向共识民主的转变与亚洲制度设计的局限性

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2022-02-10 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2022.2035426
Yuko Kasuya, B. Reilly
{"title":"向共识民主的转变与亚洲制度设计的局限性","authors":"Yuko Kasuya, B. Reilly","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2022.2035426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A ‘majoritarian turn’ identified by scholars of Asian democracy in the 1990s saw the rise of mixed-member majoritarian electoral systems and more centripetal party competition across both Northeast and Southeast Asia. In this paper, we argue that since the 2000s, the institutional pendulum has shifted, with more consensual approaches to democracy appearing to better represent key identity cleavages of gender, ethnicity, and territory—a trend evident not just in East Asia but South Asia as well. This new ‘Asian model’ typically involves increasing the proportional components of existing electoral formulas and grafting gender quotas, multiethnic party lists, and quasi-federal elements onto ostensibly majoritarian state structures. We show that these reforms have, as intended, mostly increased female and ethnic minority representation and decentralized governance structures. At the same time, however, these de jure changes are not associated with de facto political development in terms of greater democratic quality, counter to theoretical expectations. Indeed, democracy has declined across most of Asia at the same time as its democratic institutions have become more consensual.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"844 - 870"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The shift to consensus democracy and limits of institutional design in Asia\",\"authors\":\"Yuko Kasuya, B. Reilly\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09512748.2022.2035426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A ‘majoritarian turn’ identified by scholars of Asian democracy in the 1990s saw the rise of mixed-member majoritarian electoral systems and more centripetal party competition across both Northeast and Southeast Asia. In this paper, we argue that since the 2000s, the institutional pendulum has shifted, with more consensual approaches to democracy appearing to better represent key identity cleavages of gender, ethnicity, and territory—a trend evident not just in East Asia but South Asia as well. This new ‘Asian model’ typically involves increasing the proportional components of existing electoral formulas and grafting gender quotas, multiethnic party lists, and quasi-federal elements onto ostensibly majoritarian state structures. We show that these reforms have, as intended, mostly increased female and ethnic minority representation and decentralized governance structures. At the same time, however, these de jure changes are not associated with de facto political development in terms of greater democratic quality, counter to theoretical expectations. Indeed, democracy has declined across most of Asia at the same time as its democratic institutions have become more consensual.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pacific Review\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"844 - 870\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pacific Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2035426\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2035426","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要20世纪90年代,亚洲民主学者发现了一种“多数主义转向”,即混合成员多数选举制度的兴起,以及东北亚和东南亚更为向心的政党竞争。在这篇论文中,我们认为,自2000年代以来,制度的钟摆已经发生了变化,对民主的更一致的做法似乎更好地代表了性别、种族和领土的关键身份划分——这一趋势不仅在东亚,在南亚也很明显。这种新的“亚洲模式”通常包括增加现有选举方案的比例组成部分,并将性别配额、多民族政党名单和准联邦元素移植到表面上的多数主义国家结构中。我们表明,正如预期的那样,这些改革主要增加了女性和少数民族的代表性,并分散了治理结构。然而,与此同时,这些法律上的变化与更大的民主质量方面的事实上的政治发展并不相关,这与理论预期相反。事实上,亚洲大部分地区的民主都在衰落,与此同时,其民主制度也变得更加一致。
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
The shift to consensus democracy and limits of institutional design in Asia
Abstract A ‘majoritarian turn’ identified by scholars of Asian democracy in the 1990s saw the rise of mixed-member majoritarian electoral systems and more centripetal party competition across both Northeast and Southeast Asia. In this paper, we argue that since the 2000s, the institutional pendulum has shifted, with more consensual approaches to democracy appearing to better represent key identity cleavages of gender, ethnicity, and territory—a trend evident not just in East Asia but South Asia as well. This new ‘Asian model’ typically involves increasing the proportional components of existing electoral formulas and grafting gender quotas, multiethnic party lists, and quasi-federal elements onto ostensibly majoritarian state structures. We show that these reforms have, as intended, mostly increased female and ethnic minority representation and decentralized governance structures. At the same time, however, these de jure changes are not associated with de facto political development in terms of greater democratic quality, counter to theoretical expectations. Indeed, democracy has declined across most of Asia at the same time as its democratic institutions have become more consensual.
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
Pacific Review
Pacific Review Multiple-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Blue Pacific’ strategic narrative: rhetorical action, acceptance, entrapment, and appropriation? Beyond the ‘North’-’South’ impasse: self-effacing Japan, emancipatory movements of the Global South and West-Engineered aid architecture Deter together or deter separately?: time horizons and peacetime alliance cohesion of the US-Japan and US-ROK alliances The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia Informal governance and China’s influence in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
×
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