Pub Date : 2023-01-09DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102946
Nicholas Carnes, Noam Lupu
Research on the economic backgrounds of politicians is once again flourishing in political science. In this article, we describe the economic characteristics that scholars have recently studied and the common threads that have emerged in modern work on this topic. This growing literature is largely united by a shared concern about the unequal economic makeup of institutions: Recent studies generally agree that politicians tend to be vastly better off than citizens on every economic measure and that politicians from different economic backgrounds tend to think and behave differently in office. However, the literature is far from a consensus regarding why politicians are so economically advantaged. Going forward, there are numerous opportunities for future work to address this gap; to extend the literature to new countries, institutions, and time periods; and to better understand how economic backgrounds intersect with race, gender, and other social characteristics. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"The Economic Backgrounds of Politicians","authors":"Nicholas Carnes, Noam Lupu","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102946","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102946","url":null,"abstract":"Research on the economic backgrounds of politicians is once again flourishing in political science. In this article, we describe the economic characteristics that scholars have recently studied and the common threads that have emerged in modern work on this topic. This growing literature is largely united by a shared concern about the unequal economic makeup of institutions: Recent studies generally agree that politicians tend to be vastly better off than citizens on every economic measure and that politicians from different economic backgrounds tend to think and behave differently in office. However, the literature is far from a consensus regarding why politicians are so economically advantaged. Going forward, there are numerous opportunities for future work to address this gap; to extend the literature to new countries, institutions, and time periods; and to better understand how economic backgrounds intersect with race, gender, and other social characteristics. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78331391","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533
D. Carpenter
The study of agenda setting has become curiously disconnected from democratic theory and democratization. Following Schattschneider, Dahl, and recent developments in political theory, I call for its reintegration in theoretical and empirical realms. The concept of agenda democracy allows for better understanding of contests over institutions, significant historical-institutional transformations, the study of inequality and its mechanisms of generation and maintenance, and the building and undermining of democracy. Agenda democracy requires a broad understanding of agendas (beyond a mere menu of final policy choices), recognizes that many democratic regimes have institutions that systematically render agendas nondemocratic, and compels us to look at the interstices of institutions and society (party transformation, petition and grievance mechanisms, advocacy campaigns, initiatives to expand what I call the shortlist of the possible) for moments of significant change. Agenda democracy compels the examination of democratizing agenda restrictions, the study of conservative organizations in politics, and the consideration of decomposing the term “movement.” Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Agenda Democracy","authors":"D. Carpenter","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102533","url":null,"abstract":"The study of agenda setting has become curiously disconnected from democratic theory and democratization. Following Schattschneider, Dahl, and recent developments in political theory, I call for its reintegration in theoretical and empirical realms. The concept of agenda democracy allows for better understanding of contests over institutions, significant historical-institutional transformations, the study of inequality and its mechanisms of generation and maintenance, and the building and undermining of democracy. Agenda democracy requires a broad understanding of agendas (beyond a mere menu of final policy choices), recognizes that many democratic regimes have institutions that systematically render agendas nondemocratic, and compels us to look at the interstices of institutions and society (party transformation, petition and grievance mechanisms, advocacy campaigns, initiatives to expand what I call the shortlist of the possible) for moments of significant change. Agenda democracy compels the examination of democratizing agenda restrictions, the study of conservative organizations in politics, and the consideration of decomposing the term “movement.” Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90231024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102914
Katherine Bersch, F. Fukuyama
In political science, one issue still in need of greater theorizing is the proper measurement of bureaucratic autonomy, that is, the degree of discretion that political principals should grant to bureaucratic agents. This article reviews the literature on bureaucratic autonomy both in US administrative law and in political science. It uses the American experience to define five mechanisms by which political principals grant and limit autonomy, then goes on to survey the comparative literature on other democratic systems using the American framework as a baseline. Other democracies use different mixtures of these mechanisms, for example by substituting stronger ex post review for ex ante procedures or using appointment and removal power in place of either. We find that the administrative law and social science literatures on this topic approach it very differently, and that each would profit from greater awareness of the other discipline. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Defining Bureaucratic Autonomy","authors":"Katherine Bersch, F. Fukuyama","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102914","url":null,"abstract":"In political science, one issue still in need of greater theorizing is the proper measurement of bureaucratic autonomy, that is, the degree of discretion that political principals should grant to bureaucratic agents. This article reviews the literature on bureaucratic autonomy both in US administrative law and in political science. It uses the American experience to define five mechanisms by which political principals grant and limit autonomy, then goes on to survey the comparative literature on other democratic systems using the American framework as a baseline. Other democracies use different mixtures of these mechanisms, for example by substituting stronger ex post review for ex ante procedures or using appointment and removal power in place of either. We find that the administrative law and social science literatures on this topic approach it very differently, and that each would profit from greater awareness of the other discipline. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85866462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-12DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-052121-020406
Anne Meng, Jack Paine, R. Powell
We provide a unified language for studying power sharing in authoritarian regimes. Power-sharing deals entail not only sharing spoils between a ruler and challenger, but also establishing an enforcement mechanism. An arrangement does not truly share power without reallocating power to make it costly for the ruler to renege. Institutional concessions, such as delegating agenda control over policy decisions or empowering third-party enforcers, can reallocate power. However, weak institutions create a Catch-22 that inhibits credible commitment. When institutions are weak, self-enforcing power sharing is still possible if challengers have coercive means to defend their spoils. However, challengers can leverage their coercive capabilities to overthrow the ruler. This double-edged sword implies that a strategic dictator shares power only under specific conditions: challengers can credibly punish an autocratic ruler; if the ruler shares power, the challenger must willingly forgo taking harmful actions; and the ruler willingly acquiesces to diminished power and rents. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Authoritarian Power Sharing: Concepts, Mechanisms, and Strategies","authors":"Anne Meng, Jack Paine, R. Powell","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-052121-020406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-052121-020406","url":null,"abstract":"We provide a unified language for studying power sharing in authoritarian regimes. Power-sharing deals entail not only sharing spoils between a ruler and challenger, but also establishing an enforcement mechanism. An arrangement does not truly share power without reallocating power to make it costly for the ruler to renege. Institutional concessions, such as delegating agenda control over policy decisions or empowering third-party enforcers, can reallocate power. However, weak institutions create a Catch-22 that inhibits credible commitment. When institutions are weak, self-enforcing power sharing is still possible if challengers have coercive means to defend their spoils. However, challengers can leverage their coercive capabilities to overthrow the ruler. This double-edged sword implies that a strategic dictator shares power only under specific conditions: challengers can credibly punish an autocratic ruler; if the ruler shares power, the challenger must willingly forgo taking harmful actions; and the ruler willingly acquiesces to diminished power and rents. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86997489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102729
S. Goodman
This article reviews the field of citizenship studies, with attention to the causes and consequences of policy. It summarizes key findings and points of consensus across three research domains: the determinants of citizenship policy, the consequences of citizenship policy, and the consequences of citizenship, i.e., the utility of obtaining citizenship for immigrant integration. After identifying strengths and weaknesses of each, I propose new directions in research that widen the field in terms of cases and generalizable theory while also deepening the field through serious attention to approaches that center the immigrant experience. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Citizenship Studies: Policy Causes and Consequences","authors":"S. Goodman","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102729","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102729","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the field of citizenship studies, with attention to the causes and consequences of policy. It summarizes key findings and points of consensus across three research domains: the determinants of citizenship policy, the consequences of citizenship policy, and the consequences of citizenship, i.e., the utility of obtaining citizenship for immigrant integration. After identifying strengths and weaknesses of each, I propose new directions in research that widen the field in terms of cases and generalizable theory while also deepening the field through serious attention to approaches that center the immigrant experience. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76355948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102440
Volha Charnysh, Eugene Finkel, Scott Gehlbach
A recent wave of research in political science examines the past using statistical methods for causal inference and formal theory—a field widely known as historical political economy (HPE). We examine the development of this field. Our survey reveals three common uses of history in HPE: understanding the past for its own sake, using history as a way to understand the present, and using history as a setting to explore theoretical conjectures. We present important work in each area and discuss trade-offs of each approach. We further identify key practical and analytical challenges for scholars of HPE, including the accessibility of data that do exist and obstacles to inference when they do not. Looking to the future, we see improved training for scholars entering the field, a heightened focus on the accumulation of knowledge, and greater attention to underexplored topics such as race, gender, ethnicity, and climate change. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Historical Political Economy: Past, Present, and Future","authors":"Volha Charnysh, Eugene Finkel, Scott Gehlbach","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102440","url":null,"abstract":"A recent wave of research in political science examines the past using statistical methods for causal inference and formal theory—a field widely known as historical political economy (HPE). We examine the development of this field. Our survey reveals three common uses of history in HPE: understanding the past for its own sake, using history as a way to understand the present, and using history as a setting to explore theoretical conjectures. We present important work in each area and discuss trade-offs of each approach. We further identify key practical and analytical challenges for scholars of HPE, including the accessibility of data that do exist and obstacles to inference when they do not. Looking to the future, we see improved training for scholars entering the field, a heightened focus on the accumulation of knowledge, and greater attention to underexplored topics such as race, gender, ethnicity, and climate change. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83574549","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-29DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102842
Francisco Herreros
This article explores the effects of the state on the creation of social trust. It identifies four theories connecting these two variables. The first and probably most important one stresses the role of the state as a third-party punisher of free-riders, especially in large societies where people have continuous interactions with strangers. The second claims that citizens extrapolate state officers’ corruption levels to ordinary citizens’ trustworthiness. The third claims that the state promotes trust by increasing income equality, and the final one claims that the state fosters trust by providing information about types of people. Finally, the article discusses how the empirical models relating to the state and trust deal with endogeneity problems, how outcomes from experimental analyses question the results obtained from observational data, and how this work affects our ideas about what trust ultimately refers to. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"The State and Trust","authors":"Francisco Herreros","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102842","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the effects of the state on the creation of social trust. It identifies four theories connecting these two variables. The first and probably most important one stresses the role of the state as a third-party punisher of free-riders, especially in large societies where people have continuous interactions with strangers. The second claims that citizens extrapolate state officers’ corruption levels to ordinary citizens’ trustworthiness. The third claims that the state promotes trust by increasing income equality, and the final one claims that the state fosters trust by providing information about types of people. Finally, the article discusses how the empirical models relating to the state and trust deal with endogeneity problems, how outcomes from experimental analyses question the results obtained from observational data, and how this work affects our ideas about what trust ultimately refers to. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81428104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-14DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051421-124241
J. Colgan, Miriam Hinthorn
Global climate change is opening up new questions and reinvigorating old lines of inquiry in the study of international energy politics. Many policymakers and stakeholders are pushing for a clean energy transition away from the fossil fuels that have long dominated the world's energy supply. On some issues, there is considerable consensus between political scientists and other analysts, such as the basic categories of the “winners” and “losers” from the clean energy transition. On other issues, however, political science tends to depart significantly from other disciplines. The politics of the desired clean energy transition are highly complicated and filled with obstacles beyond those typically highlighted by either economics or physical sciences. For these reasons, energy politics associated with oil and other fossil fuels are far from over and continue to develop, even as new political dynamics associated with the clean energy transition emerge. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"International Energy Politics in an Age of Climate Change","authors":"J. Colgan, Miriam Hinthorn","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051421-124241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051421-124241","url":null,"abstract":"Global climate change is opening up new questions and reinvigorating old lines of inquiry in the study of international energy politics. Many policymakers and stakeholders are pushing for a clean energy transition away from the fossil fuels that have long dominated the world's energy supply. On some issues, there is considerable consensus between political scientists and other analysts, such as the basic categories of the “winners” and “losers” from the clean energy transition. On other issues, however, political science tends to depart significantly from other disciplines. The politics of the desired clean energy transition are highly complicated and filled with obstacles beyond those typically highlighted by either economics or physical sciences. For these reasons, energy politics associated with oil and other fossil fuels are far from over and continue to develop, even as new political dynamics associated with the clean energy transition emerge. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82513481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-28DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-060722-103142
Hakeem Jefferson, José Luis Gandara, Cathy Cohen, Y. González, Rebecca U. Thorpe, Vesla M. Weaver
Political scientist Hakeem Jefferson (Stanford University) facilitated a discussion about race, policing, and the state of American democracy with fellow political scientists Cathy J. Cohen (University of Chicago), Yanilda M. González (Harvard Kennedy School), Rebecca U. Thorpe (University of Washington), and Vesla M. Weaver (Johns Hopkins University) on May 26, 2021. The conversation occurred a year after George Perry Floyd Jr., a 46-year-old Black man, was murdered by a White police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Moving beyond common notions of democracy that focus primarily on voting and electoral participation, the panelists discussed how American policing and the criminal justice system, more broadly, redefine citizenship, redistribute power, and shape marginalized people's understanding of their place in society. Closing remarks addressed the potential for change in how criminal justice institutions treat marginalized people and how political scientists can more usefully contribute to efforts that strengthen democracy for all. This is an edited transcript of the conversation and includes a bibliography of the sources mentioned. Watch a video of this conversation online. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
2021年5月26日，政治学家哈基姆·杰斐逊(斯坦福大学)与其他政治学家凯茜·j·科恩(芝加哥大学)、雅尼尔达·m·González(哈佛大学肯尼迪学院)、丽贝卡·u·索普(华盛顿大学)和韦斯拉·m·韦弗(约翰霍普金斯大学)共同推动了一场关于种族、警务和美国民主状况的讨论。一年前，46岁的黑人小乔治·佩里·弗洛伊德(George Perry Floyd Jr.)在明尼苏达州明尼阿波利斯市被一名白人警察谋杀。讨论小组成员超越了主要关注投票和选举参与的常见民主概念，讨论了美国的警务和刑事司法系统如何在更广泛的范围内重新定义公民身份，重新分配权力，并塑造边缘化人群对其社会地位的理解。结束语讨论了刑事司法机构如何对待边缘化人群方面可能发生的变化，以及政治学家如何能够更有效地为加强全民民主的努力作出贡献。这是一份经过编辑的谈话记录，包括所提到的来源的参考书目。请在线观看下面的对话视频。预计《政治学年度评论》第26卷的最终在线出版日期为2023年6月。修订后的估计数请参阅http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates。
{"title":"Beyond the Ballot Box: A Conversation About Democracy and Policing in the United States","authors":"Hakeem Jefferson, José Luis Gandara, Cathy Cohen, Y. González, Rebecca U. Thorpe, Vesla M. Weaver","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-060722-103142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-060722-103142","url":null,"abstract":"Political scientist Hakeem Jefferson (Stanford University) facilitated a discussion about race, policing, and the state of American democracy with fellow political scientists Cathy J. Cohen (University of Chicago), Yanilda M. González (Harvard Kennedy School), Rebecca U. Thorpe (University of Washington), and Vesla M. Weaver (Johns Hopkins University) on May 26, 2021. The conversation occurred a year after George Perry Floyd Jr., a 46-year-old Black man, was murdered by a White police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Moving beyond common notions of democracy that focus primarily on voting and electoral participation, the panelists discussed how American policing and the criminal justice system, more broadly, redefine citizenship, redistribute power, and shape marginalized people's understanding of their place in society. Closing remarks addressed the potential for change in how criminal justice institutions treat marginalized people and how political scientists can more usefully contribute to efforts that strengthen democracy for all. This is an edited transcript of the conversation and includes a bibliography of the sources mentioned. Watch a video of this conversation online. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 26 is June 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"257 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82231028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-12DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-060820-060910
J. Gerring, C. Knutsen, Jonas Berge
Does democracy matter for normatively desirable outcomes? We survey results from 1,100 cross-country analyses drawn from 600 journal articles published after the year 2000. These analyses are conducted on 30 distinct outcomes pertaining to social policy, economic policy, citizenship and human rights, military and criminal justice, and overall governance. Across these diverse outcomes, most studies report either a positive or null relationship with democracy. However, there is evidence of threshold bias, suggesting that reported findings may reflect a somewhat exaggerated image of democracy's effects. Additionally, democratic effects are more likely to be found for outcomes that are easily attained than for those that lie beyond the reach of government but are often of great normative importance. We also find that outcomes measured by subjective indicators show a stronger positive relationship with democracy than outcomes that are measured or proxied by more objective indicators.
{"title":"Does Democracy Matter?","authors":"J. Gerring, C. Knutsen, Jonas Berge","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-060820-060910","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-060820-060910","url":null,"abstract":"Does democracy matter for normatively desirable outcomes? We survey results from 1,100 cross-country analyses drawn from 600 journal articles published after the year 2000. These analyses are conducted on 30 distinct outcomes pertaining to social policy, economic policy, citizenship and human rights, military and criminal justice, and overall governance. Across these diverse outcomes, most studies report either a positive or null relationship with democracy. However, there is evidence of threshold bias, suggesting that reported findings may reflect a somewhat exaggerated image of democracy's effects. Additionally, democratic effects are more likely to be found for outcomes that are easily attained than for those that lie beyond the reach of government but are often of great normative importance. We also find that outcomes measured by subjective indicators show a stronger positive relationship with democracy than outcomes that are measured or proxied by more objective indicators.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80763501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：