Hybrid regimes: An Overview

IF 0.2 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
IPRI Journal Pub Date : 2022-06-30 DOI:10.31945/iprij.220101
Dr. Muntasser Majeed Hameed
{"title":"Hybrid regimes: An Overview","authors":"Dr. Muntasser Majeed Hameed","doi":"10.31945/iprij.220101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to different types of democracy Indexes,  hybrid regimes or those in the gray zone, make up the majority of regime transformations in the third wave of democracy. However, after nearly three decades, conceptual confusion about hybrid regimes persists and grows, while obstructing the accumulation of knowledge about the nature of hybrid regimes. This leads to significant political repercussions for democratization. This Paper attempts to provide a clearer view of different and overlapping concepts. The classifications in this complex field, and sustain development in democratic transformation are highlighted in the literature review. To achieve this, we followed an approach based on the classification of concepts and terms in three distinct categories, based on the different trends and successive stages in literature on hybrid regimes. This limits the conceptual stretching and intellectual bias. It also helps to extrapolate the elements of contrast and diversity to highlight the prospects for the transition to those regimes as much as possible. The Paper reached a number of results. The transition paradigm was the product of a previous stage during the strong early days of the third wave. Similarly, the subsequent facts have proven that this was not \"the end of history.\" The hybrid regimes expressed these facts through their different patterns that were in multiple directions due to various cases and contexts. Therefore, the transition outcomes are also as accommodating towards the diversity in the experiences of different democratic countries.","PeriodicalId":41363,"journal":{"name":"IPRI Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IPRI Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31945/iprij.220101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

According to different types of democracy Indexes,  hybrid regimes or those in the gray zone, make up the majority of regime transformations in the third wave of democracy. However, after nearly three decades, conceptual confusion about hybrid regimes persists and grows, while obstructing the accumulation of knowledge about the nature of hybrid regimes. This leads to significant political repercussions for democratization. This Paper attempts to provide a clearer view of different and overlapping concepts. The classifications in this complex field, and sustain development in democratic transformation are highlighted in the literature review. To achieve this, we followed an approach based on the classification of concepts and terms in three distinct categories, based on the different trends and successive stages in literature on hybrid regimes. This limits the conceptual stretching and intellectual bias. It also helps to extrapolate the elements of contrast and diversity to highlight the prospects for the transition to those regimes as much as possible. The Paper reached a number of results. The transition paradigm was the product of a previous stage during the strong early days of the third wave. Similarly, the subsequent facts have proven that this was not "the end of history." The hybrid regimes expressed these facts through their different patterns that were in multiple directions due to various cases and contexts. Therefore, the transition outcomes are also as accommodating towards the diversity in the experiences of different democratic countries.
混合制度:综述
根据不同类型的民主指数, 混合政权或处于灰色地带的政权,构成了第三波民主浪潮中政权转型的大部分。然而,近三十年后,关于混合政权的概念混乱持续存在并加剧,同时阻碍了关于混合政权性质的知识积累。这对民主化产生了重大的政治影响。本文试图对不同和重叠的概念提供一个更清晰的视角。文献综述强调了这一复杂领域的分类以及民主转型中的可持续发展。为了实现这一点,我们采用了一种方法,基于混合制度文献中的不同趋势和连续阶段,将概念和术语分为三个不同的类别。这限制了概念延伸和智力偏见。这也有助于推断对比和多样性的因素,以尽可能突出向这些制度过渡的前景。该论文取得了一些成果。过渡范式是第三波浪潮早期强劲时期前一阶段的产物。同样,随后的事实证明,这并不是“历史的终结”。混合政权通过其不同的模式来表达这些事实,这些模式因各种情况和背景而朝着多个方向发展。因此,过渡成果也同样适应了不同民主国家经验的多样性。
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
IPRI Journal
IPRI Journal INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信