges of deepening and sustaining democracy in developing countries". South African Journal of International Affairs. 15 (1): 29–40. doi:10.1080/10220460802217934. ISSN 1022-0461. S2CID 55589140.
  44. ^ Stroh, Alexander; Elischer, Sebastian; Erdmann, Gero (2012). Origins and Outcomes of Electoral Institutions in African Hybrid Regimes: A Comparative Perspective (Report). German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA). from the original on 2023-03-03. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  45. ^ Ekman, Joakim (2009). "Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes". International Political Science Review. 30 (1): 7–31. doi:10.1177/0192512108097054. ISSN 0192-5121. JSTOR 20445173. S2CID 145077481.
  46. ^ Schmotz, Alexander (2019). "Hybrid Regimes". The Handbook of Political, Social, and Economic Transformation. pp. 521–525. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198829911.003.0053. ISBN 978-0-19-882991-1. from the original on 2023-04-22. Retrieved 2023-03-03. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  47. ^ Treisman, Daniel (2011). "Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime: Russia under Yeltsin and Putin". American Journal of Political Science. 55 (3): 590–609. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00500.x. ISSN 0092-5853. JSTOR 23024939. from the original on 2023-03-24. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  48. ^ Morlino, Leonardo (July 2009). "Are there hybrid regimes? Or are they just an optical illusion?". European Political Science Review. 1 (2): 273–296. doi:10.1017/S1755773909000198. ISSN 1755-7747. S2CID 154947839. from the original on 2023-03-03. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  49. ^ "Global Dashboard". BTI 2022. from the original on April 17, 2023. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
  50. ^ "Nations in Transit Methodology". Freedom House. 2021-12-31. from the original on 2023-03-18. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
  51. ^ a b 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.
  52. ^ 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
  53. ^ 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.
  54. ^ 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.
  55. ^ 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.
  56. ^ 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.
  57. ^ 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.
  58. ^ 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. (PDF) from the original on 6 February 2023. Retrieved 7 November 2022.
  59. ^ 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
  60. ^ 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.
  61. ^ 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 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.
  62. ^ Lindberg, Staffan I. "The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe". Carnegie Europe. from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved 2021-01-27.
  63. ^ 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. from the original on 21 January 2020.
  64. ^ 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.
  65. ^ 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.
  66. ^ Schmitz, Hans Peter (2004). "Domestic and Transnational Perspectives on Democratization". International Studies Review. 6 (3). [International Studies Association, Wiley]: 403–426. doi:10.1111/j.1521-9488.2004.00423.x. ISSN 1521-9488. JSTOR 3699697.
  67. ^ Bogaards, Matthijs (2010). "Measures of Democratization: From Degree to Type to War". Political Research Quarterly. 63 (2). [University of Utah, Sage Publications, Inc.]: 475–488. doi:10.1177/1065912909358578. ISSN 1065-9129. JSTOR 20721505. S2CID 154168435.
  68. ^ a b c d Greenwood, Shannon (2022-12-06). "Appendix A: Classifying democracies". Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. from the original on 2023-03-05. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  69. ^ a b c d "Democracy Index 2021: the China challenge". Economist Intelligence Unit. Feb 15, 2022. from the original on November 8, 2022. Retrieved November 18, 2022.
  70. ^ "The Global State of Democracy". Publications. 2021-11-22. from the original on 2023-03-08. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  71. ^ "FAQs – The Global State of Democracy Indices". International IDEA. 2021-12-31. from the original on 2023-04-04. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  72. ^ International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (2021). The Global State of Democracy 2021: Building resilience in a Pandemic Era. ISBN 978-91-7671-478-2. OCLC 1288461480.
  73. ^ Democracy Report 2023, Table 3, V-Dem Institute, 2023
  74. ^ (PDF). March 2021. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 October 2022. Retrieved 21 April 2023.
  75. ^ Lührmann, Anna; Tannenberg, Marcus; Lindberg, Staffan I. (March 19, 2018). "Regimes of the World (RoW): Opening New Avenues for the Comparative Study of Political Regimes". Politics and Governance. 6 (1). Cogitatio: 60–77. doi:10.17645/pag.v6i1.1214. ISSN 2183-2463.
  76. ^ Boese, Vanessa A.; Lundstedt, Martin; Morrison, Kelly; Sato, Yuko; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2022-05-23). "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.
  77. ^ Freedom House (2019-02-06). "Democracy in Retreat". Freedom in the World. from the original on 2019-02-05. Retrieved 2019-02-06.
  78. ^ a b c "Countries and Territories". Freedom House. from the original on March 26, 2023. Retrieved Nov 25, 2022.
  79. ^ Dobratz, B.A. (2015). Power, Politics, and Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology. Taylor & Francis. p. 47. ISBN 978-1-317-34529-9. from the original on April 30, 2023. Retrieved Apr 30, 2023.
  80. ^ a b Juan José Linz (2000). Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Lynne Rienner Publisher. p. 143. ISBN 978-1-55587-890-0. OCLC 1172052725. from the original on 2023-04-22. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
  81. ^ Jonathan Michie, ed. (3 February 2014). Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences. Routledge. p. 95. ISBN 978-1-135-93226-8. from the original on 22 April 2023. Retrieved 19 November 2022.
  82. ^ Allan Todd; Sally Waller (10 September 2015). Allan Todd; Sally Waller (eds.). History for the IB Diploma Paper 2 AuthoritariaAuthoritarian States (20th Century). Cambridge University Press. pp. 10–. ISBN 978-1-107-55889-2. from the original on 22 April 2023. Retrieved 19 November 2022.
  83. ^ Sondrol, P. C. (2009). "Totalitarian and Authoritarian Dictators: A Comparison of Fidel Castro and Alfredo Stroessner". Journal of Latin American Studies. 23 (3): 599–620. doi:10.1017/S0022216X00015868. JSTOR 157386. S2CID 144333167. from the original on 2023-03-08. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
  84. ^ Schedler, Andreas (2009). "Electoral Authoritarianism". The SAGE Handbook of Comparative Politics. 1 Oliver's Yard, 55 City Road, London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd. pp. 380–393. doi:10.4135/9780857021083.n21. ISBN 9781412919760.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  85. ^ Levitsky and Way 2002 2022-12-30 at the Wayback Machine; T. Karl 1995 2021-03-01 at the Wayback Machine; L. Diamond 1999 2023-01-31 at the Wayback Machine; A. Schedler 2002 2022-12-30 at the Wayback Machine
  86. ^ Barbara Geddes — Why Parties and Elections in Authoritarian Regimes?; Department of Political Science ; March 2006
  87. ^ Brancati, Dawn (May 11, 2014). "Democratic Authoritarianism: Origins and Effects". Annual Review of Political Science. 17 (1). Annual Reviews: 313–326. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-052013-115248. ISSN 1094-2939.
  88. ^ a b Schedler, Andreas (May 15, 2015), "Electoral Authoritarianism", Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Wiley, pp. 1–16, doi:10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0098, ISBN 9781118900772
  89. ^ Гудков, Лев (2009). "Природа "Путинизма"" [The nature of "Putinism"]. Вестник общественного мнения. Данные. Анализ. Дискуссии. 3: 13. from the original on 2019-08-13. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  90. ^ Morse, Yonatan L. (January 2012). "Review: THE ERA OF ELECTORAL AUTHORITARIANISM". World Politics. 64 (1): 161–198. doi:10.1017/S0043887111000281. JSTOR 41428375. S2CID 154433302.
  91. ^ Liboreiro, Jorge; Zsiros, Sandor (2022-09-16). "Hungary is no longer a full democracy but an 'electoral autocracy,' MEPs declare in new report". Euronews.
  92. ^ Bonet, Lluis; Zamorano, Mariano Martín (2021). "Cultural policies in illiberal democracies: a conceptual framework based on the Polish and Hungarian governing experiences". International Journal of Cultural Policy. 27 (5): 559–573. doi:10.1080/10286632.2020.1806829. S2CID 225285163.
  93. ^ Self, Darin (2022-09-26). "Illiberal Democracies and Democratic Backsliding". obo. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
  94. ^ Mounk, Yascha (2020-03-18). The People Vs. Democracy - Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-24502-0.
  95. ^ "Illiberal Democracy and the Struggle on the Right". Journal of Democracy.
  96. ^ Nyyssönen, Heino; Metsälä, Jussi (24 September 2020). "Liberal Democracy and its Current Illiberal Critique: The Emperor's New Clothes?". Europe-Asia Studies. 73 (2): 273–290. doi:10.1080/09668136.2020.1815654. Thus, there is a real danger of 'pseudo-democracy', especially because elections can be manipulated and often are. In these cases, elections and other democratic institutions are simply adapted patterns of authoritarianism, not democracy in some imperfect form, having the dual purpose of legitimising the incumbent's rule and guarding it from any danger of democratic change.
  97. ^ Sajó 2021, pp. 23–24.
  98. ^ Wagrandl, Ulrich (2021). "A Theory of Illiberal Democracy". Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism. Routledge. p. 98. ISBN 978-1-000-47945-4.
  99. ^ Sajó 2021, p. 24.
  100. ^ Schedler, Andreas (2006). Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Lynne Rienner Publishers. ISBN 978-1-58826-415-2.
  101. ^ Diamond, Larry (April 2002). "Assessing the Quality of Democracy". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2): 51–65.
  102. ^ DeVotta, Neil (2010). "From civil war to soft authoritarianism: Sri Lanka in comparative perspective". Global Change, Peace & Security. 22 (3): 331–343. doi:10.1080/14781158.2010.510268. S2CID 143630796.
  103. ^ Christie, Kenneth (1998). "Illiberal Democracy, Modernisation and Southeast Asia". Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory (91): 102–118. ISSN 0040-5817. JSTOR 41802094.
  104. ^ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)". Politeia. 87 (4): 133–149 (p. 136). doi:10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149.
  105. ^ Ostroverkhov, A. A. (2017). "In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (I)". Politeia. 86 (3): 136–153 (p. 148). doi:10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-136-153.
  106. ^ "Natural Governing Party". The Dictionary of Canadian Politics. Campbell Strategies. 2022. Retrieved 5 December 2022.
  107. ^ "The Wonder Boy". Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times. Knopf Doubleday. 2017. p. 338. ISBN 9780307743879. The Republicans had come to see themselves as the natural governing party of the United States. Leaving aside the Cleveland and Wilson accidents, they had been in power since Grant's day. If Republican delegates declared an uncharismatic Hoover worthy of the presidency, voters were unlikely to argue.
  108. ^ Chin, James (15 November 2022). "UMNO intends to return as Malaysia's natural governing party". Nikkei. Retrieved 5 December 2022.
  109. ^ a b O'Donnell, Guillermo (January 1994). "Delegative Democracy". Journal of Democracy. 5 (1): 55–69. doi:10.1353/jod.1994.0010. S2CID 8558740.
  110. ^ O'Donnell, Guillermo (1992). Delegative Democracy?. University of Notre Dame: Kellogg Institute for International Studies.
  111. ^ Kestler, Thomas (2011). "Demokratische Dilemmata: Zum Verhältnis zwischen Repräsentation und Partizipation". Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft. 21 (3): 24. doi:10.5771/1430-6387-2011-3-391. ISSN 1430-6387.
  112. ^ Jackson, Gabriel (Spring 1976). "The Franco Era in Historical Perspective". The Centennial Review. 20 (2): 103–127. JSTOR 23738276.
  113. ^ Vaughan, Mary Kay (2018). "Mexico, 1940–1968 and Beyond: Perfect Dictatorship? Dictablanda? or PRI State Hegemony?" (PDF). Latin American Research Review. 53 (1): 170. ISSN 0023-8791. JSTOR 26744297.
  114. ^ Ribeiro, Igor (February 25, 2009). (in Portuguese). Portal Imprensa. Archived from the original on 2012-02-01.
  115. ^ Rohmann, C (2000) A World of Ideas : The Dictionary of Important Ideas and Thinkers, Ballantine Books ISBN 978-0-345-43706-8
  116. ^ Wolin, Sheldon S. (2008). . Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13566-3. Archived from the original on 2016-04-20. Retrieved 2012-03-11. p. 47
  117. ^ Wolin, Sheldon S. (2008). . Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13566-3. Archived from the original on 2016-04-20. Retrieved 2012-03-11. p. 60
  118. ^ Weir, Fred (October 1, 2003). "Kremlin lobs another shot at marketplace of ideas". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 2009-11-10.
  119. ^ Plattner, Marc F. (1998). "Liberalism and Democracy: Can't Have One without the Other". Foreign Affairs. 77 (2). Council on Foreign Relations: 171–180. ISSN 0015-7120. JSTOR 20048858. Retrieved 2023-06-03.
  120. ^ Zakaria, Fareed (November/December 1997). "The Rise of Illiberal Democracy". Foreign Affairs. 15 October 2005 at the Wayback Machine
  121. ^ Myers, Sondra (2002). The Democracy Reader. IDEA. p. 174. ISBN 978-0-9702130-3-7.
  122. ^ Zakaria, Fareed (1997). "The Rise of Illiberal Democracy". Foreign Affairs. 76 (6). Council on Foreign Relations: 22–43. ISSN 0015-7120. JSTOR 20048274. Retrieved 2023-06-03.
  123. ^ Quigley, Carroll (1983). Weapons systems and political stability: a history. University Press of America. p. 307. ISBN 978-0-8191-2947-5. Retrieved 20 May 2013.
  124. ^ a b Gandhi, Jennifer; Vreeland, James (June 2008). "Political Institutions and Civil War: Unpacking Anocracy". Journal of Conflict Solutions. 52 (3): 401–425. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.584.1330. doi:10.1177/0022002708315594. S2CID 42071287.
  125. ^ a b Fearon, James; Laitan, David (February 2003). "Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War". American Political Science Review. 97: 75–90. doi:10.1017/S0003055403000534. S2CID 8303905.
  126. ^ Regan, Patrick; Bell, Sam (December 2010). "Changing Lanes or Stuck in the Middle: Why Are Anocracies More Prone to Civil Wars?". Political Science Quarterly. 63 (4): 747–759. doi:10.1177/1065912909336274. S2CID 154960398.
  127. ^ Benson, Michelle; Kugler, Jackek (April 1998). "Power Parity, Democracy, and Severity of Internal Violence". Journal of Conflict Resolution. 42 (2): 196–209. doi:10.1177/0022002798042002004. S2CID 143823486.
  128. ^ Montesquieu. "2–3". Spirit of the Laws. Vol. II.
  129. ^ Everdell, William R. (2000-04-15). The End of Kings: A History of Republics and Republicans. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-22482-4.
  130. ^ Marshall, Monty G.; Gurr, Ted Robert (2003). Peace and conflict 2003: A global survey of armed conflicts, self-determination movements, and democracy (PDF) (Report). College Park: Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland.
  131. ^ Marshall, Monty G.; Cole, Benjamin R. (23 July 2014). "Global Report 2014 - Conflict, Governance, and State Fragility" (PDF). Center for Systemic Peace.
  132. ^ Романюк, О. І. (2017-11-24). "WHAT IS «DEFECTIVE DEMOCRACIES» AND WHAT THEY ARE". The Bulletin of Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University. Series: Philosophy, Philosophies of Law, Political Science, Sociology. 2 (33). Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University: 114–122. doi:10.21564/2075-7190.33.109732. ISSN 2663-5704.
  133. ^ Croissant, Aurel; Merkel, Wolfgang (2019-02-13). "Defective Democracy". The Handbook of Political, Social, and Economic Transformation. Oxford University Press. pp. 437–446. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198829911.003.0041. ISBN 978-0-19-882991-1.
  134. ^ Merkel, Wolfgang (2004-01-01). "Embedded and defective democracies". Democratization. 11 (5). Informa UK Limited: 33–58. doi:10.1080/13510340412331304598. hdl:10419/251950. ISSN 1351-0347. S2CID 149654333.
  135. ^ Merkel, Wolfgang (December 2004). "Embedded and Defective Democracies" (PDF). Democratization. 11 (5). Retrieved 6 November 2014.
  136. ^ Buhllman, Mark; Merkel, Wolfgang; Wessels, Bernhard (April 2008). "The Quality of Democracy: Democracy Barometer for Established Democracies". Hertie School of Governance - Working Papers.
  137. ^ Merkel, Wolfgang; Croissant, Aurel (December 2004). "Conclusion: Good and Defective Democracies". Democratization. 11 (5): 199–213. doi:10.1080/13510340412331304651. S2CID 218522553.
  138. ^ Merkel (2004) p.33
  139. ^ Merkel (2004) p.36-27
  140. ^ Merkel (2004) p.43-45
  141. ^ Buhllman et al. (2008) p.7
  142. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan A. (April 2002). "Elections Without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2): 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026. ISSN 1086-3214.
  143. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan A. (2010-08-16). Competitive Authoritarianism. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511781353. ISBN 978-0-521-88252-1.
  144. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2020). "The New Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 31 (1): 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2020.0004. ISSN 1086-3214.
  145. ^ Diamond, Larry (April 2002). "Elections Without Democracy: Thinking About Hybrid Regimes". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2): 21–35. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0025. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 154815836.
  146. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan A. (2010-08-16). Competitive Authoritarianism. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511781353. ISBN 978-0-521-88252-1.
  147. ^ Mufti, Mariam (2018-06-22). "What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship?". Politics and Governance. 6 (2): 112–119. doi:10.17645/pag.v6i2.1400. ISSN 2183-2463.
  148. ^ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2020). "The New Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 31 (1): 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2020.0004. ISSN 1086-3214.

Further reading edit

Contemporary analysts edit

  • Herre, Bastian; Roser, Max (2013-03-15). "Democracy". Our World in Data. from the original on 2022-11-18. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  • Balderacchi, Claudio (2022-04-14). "Overlooked forms of non-democracy? Insights from hybrid regimes". Third World Quarterly. 43 (6): 1441–1459. doi:10.1080/01436597.2022.2059460. ISSN 0143-6597. S2CID 248208017.
  • Ekman, Joakim (2009). "Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes". International Political Science Review. 30 (1). Sage Publications, Ltd.: 7–31. doi:10.1177/0192512108097054. ISSN 0192-5121. JSTOR 20445173. S2CID 145077481.
  • Lührmann, Anna; Tannenberg, Marcus; Lindberg, Staffan I. (2018-03-19). "Regimes of the World (RoW): Opening New Avenues for the Comparative Study of Political Regimes". Politics and Governance. 6 (1): 60–77. doi:10.17645/pag.v6i1.1214. ISSN 2183-2463. from the original on 2022-11-18. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  • Sajó, András (2021). Ruling by Cheating: Governance in Illiberal Democracy. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-84463-5.
  • Skaaning, Svend-Erik (2021), Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy (LIED) dataset v6.0, Harvard Dataverse, doi:10.7910/DVN/WPKNIT
  • Schedler, A. (2013). The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism. Oxford Studies in Democratization. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-166983-5. from the original on 2023-04-04. Retrieved 2022-11-19.
  • "BTI 2022 Benin Country Report". BTI 2022. 2021-02-19. from the original on 2022-11-18. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  • Beatriz Magaloni. 2010. "The Game of Electoral Fraud and the Ousting of Authoritarian Rule." 2019-07-29 at the Wayback Machine American Journal of Political Science, 54 (3): 751-65.
  • Weyland, Kurt. 2024. "Hybrid Regimes in Historical Perspective." in The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics. Oxford University Press.

Research history edit

The researchers conducted a comparative analysis of political regimes around the world (Samuel Finer 1970), in developing countries (Almond and Coleman, 1960 2023-04-04 at the Wayback Machine), among Latin America (Collier 1979) and West Africa regimes (Zolberg, 1966). Types of non-democratic regimes are described (Linz, 2000, originally published in 1975 and Perlmutter, 1981). Huntington and Moore (Huntington and Moore, 1970) discuss the one-party system issue Hermet (Guy Hermet, Rose, & Rouquie 1978) explores how elections are held in such authoritarian regimes,which are nominally democratic institutions.

"Hybrid regimes" (Diamond 2002), "competitive authoritarianism" (Levitsky and Way 2002 2019-08-08 at the Wayback Machine) and "electoral authoritarianism" (Schedler, 2006) as well as how officials who came to power in an undemocratic way form election rules (Lust-Okar and Jamal, 2002 2019-07-30 at the Wayback Machine), institutionalize electoral frauds (Lehoucq 2003 2022-03-13 at the Wayback Machine, Schedler 2002 2019-08-26 at the Wayback Machine) and manipulate the economy (L. Blaydes 2023-04-04 at the Wayback Machine 2006, ) in order to win the election and stay in power.

External links edit

April 20, 2024
hybrid, regime, hybrid, regime, type, political, system, often, created, result, incomplete, democratic, transition, from, authoritarian, regime, democratic, vice, versa, categorized, having, combination, autocratic, features, with, democratic, ones, simultane. A hybrid regime a 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 b Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections b Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro states 18 8 19 Although these regimes experience civil unrest they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time b There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War 20 21 The term hybrid regime arises from a polymorphic view of political regimes that opposes the dichotomy of autocracy or democracy 22 Modern scholarly analysis of hybrid regimes focuses attention on the decorative nature of democratic institutions elections do not lead to a change of power different media broadcast the government point of view and the opposition in parliament votes the same way as the ruling party among others 23 from which it is concluded that democratic backsliding a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of hybrid regimes b 24 Some scholars also contend that hybrid regimes may imitate a full dictatorship 25 26 Contents 1 Definition 1 1 History 2 Indicators 2 1 Transition types 2 1 1 Autocratization 2 1 2 Democratisation 3 Measurement 3 1 Democracy Index 3 2 Global State of Democracy Report 3 3 V Dem Democracy Indices 3 4 Freedom House 4 Typology 4 1 Electoral authoritarianism 4 2 Electoral autocracy 4 3 Illiberal democracy 4 4 Dominant party system 4 5 Delegative democracy 4 6 Dictablanda 4 7 Guided democracy 4 8 Liberal autocracy 4 9 Semi democracy 4 10 Defective democracy 4 11 Embedded democracy 4 12 Competitive authoritarian regimes 5 See also 6 Notes 7 References 8 Further reading 8 1 Contemporary analysts 8 2 Research history 9 External linksDefinition editScholars vary on the definition of hybrid regimes based on their primary academic discipline 27 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 3 Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system 10 In 1995 Terry Karl introduced the notion of hybrid regime which was simply defined as combining democratic and authoritarian elements 28 According to professor Matthijs Bogaards hybrid types are 29 not diminished subtypes since they do not lack the full development of a characteristic but rather they exhibit a mixture of characteristics of both basic types so that they simultaneously combine autocratic and democratic dimensions or institutions Pippa Norris defined hybrid regimes as 30 a system characterized by weak checks and balances on executive powers flawed or even suspended elections fragmented opposition forces state restrictions on media freedoms intellectuals and civil society organizations curbs on the independence of the judiciary and disregard for rule of law the abuse of human rights by the security forces and tolerance of authoritarian values Henry E Hale defined hybrid regimes as 31 a political regime that combines some democratic and some autocratic elements in a significant manner It is not however a mere half way category hybrid regimes have their own distinct dynamics that do not simply amount to half of what we would see in a democracy plus half of what we would see in an autocracy Leonardo Morlino defined hybrid regimes as 32 a set of institutions that have been persistent be they stable or unstable for about a decade have been preceded by authoritarianism a traditional regime possibly with colonial characteristics or even a minimal democracy and are characterized by the break up of limited pluralism and forms of independent autonomous participation but the absence of at least one of the four aspects of a minimal democracy Professor Jeffrey C Isaac defined hybrid regimes as 33 Hybrid regimes have the common feature that they all have competition although the political elite in power deliberately rearranges state regulations and the political arena as to grant itself undue advantages History edit nbsp Countries autocratizing red or democratizing blue substantially and significantly 2010 2020 Countries in grey are substantially unchanged 34 The third wave of democratization from the 1970s onward has led to the emergence of hybrid regimes that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian 35 Neither the concept of illiberal democracy nor the concept of electoral authoritarianism fully describes these hybrid regimes 36 37 Since the end of the Cold War such regimes have become the most common among undemocratic countries 38 39 At the end of the process of transformation of authoritarian regimes limited elections appear in one way or another when liberalization occurs Liberal democracy has always been assumed while in practice this process basically froze halfway 40 In relation to regimes that were previously called transitional in the 1980s the term hybrid regime began to be used and was strengthened according to Thomas Carothers because the majority of transitional countries are neither completely dictatorial nor aspiring to democracy and by and large they can not be called transitional They are located in the politically stable gray zone changes in which may not take place for decades verification needed 16 Thus he stated that hybrid regimes must be considered without the assumption that they will ultimately become democracies These hybrid regimes were called semi authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism 40 Hybrid regimes have evolved to lean more authoritarian while keeping some democratic traits 41 One of the main issues with authoritarian rule is the ability to control the threats from the masses and democratic elements in hybrid regimes can reduce social tension between the masses and the elite 42 After the third wave of democratization some regimes became stuck in the transition to democracy causing the creation of weak democratic institutions 43 This results from a lack of institutional ownership during critical points in the transition period leading the regime into a gray zone between democracy and autocracy 44 These developments have caused some scholars to believe that hybrid regimes are not poorly functioning democracies but rather new forms of authoritarian regimes 45 Defective democratic stability is an indicator to explain and measure these new forms of autocracies 46 Additionally approval ratings of political leaders play an important role in these types of regimes and democratic elements can drive up the ratings of a strongman leader creating a tool not utilized previously 47 Today hybrid regime is a term used to explain a growing field of political development where authoritarian leaders incorporate elements of democracy that stabilize their regimes 48 Indicators edit nbsp Global trend report Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2022 49 According to Guillermo O Donnell Philippe C Schmitter Larry Diamond and Thomas Carothers signs of a hybrid regime include 16 50 The presence of external attributes of democracy elections multi party system legal opposition A low degree of representation of the interests of citizens in the process of political decision making incapacity of associations of citizens for example trade unions or that they are in state control A low level of political participation The declarative nature of political rights and freedoms formally there is in fact difficult implementation A low level of trust in political institutions by the citizenry Transition types edit Further information Democratic transition Autocratization edit nbsp Since c 2010 the number of countries autocratizing blue is higher than those democratizing yellow Democratic backsliding c is a process of regime change toward autocracy that makes the exercise of political power by the public more arbitrary and repressive 57 58 59 This process typically restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection 60 61 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 democracies especially freedom of expression 62 63 Democratic backsliding is the opposite of democratization Democratisation edit Democratization or democratisation is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic political regime including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction 64 65 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 66 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 67 Measurement editMain article Democracy indices Further information Democratic backsliding by country There are various democratic freedom indices produced by intergovernmental and non governmental organizations that publish assessments of the worlds political systems according to their own definitions 68 Democracy Index edit nbsp Democracy index types According to the Democracy Index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit there are 34 hybrid regimes representing approximately 20 of countries encompassing 17 2 to 20 5 of the world s population 69 The EIU Democracy Index is based on ratings across 60 indicators grouped into five categories electoral process and pluralism civil liberties the functioning of government political participation and political culture 68 The Democracy Index defines hybrid regimes with the following characteristics 69 Electoral fraud or irregularities occur regularly Pressure is applied to political opposition Corruption is widespread and rule of law tends to be weak Media is pressured and harassed There are issues in the functioning of governance nbsp The 2021 Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index 69 Full democracies 9 01 10 8 01 9 Flawed democracies 7 01 8 6 01 7 Hybrid regimes 5 01 6 4 01 5 Authoritarian regimes 3 01 4 2 01 3 0 2 00 As of 2021 the countries considered hybrid regimes by the Democracy Index are 69 Bangladesh El Salvador North Macedonia Ukraine Moldova Montenegro Malawi Fiji Bhutan Madagascar Senegal Hong Kong Honduras Armenia Liberia Georgia Nepal Tanzania Bolivia Kenya Morocco Guatemala Uganda Zambia Sierra Leone Benin Gambia Turkey Pakistan Haiti Kyrgyzstan Lebanon Ivory Coast Nigeria Global State of Democracy Report edit According to the Global State of Democracy Report by International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance IDEA there are 20 hybrid regimes 70 International IDEA compiles data from 12 different data sources including expert surveys and observational data includes the extent to which voting rights are inclusive political parties are free to form and campaign for office elections are free and political offices are filled through elections 68 IDEA defined hybrid regimes as 71 Combination of the elements of authoritarianism with democracy These often adopt the formal characteristics of democracy while allowing little real competition for power with weak respect for basic political and civil rights As of 2021 the countries considered hybrid regimes by the Global State of Democracy Report are 72 Angola Benin Cote d Ivoire Democratic Republic of the Congo Ethiopia Gabon Jordan Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Libya Mauritania Morocco Mozambique Nigeria Serbia Singapore Tanzania Togo Tunisia Turkey V Dem Democracy Indices edit nbsp Map of V Dem Electoral Democracy Index in 2023 73 0 900 1 000 0 800 0 899 0 700 0 799 0 600 0 699 0 500 0 599 0 400 0 499 0 300 0 399 0 200 0 299 0 100 0 199 0 000 0 099 No data According to the V Dem Democracy Indices compiled by the V Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg there are 65 hybrid regimes 74 V Dem s Regimes of the World indicators identify four political regimes closed autocracies electoral autocracies electoral democracies and liberal democracies 75 According to the V Dem Institute 76 In 2021 70 of the world population 5 4 billion people live in closed or electoral autocracies A mere 13 of the world s population reside in liberal democracies and 16 in electoral democracies Freedom House edit nbsp Freedom House ratings for European Union and surrounding states in 2019 77 Free Partly free Not free Freedom House measures the level of political and economic governance in 29 countries from Central Europe to Central Asia 78 Freedom House assign scores to countries and territories across the globe on 10 indicators of political rights e g whether there is a realistic opportunity for opposition parties to gain power through elections and 15 indicators of civil liberties e g whether there is a free and independent media 68 Freedom House classifies transitional or hybrid regimes as 78 Countries that are typically electoral democracies where democratic institutions are fragile and substantial challenges to the protection of political rights and civil liberties exist In 2022 Freedom House classified 11 of 29 countries analyzed as Transitional or Hybrid Regimes 78 Armenia Georgia Moldova Bosnia and Herzegovina Kosovo Ukraine Hungary Albania Serbia North Macedonia MontenegroTypology editFurther information List of countries by system of government and List of forms of government nbsp Countries in green claim to be a type of democracy while countries in red do not Only Saudi Arabia Oman the UAE Qatar Brunei Afghanistan and the Vatican do not claim to be democratic According to Yale professor Juan Jose Linz there a three main types of political systems today democracies totalitarian regimes and sitting between these two authoritarian regimes with many different terms that describe specific types of hybrid regimes b a 79 16 80 81 1 Academics generally refer to a full dictatorship as either a form of authoritarianism or totalitarianism over a hybrid system 82 80 83 Authoritarian governments that conduct elections are in many scholars view not hybrids but are successful well institutionalized stable authoritarian regimes b 84 85 86 Democratic elements can simultaneously serve authoritarian purposes and contribute to democratization 87 Electoral authoritarianism edit Electoral authoritarianism means that democratic institutions are imitative and due to numerous systematic violations of liberal democratic norms in fact adhere to authoritarian methods 88 Electoral authoritarianism can be competitive and hegemonic and the latter does not necessarily mean election irregularities 40 A Schedler calls electoral authoritarianism a new form of authoritarian regime not a hybrid regime or illiberal democracy 40 Moreover a purely authoritarian regime does not need elections as a source of legitimacy 89 while non alternative elections appointed at the request of the ruler are not a sufficient condition for considering the regime conducting them to be hybrid 88 Electoral autocracy edit Electoral autocracy is a hybrid regime in which democratic institutions are imitative and adhere to authoritarian methods In these regimes regular elections are held but they are accused of failing to reach democratic standards of freedom and fairness 90 91 Illiberal democracy edit The term illiberal democracy describes a governing system that hides its nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures 92 There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists 93 The rulers of an illiberal democracy may ignore or bypass constitutional limits on their power 94 While liberal democracies protect individual rights and freedoms illiberal democracies do not 95 Elections in an illiberal democracy are often manipulated or rigged being used to legitimize and consolidate the incumbent rather than to choose the country s leaders and policies 96 According to jurist Andras Sajo illiberal democracy should be counted as a type of democracy because it is democratic in a plebiscitarian sense 97 while political scientist Ulrich Wagrandl argues that illiberal democracy is actually more true to democracy s roots 98 Other theorists say that classifying illiberal democracy as democratic is overly sympathetic to the illiberal regimes 99 and therefore prefer terms such as electoral authoritarianism 100 competitive authoritarianism 101 or soft authoritarianism 102 103 Dominant party system edit A dominant party system or one party dominant system is a political occurrence in which a single political party continuously dominates election results over running opposition groups or parties 104 Any ruling party staying in power for more than one consecutive term may be considered a dominant party also referred to as a predominant or hegemonic party 105 Some dominant parties were called the natural governing party given their length of time in power 106 107 108 Delegative democracy edit In political science delegative democracy is a mode of governance close to Caesarism Bonapartism or caudillismo with a strong leader in a newly created otherwise democratic government The concept arose from Argentinian political scientist Guillermo O Donnell who notes that representative democracy as it exists is usually linked solely to highly developed capitalist countries However newly installed democracies do not seem to be on a path of becoming fully representative democracies 109 O Donnell calls the former delegative democracies for they are not fully consolidated democracies but may be enduring For a representative democracy to exist there must be an important interaction effect The successful cases have featured a decisive coalition of broadly supported political leaders who take great care in creating and strengthening democratic political institutions 109 By contrast the delegative form is partially democratic for the president has a free rein to act and justify his or her acts in the name of the people The president can govern as he sees fit even if it does not resemble promises made while running for election The president claims to represent the whole nation rather than just a political party embodying even the legislature and the judiciary 110 O Donnell s notion of delegative democracy has been criticized as being misleading because he renders the delegative model that is core to many current democratic governments worldwide into a negative concept 111 Dictablanda edit Dictablanda is a dictatorship in which civil liberties are allegedly preserved rather than destroyed The word dictablanda is a pun on the Spanish word dictadura dictatorship replacing dura which by itself is a word meaning hard with blanda meaning soft The term was first used in Spain in 1930 when Damaso Berenguer replaced Miguel Primo de Rivera y Orbaneja as the head of the ruling dictatorial government and attempted to reduce tensions in the country by repealing some of the harsher measures that Primo de Rivera had introduced It was also used to refer to the later years of Francisco Franco s Spanish State 112 and to the hegemonic 70 year rule of the Institutional Revolutionary Party PRI in Mexico 113 Augusto Pinochet used the term when he was asked about his regime and the accusations about his government citation needed Analogously the same pun is made in Portuguese as ditabranda or ditamole In February 2009 the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S Paulo ran a controversial editorial classifying the military dictatorship in Brazil 1964 1985 as a ditabranda 114 Guided democracy edit Guided democracy also called managed democracy 115 is a formally democratic government that functions as a de facto authoritarian government or in some cases as an autocratic government Such hybrid regimes are legitimized by elections but do not change the state s policies motives and goals 116 The concept is also related to semi democracy also known as anocracy In a guided democracy the government controls elections such that the people can exercise democratic rights without truly changing public policy While they follow basic democratic principles there can be major deviations towards authoritarianism Under managed democracy the state s continuous use of propaganda techniques prevents the electorate from having a significant impact on policy 117 After World War II the term was used in Indonesia for the approach to government under the Sukarno administration from 1959 to 1966 It is today widely employed in Russia where it was introduced into common practice by Kremlin theorists in particular Gleb Pavlovsky 118 Liberal autocracy edit A liberal autocracy is a non democratic government that follows the principles of liberalism 119 Until the 20th century most countries in Western Europe were liberal autocracies or at best semi democracies 120 One example of a classic liberal autocracy was the Austro Hungarian Empire 121 According to Fareed Zakaria a more recent example is Hong Kong until 1 July 1997 which was ruled by the British Crown He says that until 1991 it had never held a meaningful election but its government epitomized constitutional liberalism protecting its citizens basic rights and administering a fair court system and bureaucracy 122 Semi democracy edit Anocracy or semi democracy 123 is a form of government that is loosely defined as part democracy and part dictatorship 124 125 or as a regime that mixes democratic with autocratic features 125 Another definition classifies anocracy as a regime that permits some means of participation through opposition group behavior but that has incomplete development of mechanisms to redress grievances 126 127 The term semi democratic is reserved for stable regimes that combine democratic and authoritarian elements 128 129 Scholars distinguish anocracies from autocracies and democracies in their capability to maintain authority political dynamics and policy agendas 130 Similarly the regimes have democratic institutions that allow for nominal amounts of competition 124 Such regimes are particularly susceptible to outbreaks of armed conflict and unexpected or adverse changes in leadership 131 Defective democracy edit Defective democracy is a concept that was proposed by the political scientists Wolfgang Merkel Hans Jurgen Puhle and Aurel S Croissant at the beginning of the 21st century to subtilize the distinctions between totalitarian authoritarian and democratic political systems 132 133 It is based on the concept of embedded democracy While there are four forms of defective democracy how each nation reaches the point of defectiveness varies 134 One recurring theme is the geographical location of the nation which includes the effects of the influence of surrounding nations in the region Other causes for defective democracies include their path of modernization level of modernization economic trends social capital civil society political institutions and education Embedded democracy edit Embedded democracy is a form of government in which democratic governance is secured by democratic partial regimes 135 136 137 The term embedded democracy was coined by political scientists Wolfgang Merkel Hans Jurgen Puhle and Aurel Croissant who identified five interdependent partial regimes necessary for an embedded democracy electoral regime political participation civil rights horizontal accountability and the power of the elected representatives to govern 138 The five internal regimes work together to check the power of the government while external regimes also help to secure and stabilize embedded democracies 139 Together all the regimes ensure that an embedded democracy is guided by the three fundamental principles of freedom equality and control 140 141 Competitive authoritarian regimes edit Competitive Authoritarian Regimes or Competitive Authoritarianism is a subtype of Authoritarianism and of the wider Hybrid Regime regime type This regime type was created to encapsulate states that contained formal democratic institutions that rulers viewed as the principal means of obtaining and exercising legitimate political authority with a meaningful opposition and other semblances of democratic political society However officials violate elections frequently and interfere with opposition organisations causing the regime to miss the minimum conventional standard for democracy 142 143 144 145 Three main instruments are used within Competitive Authoritarian Regimes to maintain political power the self serving use of state institutions regarding abuses of electoral and judicial institutions such as voter intimidation and voter fraud the overuse of state resources to gain influence and or power over proportional representation media and use legal resources to disturb constitutional change and the disruption of civil liberties such as freedom of speech press and association 146 Currently within the political sphere Competitive Authoritarianism has become a crucial regime type that has grown exponentially since the Post Soviet era in multiple world regions without signs of slowing On the contrary there has been growth of Competitive Authoritarianism within previously steadfast democratic regimes which has been attributed to the recent phenomenon of democratic backsliding 147 148 See also edit nbsp Politics portal Authoritarian democracy Embedded democracy Delegative democracy Types of democracy Democracy Dictatorship Index Hybrid institutions and governanceNotes edit a b Scholars uses a variety of terms to encompass the greyzones between full autocracies and full democracies 1 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a b c d e f 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 3 Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Other names include autocratization democratic decline 51 de democratization 52 democratic erosion 53 democratic decay 54 democratic recession 55 democratic regression 51 and democratic deconsolidation 56 References edit a b Gagne Jean Francois Mar 10 2015 Hybrid Regimes Oxford University Press OUP doi 10 1093 obo 9780199756223 0167 Plattner Marc F 1969 12 31 Is Democracy in Decline kipdf com Archived from the original on 2023 04 06 Retrieved 2022 12 27 a b c 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 Urribarri Raul A Sanchez 2011 Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court Law amp Social Inquiry 36 4 Wiley 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 Gobel 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 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location link Tlemcani Rachid 2007 05 29 Electoral Authoritarianism Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Archived from the original on 2023 04 06 Retrieved 2022 11 16 What is Hybrid Democracy Digital Society School 2022 05 19 Archived from the original on 2023 04 05 Retrieved 2022 11 16 a b Zinecker Heidrun 2009 Regime Hybridity in Developing Countries Achievements and Limitations of New Research on Transitions International Studies Review 11 2 Oxford University Press Wiley The International Studies Association 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 Index Dem Dec 2017 09 23 Archived from the original on 2022 11 21 Retrieved 2022 11 21 a b Ekman Joakim 2009 Political Participation and Regime Stability A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes International Political Science Review 30 1 7 31 doi 10 1177 0192512108097054 ISSN 0192 5121 S2CID 145077481 Baker A 2021 Shaping the Developing World The West the South and the Natural World SAGE p 202 ISBN 978 1 0718 0709 5 Archived from the original on 2023 04 23 Retrieved 2023 04 23 Why Parties and Elections in Dictatorships How Dictatorships Work Cambridge University Press 2018 pp 129 153 doi 10 1017 9781316336182 006 ISBN 9781316336182 Riaz Ali 2019 What is a Hybrid Regime Voting in a Hybrid Regime Politics of South Asia Singapore Springer pp 9 19 doi 10 1007 978 981 13 7956 7 2 ISBN 978 981 13 7955 0 ISSN 2523 8345 S2CID 198088445 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 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 a b c d Podlesnyj D V 2016 Politologiya Uchebnoe posobie Political Science Textbook in Russian Kharkiv HGU NUA pp 62 65 164 Archived from the original on 2023 04 22 Retrieved 2019 08 13 Schulmann Ekaterina 15 August 2014 Carstvo politicheskoj imitacii The kingdom of political imitation Vedomosti Archived from the original on 2019 07 30 Retrieved 2019 08 13 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 amp Francis p 212 ISBN 978 1 317 70018 0 Archived from the original on December 9 2022 Retrieved Nov 27 2022 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 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan 2002 The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism Journal of Democracy 13 2 Project Muse 51 65 doi 10 1353 jod 2002 0026 ISSN 1086 3214 S2CID 6711009 Competitive Authoritarianism Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War Department of Political Science Archived from the original on 2023 04 06 Retrieved 2022 11 16 Hybrid Regimes obo Archived from the original on 2019 07 29 Retrieved 2019 08 13 Mufti Mariam Jun 22 2018 What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship Politics and Governance 6 2 Cogitatio 112 119 doi 10 17645 pag v6i2 1400 ISSN 2183 2463 S2CID 158943827 Home IDEA Global State of Democracy Report International IDEA Archived from the original on April 4 2023 Retrieved Nov 26 2022 Schedler Andreas Aug 1 2013 Shaping the Authoritarian Arena The Politics of Uncertainty Oxford University Press pp 54 75 doi 10 1093 acprof oso 9780199680320 003 0003 ISBN 978 0 19 968032 0 Brooker P 2013 Non Democratic Regimes Comparative Government and Politics Bloomsbury Publishing p 222 ISBN 978 1 137 38253 5 Archived from the original on December 9 2022 Retrieved Nov 27 2022 Cassani Andrea September 3 2013 Hybrid what Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes International Political Science Review 35 5 SAGE 542 558 doi 10 1177 0192512113495756 ISSN 0192 5121 S2CID 144881011 Colomer J M Beale A L 2020 Democracy and Globalization Anger Fear and Hope Taylor amp Francis p 180 ISBN 978 1 000 05363 0 Archived from the original on 2023 04 04 Retrieved 2022 12 27 Bogaards Matthijs 2009 How to classify hybrid regimes Defective democracy and electoral authoritarianism Democratization 16 2 399 423 doi 10 1080 13510340902777800 ISSN 1351 0347 S2CID 145315763 Norris Pippa 2017 Is Western Democracy Backsliding Diagnosing the Risks SSRN Electronic Journal Elsevier doi 10 2139 ssrn 2933655 ISSN 1556 5068 S2CID 157117940 Archived from the original on 2023 04 04 Retrieved 2022 12 09 Hale Henry E 2010 Eurasian Polities as Hybrid Regimes The Case of Putin s Russia Journal of Eurasian Studies 1 1 SAGE Publications 33 41 doi 10 1016 j euras 2009 11 001 ISSN 1879 3665 Hameed Dr Muntasser Majeed 2022 06 30 Hybrid regimes An Overview IPRI Journal 22 1 1 24 doi 10 31945 iprij 220101 Isaac J C 1998 Democracy in Dark Times Cornell University Press p 199 ISBN 978 0 8014 8454 4 Newton Kenneth van Deth Jan W 2021 Foundations of comparative politics democracies of the modern world Cambridge United Kingdom ISBN 978 1 108 92494 8 OCLC 1156414956 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location missing publisher link Huntington S P 2012 The Third Wave Democratization in the Late 20th Century The Julian J Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series University of Oklahoma Press ISBN 978 0 8061 8604 7 Retrieved November 16 2022 Matthijs Bogaards 2009 How to Classify Hybrid Regimes Defective Democracy and Electoral Authoritarianism Democratization 16 2 399 423 Gagne Jean Francois 2019 05 02 Hybrid Regimes obo Archived from the original on 2019 07 29 Retrieved 2022 11 19 Morlino Leonardo Berg Schlosser Dirk Badie Bertrand 6 March 2017 Political Science A Global Perspective SAGE pp 112ff ISBN 978 1 5264 1303 1 OCLC 1124515503 Archived from the original on 16 November 2022 Retrieved 16 November 2022 Andreas Schedler ed 2006 Electoral Authoritarianism The Dynamics of Unfree Competition Boulder Colorado Lynne Rienner a b c d Yonatan L Morse January 2012 Review The Era of Electoral Authoritarianism World Politics 64 1 pp 161 198 Archived 2021 07 29 at the Wayback Machine Authoritarianism What Everyone Needs to Know Oxford and New York Oxford University Press 2018 09 04 ISBN 978 0 19 088020 0 Archived from the original on 2023 03 03 Retrieved 2023 03 03 Foundations of Comparative Politics VitalSource 4th ed ISBN 9781108831826 Archived from the original on 2023 03 02 Retrieved 2023 03 03 Rocha Menocal Alina Fritz Verena Rakner Lise 2008 06 01 Hybrid regimes and the challenges of deepening and sustaining democracy in developing countries South African Journal of International Affairs 15 1 29 40 doi 10 1080 10220460802217934 ISSN 1022 0461 S2CID 55589140 Stroh Alexander Elischer Sebastian Erdmann Gero 2012 Origins and Outcomes of Electoral Institutions in African Hybrid Regimes A Comparative Perspective Report German Institute of Global and Area Studies GIGA Archived from the original on 2023 03 03 Retrieved 2023 03 03 Ekman Joakim 2009 Political Participation and Regime Stability A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes International Political Science Review 30 1 7 31 doi 10 1177 0192512108097054 ISSN 0192 5121 JSTOR 20445173 S2CID 145077481 Schmotz Alexander 2019 Hybrid Regimes The Handbook of Political Social and Economic Transformation pp 521 525 doi 10 1093 oso 9780198829911 003 0053 ISBN 978 0 19 882991 1 Archived from the original on 2023 04 22 Retrieved 2023 03 03 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a website ignored help Treisman Daniel 2011 Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime Russia under Yeltsin and Putin American Journal of Political Science 55 3 590 609 doi 10 1111 j 1540 5907 2010 00500 x ISSN 0092 5853 JSTOR 23024939 Archived from the original on 2023 03 24 Retrieved 2023 03 03 Morlino Leonardo July 2009 Are there hybrid regimes Or are they just an optical illusion European Political Science Review 1 2 273 296 doi 10 1017 S1755773909000198 ISSN 1755 7747 S2CID 154947839 Archived from the original on 2023 03 03 Retrieved 2023 03 03 Global Dashboard BTI 2022 Archived from the original on April 17 2023 Retrieved April 17 2023 Nations in Transit Methodology Freedom House 2021 12 31 Archived from the original on 2023 03 18 Retrieved 2022 11 19 a b 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 Mudde Cas and Kaltwasser Cristobal Rovira 2017 Populism a Very Short Introduction New York Oxford University Press pp 86 96 ISBN 978 0 19 023487 4 Laebens Melis G Luhrmann Anna 2021 What halts democratic erosion The changing role of accountability Democratization 28 5 908 928 doi 10 1080 13510347 2021 1897109 S2CID 234870008 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 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 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 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 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 Luhrmann 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 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 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 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 Lindberg Staffan I The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe Carnegie Europe Archived from the original on 13 April 2021 Retrieved 2021 01 27 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 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 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 Schmitz Hans Peter 2004 Domestic and Transnational Perspectives on Democratization International Studies Review 6 3 International Studies Association Wiley 403 426 doi 10 1111 j 1521 9488 2004 00423 x ISSN 1521 9488 JSTOR 3699697 Bogaards Matthijs 2010 Measures of Democratization From Degree to Type to War Political Research Quarterly 63 2 University of Utah Sage Publications Inc 475 488 doi 10 1177 1065912909358578 ISSN 1065 9129 JSTOR 20721505 S2CID 154168435 a b c d Greenwood Shannon 2022 12 06 Appendix A Classifying democracies Pew Research Center s Global Attitudes Project Archived from the original on 2023 03 05 Retrieved 2022 12 27 a b c d Democracy Index 2021 the China challenge Economist Intelligence Unit Feb 15 2022 Archived from the original on November 8 2022 Retrieved November 18 2022 The Global State of Democracy Publications 2021 11 22 Archived from the original on 2023 03 08 Retrieved 2022 12 27 FAQs The Global State of Democracy Indices International IDEA 2021 12 31 Archived from the original on 2023 04 04 Retrieved 2022 12 27 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance 2021 The Global State of Democracy 2021 Building resilience in a Pandemic Era ISBN 978 91 7671 478 2 OCLC 1288461480 Democracy Report 2023 Table 3 V Dem Institute 2023 V Dem Codebook v11 PDF March 2021 Archived from the original PDF on 30 October 2022 Retrieved 21 April 2023 Luhrmann Anna Tannenberg Marcus Lindberg Staffan I March 19 2018 Regimes of the World RoW Opening New Avenues for the Comparative Study of Political Regimes Politics and Governance 6 1 Cogitatio 60 77 doi 10 17645 pag v6i1 1214 ISSN 2183 2463 Boese Vanessa A Lundstedt Martin Morrison Kelly Sato Yuko Lindberg Staffan I 2022 05 23 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 Freedom House 2019 02 06 Democracy in Retreat Freedom in the World Archived from the original on 2019 02 05 Retrieved 2019 02 06 a b c Countries and Territories Freedom House Archived from the original on March 26 2023 Retrieved Nov 25 2022 Dobratz B A 2015 Power Politics and Society An Introduction to Political Sociology Taylor amp Francis p 47 ISBN 978 1 317 34529 9 Archived from the original on April 30 2023 Retrieved Apr 30 2023 a b Juan Jose Linz 2000 Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes Lynne Rienner Publisher p 143 ISBN 978 1 55587 890 0 OCLC 1172052725 Archived from the original on 2023 04 22 Retrieved 2022 11 19 Jonathan Michie ed 3 February 2014 Reader s Guide to the Social Sciences Routledge p 95 ISBN 978 1 135 93226 8 Archived from the original on 22 April 2023 Retrieved 19 November 2022 Allan Todd Sally Waller 10 September 2015 Allan Todd Sally Waller eds History for the IB Diploma Paper 2 AuthoritariaAuthoritarian States 20th Century Cambridge University Press pp 10 ISBN 978 1 107 55889 2 Archived from the original on 22 April 2023 Retrieved 19 November 2022 Sondrol P C 2009 Totalitarian and Authoritarian Dictators A Comparison of Fidel Castro and Alfredo Stroessner Journal of Latin American Studies 23 3 599 620 doi 10 1017 S0022216X00015868 JSTOR 157386 S2CID 144333167 Archived from the original on 2023 03 08 Retrieved 2022 11 19 Schedler Andreas 2009 Electoral Authoritarianism The SAGE Handbook of Comparative Politics 1 Oliver s Yard 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom SAGE Publications Ltd pp 380 393 doi 10 4135 9780857021083 n21 ISBN 9781412919760 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location link Levitsky and Way 2002 Archived 2022 12 30 at the Wayback Machine T Karl 1995 Archived 2021 03 01 at the Wayback Machine L Diamond 1999 Archived 2023 01 31 at the Wayback Machine A Schedler 2002 Archived 2022 12 30 at the Wayback Machine Barbara Geddes Why Parties and Elections in Authoritarian Regimes Department of Political Science March 2006 Brancati Dawn May 11 2014 Democratic Authoritarianism Origins and Effects Annual Review of Political Science 17 1 Annual Reviews 313 326 doi 10 1146 annurev polisci 052013 115248 ISSN 1094 2939 a b Schedler Andreas May 15 2015 Electoral Authoritarianism Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Wiley pp 1 16 doi 10 1002 9781118900772 etrds0098 ISBN 9781118900772 Gudkov Lev 2009 Priroda Putinizma The nature of Putinism Vestnik obshestvennogo mneniya Dannye Analiz Diskussii 3 13 Archived from the original on 2019 08 13 Retrieved 2019 08 13 Morse Yonatan L January 2012 Review THE ERA OF ELECTORAL AUTHORITARIANISM World Politics 64 1 161 198 doi 10 1017 S0043887111000281 JSTOR 41428375 S2CID 154433302 Liboreiro Jorge Zsiros Sandor 2022 09 16 Hungary is no longer a full democracy but an electoral autocracy MEPs declare in new report Euronews Bonet Lluis Zamorano Mariano Martin 2021 Cultural policies in illiberal democracies a conceptual framework based on the Polish and Hungarian governing experiences International Journal of Cultural Policy 27 5 559 573 doi 10 1080 10286632 2020 1806829 S2CID 225285163 Self Darin 2022 09 26 Illiberal Democracies and Democratic Backsliding obo Retrieved 2023 04 26 Mounk Yascha 2020 03 18 The People Vs Democracy Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It Harvard University Press ISBN 978 0 674 24502 0 Illiberal Democracy and the Struggle on the Right Journal of Democracy Nyyssonen Heino Metsala Jussi 24 September 2020 Liberal Democracy and its Current Illiberal Critique The Emperor s New Clothes Europe Asia Studies 73 2 273 290 doi 10 1080 09668136 2020 1815654 Thus there is a real danger of pseudo democracy especially because elections can be manipulated and often are In these cases elections and other democratic institutions are simply adapted patterns of authoritarianism not democracy in some imperfect form having the dual purpose of legitimising the incumbent s rule and guarding it from any danger of democratic change Sajo 2021 pp 23 24 Wagrandl Ulrich 2021 A Theory of Illiberal Democracy Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism Routledge p 98 ISBN 978 1 000 47945 4 Sajo 2021 p 24 Schedler Andreas 2006 Electoral Authoritarianism The Dynamics of Unfree Competition Lynne Rienner Publishers ISBN 978 1 58826 415 2 Diamond Larry April 2002 Assessing the Quality of Democracy Journal of Democracy 13 2 51 65 DeVotta Neil 2010 From civil war to soft authoritarianism Sri Lanka in comparative perspective Global Change Peace amp Security 22 3 331 343 doi 10 1080 14781158 2010 510268 S2CID 143630796 Christie Kenneth 1998 Illiberal Democracy Modernisation and Southeast Asia Theoria A Journal of Social and Political Theory 91 102 118 ISSN 0040 5817 JSTOR 41802094 Ostroverkhov A A 2017 In Searching for Theory of One Party Dominance World Experience of Studying Dominant Party Systems II Politeia 87 4 133 149 p 136 doi 10 30570 2078 5089 2017 87 4 133 149 Ostroverkhov A A 2017 In Searching for Theory of One Party Dominance World Experience of Studying Dominant Party Systems I Politeia 86 3 136 153 p 148 doi 10 30570 2078 5089 2017 86 3 136 153 Natural Governing Party The Dictionary of Canadian Politics Campbell Strategies 2022 Retrieved 5 December 2022 The Wonder Boy Hoover An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times Knopf Doubleday 2017 p 338 ISBN 9780307743879 The Republicans had come to see themselves as the natural governing party of the United States Leaving aside the Cleveland and Wilson accidents they had been in power since Grant s day If Republican delegates declared an uncharismatic Hoover worthy of the presidency voters were unlikely to argue Chin James 15 November 2022 UMNO intends to return as Malaysia s natural governing party Nikkei Retrieved 5 December 2022 a b O Donnell Guillermo January 1994 Delegative Democracy Journal of Democracy 5 1 55 69 doi 10 1353 jod 1994 0010 S2CID 8558740 O Donnell Guillermo 1992 Delegative Democracy University of Notre Dame Kellogg Institute for International Studies Kestler Thomas 2011 Demokratische Dilemmata Zum Verhaltnis zwischen Reprasentation und Partizipation Zeitschrift fur Politikwissenschaft 21 3 24 doi 10 5771 1430 6387 2011 3 391 ISSN 1430 6387 Jackson Gabriel Spring 1976 The Franco Era in Historical Perspective The Centennial Review 20 2 103 127 JSTOR 23738276 Vaughan Mary Kay 2018 Mexico 1940 1968 and Beyond Perfect Dictatorship Dictablanda or PRI State Hegemony PDF Latin American Research Review 53 1 170 ISSN 0023 8791 JSTOR 26744297 Ribeiro Igor February 25 2009 A ditabranda da Folha in Portuguese Portal Imprensa Archived from the original on 2012 02 01 Rohmann C 2000 A World of Ideas The Dictionary of Important Ideas and Thinkers Ballantine Books ISBN 978 0 345 43706 8 Wolin Sheldon S 2008 Democracy Incorporated Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism Princeton Princeton University Press ISBN 978 0 691 13566 3 Archived from the original on 2016 04 20 Retrieved 2012 03 11 p 47 Wolin Sheldon S 2008 Democracy Incorporated Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism Princeton Princeton University Press ISBN 978 0 691 13566 3 Archived from the original on 2016 04 20 Retrieved 2012 03 11 p 60 Weir Fred October 1 2003 Kremlin lobs another shot at marketplace of ideas The Christian Science Monitor Retrieved 2009 11 10 Plattner Marc F 1998 Liberalism and Democracy Can t Have One without the Other Foreign Affairs 77 2 Council on Foreign Relations 171 180 ISSN 0015 7120 JSTOR 20048858 Retrieved 2023 06 03 Zakaria Fareed November December 1997 The Rise of Illiberal Democracy Foreign Affairs Archived 15 October 2005 at the Wayback Machine Myers Sondra 2002 The Democracy Reader IDEA p 174 ISBN 978 0 9702130 3 7 Zakaria Fareed 1997 The Rise of Illiberal Democracy Foreign Affairs 76 6 Council on Foreign Relations 22 43 ISSN 0015 7120 JSTOR 20048274 Retrieved 2023 06 03 Quigley Carroll 1983 Weapons systems and political stability a history University Press of America p 307 ISBN 978 0 8191 2947 5 Retrieved 20 May 2013 a b Gandhi Jennifer Vreeland James June 2008 Political Institutions and Civil War Unpacking Anocracy Journal of Conflict Solutions 52 3 401 425 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 584 1330 doi 10 1177 0022002708315594 S2CID 42071287 a b Fearon James Laitan David February 2003 Ethnicity Insurgency and Civil War American Political Science Review 97 75 90 doi 10 1017 S0003055403000534 S2CID 8303905 Regan Patrick Bell Sam December 2010 Changing Lanes or Stuck in the Middle Why Are Anocracies More Prone to Civil Wars Political Science Quarterly 63 4 747 759 doi 10 1177 1065912909336274 S2CID 154960398 Benson Michelle Kugler Jackek April 1998 Power Parity Democracy and Severity of Internal Violence Journal of Conflict Resolution 42 2 196 209 doi 10 1177 0022002798042002004 S2CID 143823486 Montesquieu 2 3 Spirit of the Laws Vol II Everdell William R 2000 04 15 The End of Kings A History of Republics and Republicans University of Chicago Press ISBN 978 0 226 22482 4 Marshall Monty G Gurr Ted Robert 2003 Peace and conflict 2003 A global survey of armed conflicts self determination movements and democracy PDF Report College Park Center for International Development and Conflict Management University of Maryland Marshall Monty G Cole Benjamin R 23 July 2014 Global Report 2014 Conflict Governance and State Fragility PDF Center for Systemic Peace Romanyuk O I 2017 11 24 WHAT IS DEFECTIVE DEMOCRACIES AND WHAT THEY ARE The Bulletin of Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University Series Philosophy Philosophies of Law Political Science Sociology 2 33 Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University 114 122 doi 10 21564 2075 7190 33 109732 ISSN 2663 5704 Croissant Aurel Merkel Wolfgang 2019 02 13 Defective Democracy The Handbook of Political Social and Economic Transformation Oxford University Press pp 437 446 doi 10 1093 oso 9780198829911 003 0041 ISBN 978 0 19 882991 1 Merkel Wolfgang 2004 01 01 Embedded and defective democracies Democratization 11 5 Informa UK Limited 33 58 doi 10 1080 13510340412331304598 hdl 10419 251950 ISSN 1351 0347 S2CID 149654333 Merkel Wolfgang December 2004 Embedded and Defective Democracies PDF Democratization 11 5 Retrieved 6 November 2014 Buhllman Mark Merkel Wolfgang Wessels Bernhard April 2008 The Quality of Democracy Democracy Barometer for Established Democracies Hertie School of Governance Working Papers Merkel Wolfgang Croissant Aurel December 2004 Conclusion Good and Defective Democracies Democratization 11 5 199 213 doi 10 1080 13510340412331304651 S2CID 218522553 Merkel 2004 p 33 Merkel 2004 p 36 27 Merkel 2004 p 43 45 Buhllman et al 2008 p 7 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan A April 2002 Elections Without Democracy The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism Journal of Democracy 13 2 51 65 doi 10 1353 jod 2002 0026 ISSN 1086 3214 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan A 2010 08 16 Competitive Authoritarianism Cambridge University Press doi 10 1017 cbo9780511781353 ISBN 978 0 521 88252 1 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan 2020 The New Competitive Authoritarianism Journal of Democracy 31 1 51 65 doi 10 1353 jod 2020 0004 ISSN 1086 3214 Diamond Larry April 2002 Elections Without Democracy Thinking About Hybrid Regimes Journal of Democracy 13 2 21 35 doi 10 1353 jod 2002 0025 ISSN 1086 3214 S2CID 154815836 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan A 2010 08 16 Competitive Authoritarianism Cambridge University Press doi 10 1017 cbo9780511781353 ISBN 978 0 521 88252 1 Mufti Mariam 2018 06 22 What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship Politics and Governance 6 2 112 119 doi 10 17645 pag v6i2 1400 ISSN 2183 2463 Levitsky Steven Way Lucan 2020 The New Competitive Authoritarianism Journal of Democracy 31 1 51 65 doi 10 1353 jod 2020 0004 ISSN 1086 3214 Further reading editContemporary analysts edit Herre Bastian Roser Max 2013 03 15 Democracy Our World in Data Archived from the original on 2022 11 18 Retrieved 2022 11 18 Balderacchi Claudio 2022 04 14 Overlooked forms of non democracy Insights from hybrid regimes Third World Quarterly 43 6 1441 1459 doi 10 1080 01436597 2022 2059460 ISSN 0143 6597 S2CID 248208017 Ekman Joakim 2009 Political Participation and Regime Stability A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes International Political Science Review 30 1 Sage Publications Ltd 7 31 doi 10 1177 0192512108097054 ISSN 0192 5121 JSTOR 20445173 S2CID 145077481 Luhrmann Anna Tannenberg Marcus Lindberg Staffan I 2018 03 19 Regimes of the World RoW Opening New Avenues for the Comparative Study of Political Regimes Politics and Governance 6 1 60 77 doi 10 17645 pag v6i1 1214 ISSN 2183 2463 Archived from the original on 2022 11 18 Retrieved 2022 11 18 Sajo Andras 2021 Ruling by Cheating Governance in Illiberal Democracy Cambridge University Press ISBN 978 1 108 84463 5 Skaaning Svend Erik 2021 Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy LIED dataset v6 0 Harvard Dataverse doi 10 7910 DVN WPKNIT Schedler A 2013 The Politics of Uncertainty Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism Oxford Studies in Democratization OUP Oxford ISBN 978 0 19 166983 5 Archived from the original on 2023 04 04 Retrieved 2022 11 19 BTI 2022 Benin Country Report BTI 2022 2021 02 19 Archived from the original on 2022 11 18 Retrieved 2022 11 18 Beatriz Magaloni 2010 The Game of Electoral Fraud and the Ousting of Authoritarian Rule Archived 2019 07 29 at the Wayback Machine American Journal of Political Science 54 3 751 65 Weyland Kurt 2024 Hybrid Regimes in Historical Perspective in The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics Oxford University Press Research history edit The researchers conducted a comparative analysis of political regimes around the world Samuel Finer 1970 in developing countries Almond and Coleman 1960 Archived 2023 04 04 at the Wayback Machine among Latin America Collier 1979 and West Africa regimes Zolberg 1966 Types of non democratic regimes are described Linz 2000 originally published in 1975 and Perlmutter 1981 Huntington and Moore Huntington and Moore 1970 discuss the one party system issue Hermet Guy Hermet Rose amp Rouquie 1978 explores how elections are held in such authoritarian regimes which are nominally democratic institutions Hybrid regimes Diamond 2002 competitive authoritarianism Levitsky and Way 2002 Archived 2019 08 08 at the Wayback Machine and electoral authoritarianism Schedler 2006 as well as how officials who came to power in an undemocratic way form election rules Lust Okar and Jamal 2002 Archived 2019 07 30 at the Wayback Machine institutionalize electoral frauds Lehoucq 2003 Archived 2022 03 13 at the Wayback Machine Schedler 2002 Archived 2019 08 26 at the Wayback Machine and manipulate the economy L Blaydes Archived 2023 04 04 at the Wayback Machine 2006 Magaloni 2006 in order to win the election and stay in power External links editHybrid Concepts and the Concept of Hybridity European Consortium for Political Research Democracy data how do researchers measure democracy Our World in Data Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Hybrid regime amp oldid 1217401538, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.