社会主义专制、民主和混合政体中的断裂平衡与渐进摩擦

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Public Policy Pub Date : 2022-01-25 DOI:10.1017/S0143814X21000143
Miklós Sebők, Ágnes M. Balázs, Csaba Molnár
{"title":"社会主义专制、民主和混合政体中的断裂平衡与渐进摩擦","authors":"Miklós Sebők, Ágnes M. Balázs, Csaba Molnár","doi":"10.1017/S0143814X21000143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The analysis of public policy agendas in comparative politics has been somewhat limited in terms of geography, time frame and political system, with studies on full-blown autocracies and hybrid regimes few and far between. This article addresses this gap by comparing policy dynamics in three Hungarian regimes over 73 years. Besides our theoretical contribution related to policy-making in Socialist autocracy and illiberal democracy, we also test hypotheses related to non-democratic regimes. We find that – similarly to developed democracies – policy agendas in autocracies are mostly stable with occasional but large-scale “punctuations”. Our data also confirms that these punctuations are more pronounced in non-democratic polities. However, based on our results, illiberal political systems, such as the hybrid regime of Viktor Orbán, are difficult to pin down on such a clear-cut continuum between democracy and autocracy as the level of punctuation differs by policy agendas from parliamentary debates to budgets.","PeriodicalId":47578,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy","volume":"42 1","pages":"247 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Punctuated equilibrium and progressive friction in socialist autocracy, democracy and hybrid regimes\",\"authors\":\"Miklós Sebők, Ágnes M. Balázs, Csaba Molnár\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0143814X21000143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The analysis of public policy agendas in comparative politics has been somewhat limited in terms of geography, time frame and political system, with studies on full-blown autocracies and hybrid regimes few and far between. This article addresses this gap by comparing policy dynamics in three Hungarian regimes over 73 years. Besides our theoretical contribution related to policy-making in Socialist autocracy and illiberal democracy, we also test hypotheses related to non-democratic regimes. We find that – similarly to developed democracies – policy agendas in autocracies are mostly stable with occasional but large-scale “punctuations”. Our data also confirms that these punctuations are more pronounced in non-democratic polities. However, based on our results, illiberal political systems, such as the hybrid regime of Viktor Orbán, are difficult to pin down on such a clear-cut continuum between democracy and autocracy as the level of punctuation differs by policy agendas from parliamentary debates to budgets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47578,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"247 - 269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X21000143\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X21000143","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

比较政治学中对公共政策议程的分析在地理、时间框架和政治制度等方面受到一定限制,对成熟专制政体和混合型政体的研究少之又少。本文通过比较三个匈牙利政权73年来的政策动态来解决这一差距。除了我们的理论贡献与社会主义专制和非自由民主的政策制定有关,我们还检验了与非民主政权有关的假设。我们发现,与发达民主国家类似,专制国家的政策议程基本稳定,偶尔会出现大规模的“停顿”。我们的数据还证实,这些标点符号在非民主政体中更为明显。然而,根据我们的结果,不自由的政治制度,如维克多Orbán的混合政权,很难确定民主和专制之间如此明确的连续体,因为从议会辩论到预算的政策议程不同,标点符号的水平也不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Punctuated equilibrium and progressive friction in socialist autocracy, democracy and hybrid regimes
Abstract The analysis of public policy agendas in comparative politics has been somewhat limited in terms of geography, time frame and political system, with studies on full-blown autocracies and hybrid regimes few and far between. This article addresses this gap by comparing policy dynamics in three Hungarian regimes over 73 years. Besides our theoretical contribution related to policy-making in Socialist autocracy and illiberal democracy, we also test hypotheses related to non-democratic regimes. We find that – similarly to developed democracies – policy agendas in autocracies are mostly stable with occasional but large-scale “punctuations”. Our data also confirms that these punctuations are more pronounced in non-democratic polities. However, based on our results, illiberal political systems, such as the hybrid regime of Viktor Orbán, are difficult to pin down on such a clear-cut continuum between democracy and autocracy as the level of punctuation differs by policy agendas from parliamentary debates to budgets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Policy applies social science theories and concepts to significant political, economic and social issues and to the ways in which public policies are made. Its articles deal with topics of concern to public policy scholars in America, Europe, Japan and other advanced industrial nations. The journal often publishes articles that cut across disciplines, such as environmental issues, international political economy, regulatory policy and European Union processes. Its peer reviewers come from up to a dozen social science disciplines and countries across three continents, thus ensuring both analytic rigour and accuracy in reference to national and policy context.
期刊最新文献
Why are international standards not set? Explaining “weak” cases in shadow banking regulation PUP volume 43 issue 4 Cover and Back matter Policymaking in a plural society: the case of human experiments in medicine in Israel How are policy pilots managed? Findings from the New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme in China Social media exposure’s effects on public support toward three-child policy in China: role of cognitive elaboration, perceived negative effects, and institutional trust
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1