Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/00323187.2021.1931373
Ching-Hsing Wang, D. Weng
ABSTRACT Election polls have been widely used to probe and understand the public’s political attitudes and behaviour. However, they might simultaneously motivate people to seek information about the questions they do not know when they are asked in the polls. Given that past studies have ignored the role of polls in motivating individual information seeking, this study aims to examine the effect of polls on individual knowledge of the electoral system. Specifically, this study addresses whether individuals’ participation in the election poll would increase their understanding of the electoral system of the legislative election in Taiwan. Using survey data from Taiwan’s Election and Democratisation Study (TEDS) 2016 presidential and legislative elections, this study finds that people who are asked questions about the legislative election in the first survey are more likely to provide correct answers in the second survey compared to their counterparts. The findings imply that election polls are not only tools for understanding public opinion on competing parties or candidates and policy issues, but also for stimulating individuals to understand politics.
{"title":"Do election polls increase individual understanding of politics?","authors":"Ching-Hsing Wang, D. Weng","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1931373","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1931373","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Election polls have been widely used to probe and understand the public’s political attitudes and behaviour. However, they might simultaneously motivate people to seek information about the questions they do not know when they are asked in the polls. Given that past studies have ignored the role of polls in motivating individual information seeking, this study aims to examine the effect of polls on individual knowledge of the electoral system. Specifically, this study addresses whether individuals’ participation in the election poll would increase their understanding of the electoral system of the legislative election in Taiwan. Using survey data from Taiwan’s Election and Democratisation Study (TEDS) 2016 presidential and legislative elections, this study finds that people who are asked questions about the legislative election in the first survey are more likely to provide correct answers in the second survey compared to their counterparts. The findings imply that election polls are not only tools for understanding public opinion on competing parties or candidates and policy issues, but also for stimulating individuals to understand politics.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"186 - 206"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00323187.2021.1931373","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43002750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/00323187.2021.1948344
Hiroyuki Hoshiro
Do diplomatic visits by political leaders of recipient countries to donors influence the amount of bilateral Official Development Assistance (ODA) granted by donors? Some might argue that as aid allocation is already determined by a donor’s cost and benefit calculation, diplomatic visits do not affect the donor’s aid allocation behaviour. Despite the importance of answering such questions regarding the determinants of aid allocation, no research has been conducted on this topic. Focusing on the case of Japan, this study explores the relationship between diplomatic visits from recipients and aid allocation. Since the 1960s, Japan has been one of the top five aid-giving countries of the world; however, its motives have been criticised as self-interested and solely in pursuit of ulterior economic interests. Through an analysis of panel data measuring ODA given by Japan to 179 recipient countries between 1969 and 2015, this paper reached the following conclusions. First, diplomatic visits to Japan by political leaders from aid recipient countries resulted in said countries receiving increased bilateral ODA from Japan in cases where countries were already receiving aid from Japan. The more diplomatic visits made to Japan, the greater the increase in aid. This result can be explained by three mechanisms: (1) diplomatic visits are a costly signal of developing countries’ need for aid, (2) visits to donor countries would create domestic political pressure in donor countries when visitors openly require financial assistance, and (3) face-to-face talks are likely to provide opportunities for leaders of a donor to gain greater knowledge of recipients’ needs. This result was verified using different models and several robustness checks such as an instrumental variables approach that accounts for reverse causality and endogeneity, error-correction model (ECM), which can control for temporal dependence and the problem of co-integration. Second, diplomatic visits were shown to have no relation with the initiation of new aid agreements in cases of developing countries that have not received aid from Japan in the past. This is because, there are only few countries such as North Korea that do not receive ODA from Japan when their leaders visit Japan for the first time. This result implies that aid initiation has other causes rather than diplomatic visits. This study makes two contributions to the study of aid allocation and international relations. Although a considerable amount of quantitative research on aid allocation
{"title":"Do diplomatic visits promote official development aid? Evidence from Japan","authors":"Hiroyuki Hoshiro","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1948344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1948344","url":null,"abstract":"Do diplomatic visits by political leaders of recipient countries to donors influence the amount of bilateral Official Development Assistance (ODA) granted by donors? Some might argue that as aid allocation is already determined by a donor’s cost and benefit calculation, diplomatic visits do not affect the donor’s aid allocation behaviour. Despite the importance of answering such questions regarding the determinants of aid allocation, no research has been conducted on this topic. Focusing on the case of Japan, this study explores the relationship between diplomatic visits from recipients and aid allocation. Since the 1960s, Japan has been one of the top five aid-giving countries of the world; however, its motives have been criticised as self-interested and solely in pursuit of ulterior economic interests. Through an analysis of panel data measuring ODA given by Japan to 179 recipient countries between 1969 and 2015, this paper reached the following conclusions. First, diplomatic visits to Japan by political leaders from aid recipient countries resulted in said countries receiving increased bilateral ODA from Japan in cases where countries were already receiving aid from Japan. The more diplomatic visits made to Japan, the greater the increase in aid. This result can be explained by three mechanisms: (1) diplomatic visits are a costly signal of developing countries’ need for aid, (2) visits to donor countries would create domestic political pressure in donor countries when visitors openly require financial assistance, and (3) face-to-face talks are likely to provide opportunities for leaders of a donor to gain greater knowledge of recipients’ needs. This result was verified using different models and several robustness checks such as an instrumental variables approach that accounts for reverse causality and endogeneity, error-correction model (ECM), which can control for temporal dependence and the problem of co-integration. Second, diplomatic visits were shown to have no relation with the initiation of new aid agreements in cases of developing countries that have not received aid from Japan in the past. This is because, there are only few countries such as North Korea that do not receive ODA from Japan when their leaders visit Japan for the first time. This result implies that aid initiation has other causes rather than diplomatic visits. This study makes two contributions to the study of aid allocation and international relations. Although a considerable amount of quantitative research on aid allocation","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"207 - 227"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47943629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/00323187.2021.1948345
Christina Lai
ABSTRACT China’s improved diplomatic relations with Asian countries have been characterised by positive engagement with regional organisations. However, cross-nation opinion surveys show that China’s approval in the region has declined significantly since2013. Why does this gap exist, and what can China do to close it? More importantly, how can Beijing effectively align its policy objectives with its soft-power tools to gain more support among its Asian neighbours?This article argues that reconciliation between China’s core interests and its soft power discourse is possible and desirable, as China’s self-restraint, assuring, and leadership practices are crucial sources of China’s policy practices. First, it claims that China’s soft power discourse matters greatly, as a rising country needs to express its good intentions to others in avoiding an anti-China alliance. Secondly, it proposes a feasible framework to reconcile China’s core interests and its soft power policy, in which Beijing could be firm in its official stances and flexible in its execution.It offers an in-depth analysis of three case studies: China’s North Korea policy, its handling in the South China Sea disputes, and its governance in Hong Kong. Finally, it concludes with substantive implications for East Asian politics.
{"title":"Soft power is not so soft: is a reconciliation between China’s core interests and foreign policy practices possible?","authors":"Christina Lai","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1948345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1948345","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT China’s improved diplomatic relations with Asian countries have been characterised by positive engagement with regional organisations. However, cross-nation opinion surveys show that China’s approval in the region has declined significantly since2013. Why does this gap exist, and what can China do to close it? More importantly, how can Beijing effectively align its policy objectives with its soft-power tools to gain more support among its Asian neighbours?This article argues that reconciliation between China’s core interests and its soft power discourse is possible and desirable, as China’s self-restraint, assuring, and leadership practices are crucial sources of China’s policy practices. First, it claims that China’s soft power discourse matters greatly, as a rising country needs to express its good intentions to others in avoiding an anti-China alliance. Secondly, it proposes a feasible framework to reconcile China’s core interests and its soft power policy, in which Beijing could be firm in its official stances and flexible in its execution.It offers an in-depth analysis of three case studies: China’s North Korea policy, its handling in the South China Sea disputes, and its governance in Hong Kong. Finally, it concludes with substantive implications for East Asian politics.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"167 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48525856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/00323187.2021.1898995
Lara M. Greaves, Luke D. Oldfield, Martin von Randow, C. Sibley, B. Milne
ABSTRACT Quality survey research relies on the willingness of the public to participate, but survey response rates are decreasing over time. This research note explores response rate data from several national probability sample mail surveys drawn from a consistent sampling frame (the New Zealand electoral roll) over the past 30 years. The aim of this work is to document the scale of the response rate decline problem in mail survey studies, predict future response rates, and track nonresponse bias through comparing self-reported voter turnout in surveys to official turnout. We use data from the New Zealand Election Study, the International Social Survey Programme, the New Zealand edition of the World Values Survey, and the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study. Our findings demonstrate that there has been a consistent downward trend in response rates and an increase in nonresponse bias for self-reported voter turnout. Response rates in the early 1990s were as high as 72%, before dropping to the 60% range around the year 2000, with response rates effectively halving from their early 1990s rates by 2015. We comment on the implications for future surveys, voter enrolment, local government turnout, and political polling. Ultimately, these results leave us with the question of how long traditional mail survey research will be able to continue.
{"title":"How low can we go? Declining survey response rates to new zealand electoral roll mail surveys over three decades","authors":"Lara M. Greaves, Luke D. Oldfield, Martin von Randow, C. Sibley, B. Milne","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1898995","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1898995","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Quality survey research relies on the willingness of the public to participate, but survey response rates are decreasing over time. This research note explores response rate data from several national probability sample mail surveys drawn from a consistent sampling frame (the New Zealand electoral roll) over the past 30 years. The aim of this work is to document the scale of the response rate decline problem in mail survey studies, predict future response rates, and track nonresponse bias through comparing self-reported voter turnout in surveys to official turnout. We use data from the New Zealand Election Study, the International Social Survey Programme, the New Zealand edition of the World Values Survey, and the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study. Our findings demonstrate that there has been a consistent downward trend in response rates and an increase in nonresponse bias for self-reported voter turnout. Response rates in the early 1990s were as high as 72%, before dropping to the 60% range around the year 2000, with response rates effectively halving from their early 1990s rates by 2015. We comment on the implications for future surveys, voter enrolment, local government turnout, and political polling. Ultimately, these results leave us with the question of how long traditional mail survey research will be able to continue.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"228 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00323187.2021.1898995","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46408620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/00323187.2021.1923374
F. Reichert
ABSTRACT How young people become active citizens to sustain democracy is a crucial question for a modern democracy like Australia to pose in a context of youth political disillusionment with politics. The present research investigates this question in the context of young Australian adults’ norms of citizenship and intended political participation. The results show that encouraging young people to engage in decision-making processes in school or the community may cultivate active democrats, while law-abidingness works as a moderator of other citizenship norms. It remains a major challenge for democracies to promote engaged citizenship norms, prepare young people to be interested in civic issues, and facilitate skills that make politically self-efficacious young citizens.
{"title":"How citizenship norms predict participation in different political activities","authors":"F. Reichert","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1923374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1923374","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How young people become active citizens to sustain democracy is a crucial question for a modern democracy like Australia to pose in a context of youth political disillusionment with politics. The present research investigates this question in the context of young Australian adults’ norms of citizenship and intended political participation. The results show that encouraging young people to engage in decision-making processes in school or the community may cultivate active democrats, while law-abidingness works as a moderator of other citizenship norms. It remains a major challenge for democracies to promote engaged citizenship norms, prepare young people to be interested in civic issues, and facilitate skills that make politically self-efficacious young citizens.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"72 1","pages":"245 - 264"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00323187.2021.1923374","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45791554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-08-26DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0315
Rebecca H. Best
Traditionally, women have been viewed as having little agency in wars and conflicts. Women were thought neither to cause the wars nor to fight them. When women were considered at all by scholars of war, they were conceived of primarily as victims. As women gained the franchise and ultimately began to be elected into political office in advanced democracies, some scholars began to consider the foreign policy implications of this—that is, do women’s attitudes toward war and defense policy differ from those of men and do these views produce different outcomes at the ballot box? Furthermore, do women behave differently with regard to security issues once in national office? Does their presence change the way their male colleagues vote on these issues? In recent decades, scholarship emerging first from critical feminist theory and later from positivist political scientists has begun to look more explicitly for women’s roles, experiences, and influences on and in conflict. This work has led to the recognition that, even when victimized in war, women have agency, and to the parallel conclusion that men’s agency is not as complete as scholars, practitioners, and the public have often assumed. This bibliography provides an overview of the development of women and conflict literature as well as several prominent themes and questions within the literature. It is of necessity incomplete and interested scholars are encouraged to review related articles in Oxford Bibliographies in International Relations, such as “Feminist Security Studies” by Kristen P. Williams, and “Women and Peacemaking/Peacekeeping” by Sabrina Karim and Kyle Beardsley.
{"title":"Women and Conflict Studies","authors":"Rebecca H. Best","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0315","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0315","url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, women have been viewed as having little agency in wars and conflicts. Women were thought neither to cause the wars nor to fight them. When women were considered at all by scholars of war, they were conceived of primarily as victims. As women gained the franchise and ultimately began to be elected into political office in advanced democracies, some scholars began to consider the foreign policy implications of this—that is, do women’s attitudes toward war and defense policy differ from those of men and do these views produce different outcomes at the ballot box? Furthermore, do women behave differently with regard to security issues once in national office? Does their presence change the way their male colleagues vote on these issues? In recent decades, scholarship emerging first from critical feminist theory and later from positivist political scientists has begun to look more explicitly for women’s roles, experiences, and influences on and in conflict. This work has led to the recognition that, even when victimized in war, women have agency, and to the parallel conclusion that men’s agency is not as complete as scholars, practitioners, and the public have often assumed. This bibliography provides an overview of the development of women and conflict literature as well as several prominent themes and questions within the literature. It is of necessity incomplete and interested scholars are encouraged to review related articles in Oxford Bibliographies in International Relations, such as “Feminist Security Studies” by Kristen P. Williams, and “Women and Peacemaking/Peacekeeping” by Sabrina Karim and Kyle Beardsley.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43880095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-29DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0310
Vera Heuer, Gabriela Rangel
For decades, women were actively excluded from the political arena. As suffrage expanded around the world, women’s rights activists celebrated a major step toward gender equality in the political arena. Yet the gender gap in political engagement still persists to this day. Although in some countries, women are now found to turn out to vote at rates similar to men (and in industrialized countries, women may even vote at higher rates), they are still less likely to participate in many other types of political activities. Scholars have long investigated the factors influencing women’s political engagement. Early research focused heavily on individual level factors—most often lack of access to resources or informal networks—as determinants of the gender gap. A burgeoning body of literature, however, has identified institutions as an important factor influencing women’s political engagement. Thus this bibliography focuses on those institutional determinants of women’s political engagement defined as any type of political activity that nonelite women take part in. This includes voting, participating in campaigns, and engaging in demonstrations or protests, but also more cognitive aspects of engagement, such as political interest and political knowledge. This bibliography does not focus on the impact of institutions on women’s access or election into political office, as there is extensive literature on institutional determinants and women’s representation, which falls outside of the scope of women’s engagement as nonstate actors. The research outlined here, however, does consider a variety of institutional factors that influence women’s engagement. The bibliography begins by reviewing the literature on how the structures of the political system—including Regime Type, electoral rules, and quotas—impact women’s engagement. It then discusses how institutions can indirectly influence women’s political attitudes and behavior, by reviewing the impact of the composition of institutions on women’s engagement. That section is followed by a set of research that shows how institutional outcomes—namely Policy Outcomes and Institutional Support—influence various forms of political participation, and concludes with examples of nonstate institutions and their impact on women’s engagement.
{"title":"Institutional Factors Affecting Women’s Political Engagement","authors":"Vera Heuer, Gabriela Rangel","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0310","url":null,"abstract":"For decades, women were actively excluded from the political arena. As suffrage expanded around the world, women’s rights activists celebrated a major step toward gender equality in the political arena. Yet the gender gap in political engagement still persists to this day. Although in some countries, women are now found to turn out to vote at rates similar to men (and in industrialized countries, women may even vote at higher rates), they are still less likely to participate in many other types of political activities. Scholars have long investigated the factors influencing women’s political engagement. Early research focused heavily on individual level factors—most often lack of access to resources or informal networks—as determinants of the gender gap. A burgeoning body of literature, however, has identified institutions as an important factor influencing women’s political engagement. Thus this bibliography focuses on those institutional determinants of women’s political engagement defined as any type of political activity that nonelite women take part in. This includes voting, participating in campaigns, and engaging in demonstrations or protests, but also more cognitive aspects of engagement, such as political interest and political knowledge. This bibliography does not focus on the impact of institutions on women’s access or election into political office, as there is extensive literature on institutional determinants and women’s representation, which falls outside of the scope of women’s engagement as nonstate actors. The research outlined here, however, does consider a variety of institutional factors that influence women’s engagement. The bibliography begins by reviewing the literature on how the structures of the political system—including Regime Type, electoral rules, and quotas—impact women’s engagement. It then discusses how institutions can indirectly influence women’s political attitudes and behavior, by reviewing the impact of the composition of institutions on women’s engagement. That section is followed by a set of research that shows how institutional outcomes—namely Policy Outcomes and Institutional Support—influence various forms of political participation, and concludes with examples of nonstate institutions and their impact on women’s engagement.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42323190","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-29DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0311
Gretchen Bauer
In the early 21st century, African women are world leaders in women’s representation in parliaments, and they are at global averages for women’s representation in cabinets and courts. These are trends that have their origins in the political transitions that swept across the African continent beginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s—what some have referred to as Africa’s second independence. Across Africa, political independence was first won beginning in the late 1950s in many countries, but even later, in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, in other countries. In many countries, single-party rule and military regimes swiftly ensued in the early years of independence, while in those that were not yet independent, armed struggles were often necessary to achieve liberation. While African women had played significant roles in politics in the precolonial and colonial eras across the continent, and in nationalist movements for independence, they had many fewer opportunities in the single-party and military regimes of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. But women and their organizations were often at the forefront of the political transitions that beset Africa beginning in the 1990s, and from then onward commenced a renewed representation in formal politics. The research and scholarship followed suit, and there has emerged a significant literature on women’s representation in politics in Africa from the 1990s onward—in legislatures, cabinets, and courts, as well as from women’s movements outside of formal government office. The author would like to thank Amara Galileo for valuable research assistance.
{"title":"Women’s Political Representation in Africa","authors":"Gretchen Bauer","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0311","url":null,"abstract":"In the early 21st century, African women are world leaders in women’s representation in parliaments, and they are at global averages for women’s representation in cabinets and courts. These are trends that have their origins in the political transitions that swept across the African continent beginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s—what some have referred to as Africa’s second independence. Across Africa, political independence was first won beginning in the late 1950s in many countries, but even later, in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, in other countries. In many countries, single-party rule and military regimes swiftly ensued in the early years of independence, while in those that were not yet independent, armed struggles were often necessary to achieve liberation. While African women had played significant roles in politics in the precolonial and colonial eras across the continent, and in nationalist movements for independence, they had many fewer opportunities in the single-party and military regimes of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. But women and their organizations were often at the forefront of the political transitions that beset Africa beginning in the 1990s, and from then onward commenced a renewed representation in formal politics. The research and scholarship followed suit, and there has emerged a significant literature on women’s representation in politics in Africa from the 1990s onward—in legislatures, cabinets, and courts, as well as from women’s movements outside of formal government office. The author would like to thank Amara Galileo for valuable research assistance.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48500065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-29DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0313
Olli Hellmann
This article reviews academic work on party systems—defined as the patterns of interactions between political parties—in East and Southeast Asia (hereafter “East Asia”). Before drawing a “map” of the relevant literature, it is important to acknowledge the political and cultural diversity of the region. Not only is East Asia characterized by a multiplicity of political systems, ranging from totalitarian regimes to consolidated democracies, but scholars are, in addition, faced with linguistic heterogeneity, which creates incentives to specialize in individual countries rather than theoretical themes. This diversity is clearly reflected in the study of party systems. First, party systems differ significantly between democratic and nondemocratic political systems. What is particularly striking is that parties in the democracies of East Asia are generally only weakly institutionalized. In contrast, regime parties in the region’s autocratic political systems tend to command effective and extensive organizations—a diagnosis that does not just apply to the surviving communist regimes, but also to the region’s “electoral authoritarian” regimes. Second, much of the scholarship on party systems in East Asia takes the form of single-country case studies. While rich in empirical detail, these studies rarely engage in theoretical debates on party systems and thus they do not attract much of a readership beyond regional studies experts. This annotated bibliography aims to address this issue. By organizing academic work on East Asian party systems into a theory-guided framework, the bibliography gives readers an overview of how existing studies may contribute to the general literature on party politics—even though these studies themselves may not make their contribution explicit. Specifically, the bibliography is structured along four key theoretical questions: (1) How can we account for differences in the development of party systems? (2) How do party systems affect the consolidation of (democratic and autocratic) political regimes? (3) How do party systems relate to the state? (4) What is the effect of party systems on the quality of governance? The bibliography covers different conceptual dimensions of party system development, including fragmentation (how many relevant parties are there?), party-voter linkages (how are political parties rooted in the electorate?), party system institutionalization (how stable are patterns of interparty competition?), and party institutionalization (how routinized are party internal processes?).
{"title":"Political Party Systems in East and Southeast Asia","authors":"Olli Hellmann","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0313","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews academic work on party systems—defined as the patterns of interactions between political parties—in East and Southeast Asia (hereafter “East Asia”). Before drawing a “map” of the relevant literature, it is important to acknowledge the political and cultural diversity of the region. Not only is East Asia characterized by a multiplicity of political systems, ranging from totalitarian regimes to consolidated democracies, but scholars are, in addition, faced with linguistic heterogeneity, which creates incentives to specialize in individual countries rather than theoretical themes. This diversity is clearly reflected in the study of party systems. First, party systems differ significantly between democratic and nondemocratic political systems. What is particularly striking is that parties in the democracies of East Asia are generally only weakly institutionalized. In contrast, regime parties in the region’s autocratic political systems tend to command effective and extensive organizations—a diagnosis that does not just apply to the surviving communist regimes, but also to the region’s “electoral authoritarian” regimes. Second, much of the scholarship on party systems in East Asia takes the form of single-country case studies. While rich in empirical detail, these studies rarely engage in theoretical debates on party systems and thus they do not attract much of a readership beyond regional studies experts. This annotated bibliography aims to address this issue. By organizing academic work on East Asian party systems into a theory-guided framework, the bibliography gives readers an overview of how existing studies may contribute to the general literature on party politics—even though these studies themselves may not make their contribution explicit. Specifically, the bibliography is structured along four key theoretical questions: (1) How can we account for differences in the development of party systems? (2) How do party systems affect the consolidation of (democratic and autocratic) political regimes? (3) How do party systems relate to the state? (4) What is the effect of party systems on the quality of governance? The bibliography covers different conceptual dimensions of party system development, including fragmentation (how many relevant parties are there?), party-voter linkages (how are political parties rooted in the electorate?), party system institutionalization (how stable are patterns of interparty competition?), and party institutionalization (how routinized are party internal processes?).","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":"194 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41284110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-29DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0312
Cynthia Barrow-Giles, Tennyson S. D. Joseph
The works included in this compendium summary address themes relevant to the elections and democracy in the Caribbean region. The states that fall within the relevant “region” include the formerly English, French, and Dutch colonies in the Caribbean Sea and the South and Central American mainland, as well as the remaining English, French, Dutch, Danish, and Spanish colonies in the Caribbean. The aim of this bibliography is to provide readers and researchers with a broad overview of the kinds of theoretical, thematic, and empirical emphases that have framed the questions around which the electoral and democratic landscape of the Caribbean has been studied. For purposes of clarification, the collection does not address Caribbean democracy as a stand-alone isolated issue, but instead provides a survey of works on elections in the Caribbean through the lens of their interrelation with Caribbean democratic history, practice, culture, and constitutional development and institutional framework. (A survey of Caribbean democracy will require isolated treatment). Relatedly, while the article addresses the experience of the wider Caribbean, much of the emphasis on the intellectual output is on the works relevant to the English-speaking Caribbean. Where the experiences of the non-English countries have given rise to critical intellectual interventions, these are included to bring balance to the Caribbean story and to highlight commonalities and divergences, useful for researchers interested in comparative analyses. Following this introduction, the article is divided into eleven thematic sections, examining (1) seminal texts and works on Caribbean democracy and Caribbean elections, or works providing general data and analysis of large blocs of countries or works presenting pathbreaking theoretical treatment of critical issues in Caribbean democracy; (2) texts addressing the issue of the administration and governance of elections, inclusive of concerns with money and electoral financing; (3) texts concerned with constitutional development; (4) texts on electoral reform; (5) works addressing dysfunctionalities such as electoral corruption and electoral violence; (6) women and political participation; (7) public opinion and voting behavior; (8) works concerned with providing analyses of the results and outcomes of Caribbean elections in a largely statistical or data-capturing sense; and (9) works that have sought to offer analyses of Caribbean elections in relation to the broader political-economy of the region. Given the reality of ethnic division and the absence of racial and cultural uniformity in several countries of the Caribbean, one of the sections is devoted to (10) surveying some of the key works that have addressed the challenges of ethnicity, ethnic mobilization, and ethnic voting, and their implications for democratic development. The final section presents (11) the main works that have sought to address the very important question of election monito
{"title":"Elections and Democracy in the Caribbean","authors":"Cynthia Barrow-Giles, Tennyson S. D. Joseph","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0312","url":null,"abstract":"The works included in this compendium summary address themes relevant to the elections and democracy in the Caribbean region. The states that fall within the relevant “region” include the formerly English, French, and Dutch colonies in the Caribbean Sea and the South and Central American mainland, as well as the remaining English, French, Dutch, Danish, and Spanish colonies in the Caribbean. The aim of this bibliography is to provide readers and researchers with a broad overview of the kinds of theoretical, thematic, and empirical emphases that have framed the questions around which the electoral and democratic landscape of the Caribbean has been studied. For purposes of clarification, the collection does not address Caribbean democracy as a stand-alone isolated issue, but instead provides a survey of works on elections in the Caribbean through the lens of their interrelation with Caribbean democratic history, practice, culture, and constitutional development and institutional framework. (A survey of Caribbean democracy will require isolated treatment). Relatedly, while the article addresses the experience of the wider Caribbean, much of the emphasis on the intellectual output is on the works relevant to the English-speaking Caribbean. Where the experiences of the non-English countries have given rise to critical intellectual interventions, these are included to bring balance to the Caribbean story and to highlight commonalities and divergences, useful for researchers interested in comparative analyses. Following this introduction, the article is divided into eleven thematic sections, examining (1) seminal texts and works on Caribbean democracy and Caribbean elections, or works providing general data and analysis of large blocs of countries or works presenting pathbreaking theoretical treatment of critical issues in Caribbean democracy; (2) texts addressing the issue of the administration and governance of elections, inclusive of concerns with money and electoral financing; (3) texts concerned with constitutional development; (4) texts on electoral reform; (5) works addressing dysfunctionalities such as electoral corruption and electoral violence; (6) women and political participation; (7) public opinion and voting behavior; (8) works concerned with providing analyses of the results and outcomes of Caribbean elections in a largely statistical or data-capturing sense; and (9) works that have sought to offer analyses of Caribbean elections in relation to the broader political-economy of the region. Given the reality of ethnic division and the absence of racial and cultural uniformity in several countries of the Caribbean, one of the sections is devoted to (10) surveying some of the key works that have addressed the challenges of ethnicity, ethnic mobilization, and ethnic voting, and their implications for democratic development. The final section presents (11) the main works that have sought to address the very important question of election monito","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48887216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：