Governance under the Covid-19 pandemic: comparative perspectives on Germany and Hungary: Special section "Democratic Health in the Corona Pandemic. The Corona Pandemic as a Trigger or Amplifier of Democratic Erosion?"

IF 1.4 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Christian Schweiger
{"title":"Governance under the Covid-19 pandemic: comparative perspectives on Germany and Hungary: Special section \"Democratic Health in the Corona Pandemic. The Corona Pandemic as a Trigger or Amplifier of Democratic Erosion?\"","authors":"Christian Schweiger","doi":"10.1007/s12286-022-00546-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>By adopting a comparative approach between different regime types, the paper concentrates on Germany and Hungary as case studies for the comparative analysis of the effects the pandemic has had on national governance in the two countries which most strongly represent the growing cleavage between the EU's liberal Western core and the <i>illiberal</i> Central-Eastern periphery. Methodologically the analysis follows the Most Different Systems Design and examines to what extent the Covid pandemic has functioned as a potential catalyser for the weakening of democratic governance in formerly solid democratic political systems and/or as an accelerator of democratic backsliding in hybrid regimes. For this purpose, the paper examines the process and the content of legislation passed domestically to contain the effects of the pandemic. The analysis shows that even under the stronger coordination of executive decision-making between the federal and regional government level, the foundations of legislative and judicial scrutiny remained resilient during the pandemic in Germany's multi-level polity, while in Hungary central government has used the pandemic to substantially expand its executive powers at the expense of legislative and judiciary powers.</p>","PeriodicalId":44200,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft","volume":"16 1","pages":"663-685"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9773679/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-022-00546-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

By adopting a comparative approach between different regime types, the paper concentrates on Germany and Hungary as case studies for the comparative analysis of the effects the pandemic has had on national governance in the two countries which most strongly represent the growing cleavage between the EU's liberal Western core and the illiberal Central-Eastern periphery. Methodologically the analysis follows the Most Different Systems Design and examines to what extent the Covid pandemic has functioned as a potential catalyser for the weakening of democratic governance in formerly solid democratic political systems and/or as an accelerator of democratic backsliding in hybrid regimes. For this purpose, the paper examines the process and the content of legislation passed domestically to contain the effects of the pandemic. The analysis shows that even under the stronger coordination of executive decision-making between the federal and regional government level, the foundations of legislative and judicial scrutiny remained resilient during the pandemic in Germany's multi-level polity, while in Hungary central government has used the pandemic to substantially expand its executive powers at the expense of legislative and judiciary powers.

新冠肺炎大流行下的治理:德国和匈牙利的比较视角
通过采用不同政体类型之间的比较方法,本文将德国和匈牙利作为案例研究,对疫情对这两个国家的国家治理产生的影响进行比较分析,这两个国家最强烈地代表了欧盟自由的西方核心和不自由的中东部边缘之间日益增长的分裂。在方法上,该分析遵循了最不同系统设计,并检查了Covid大流行在多大程度上成为削弱以前稳固的民主政治制度中民主治理的潜在催化剂和/或混合政权中民主倒退的加速器。为此目的,本文件审查了为控制这一流行病的影响而在国内通过的立法的进程和内容。分析表明,即使在联邦和地区政府之间加强行政决策协调的情况下,德国多层次的政治体系中,立法和司法审查的基础在疫情期间仍然具有弹性,而在匈牙利,中央政府利用疫情大幅扩大了行政权力,牺牲了立法和司法权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Comparative Governance and Politics – Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft (ZfVP) was founded in 2007. It is an internationally renowned journal that adheres to the highest standards of quality (double-blind peer review). The journal is published quarterly, and it is the first bilingual (German and English) journal that focuses on innovative research results in the area of comparative politics. The journal is a central academic forum for outstanding research achievements in the field of comparative politics, and covers the entire range of comparative research within the field. The journal publishes conceptual, methodological, and empirical studies from all the various research areas within the discipline of political science. Special Issues and Special Sections Special Issues and Special Sections offer the opportunity to present focal topics of comparative research. All submissions undergo a double-blind peer review procedure, which is conducted within the scope of a consultation between the author and the editors through our online submission system. The editors will also initiate the creation of potential special issues through open calls for papers. At the same time, the editors always appreciate suggestions and initiatives from the comparative studies community. Proposals for Special Issues and Special Sections are also subjected to an internal evaluation process. Our Special Issues are published as one of the four quarterly issues and usually consist of six to ten articles, accompanied by an introduction written by the guest editor(s). Special Sections, on the other hand, are a topical focus in one of the four quarterly issues, consisting of three to five articles, which are supplemented by a guest editor’s preface.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信