比较独立公投:为什么有些国家接受而有些国家不接受?

IF 3 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Enrique Sánchez Sánchez, Jean-Baptiste Harguindéguy, Almudena Sánchez Sánchez, Alistair Cole
{"title":"比较独立公投:为什么有些国家接受而有些国家不接受?","authors":"Enrique Sánchez Sánchez, Jean-Baptiste Harguindéguy, Almudena Sánchez Sánchez, Alistair Cole","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2082960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article aims to explain why some central governments accept to hold independence referendums while others refuse to do so. For this purpose, this investigation assesses a series of seven hypotheses on 131 international cases of secession consultations from 1944 to 2021 extracted from an updated version of the Contested sovereignty dataset. The results of the logistic regression model identify four relevant variables. In the first place, the competition/proximity model and the time variable explain the support brought by central governments for the organisation of self-determination referendums. Additionally, the study shows that the quality of democracy influences the decision to allow minorities to hold independence consultations. Finally, and with a lower level of significance, it is also argued that periods of previous violence incite host state authorities to agree to hold self-determination referendums.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"29 1","pages":"1868 - 1891"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Independence Referendums: Why Do Some States Accept Them while Others Do Not?\",\"authors\":\"Enrique Sánchez Sánchez, Jean-Baptiste Harguindéguy, Almudena Sánchez Sánchez, Alistair Cole\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14650045.2022.2082960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article aims to explain why some central governments accept to hold independence referendums while others refuse to do so. For this purpose, this investigation assesses a series of seven hypotheses on 131 international cases of secession consultations from 1944 to 2021 extracted from an updated version of the Contested sovereignty dataset. The results of the logistic regression model identify four relevant variables. In the first place, the competition/proximity model and the time variable explain the support brought by central governments for the organisation of self-determination referendums. Additionally, the study shows that the quality of democracy influences the decision to allow minorities to hold independence consultations. Finally, and with a lower level of significance, it is also argued that periods of previous violence incite host state authorities to agree to hold self-determination referendums.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geopolitics\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"1868 - 1891\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geopolitics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2082960\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geopolitics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2082960","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ABSTRACT 本文旨在解释为什么一些中央政府同意举行独立公投,而另一些中央政府却拒绝这样做。为此,本研究从有争议主权数据集的更新版本中提取了 1944 年至 2021 年间 131 个国际分离协商案例,对其中的七个假设进行了评估。逻辑回归模型的结果确定了四个相关变量。首先,竞争/邻近模型和时间变量解释了中央政府对组织自决公投的支持。此外,研究还表明,民主的质量影响着允许少数民族举行独立协商的决定。最后,在显著性水平较低的情况下,研究还认为以前的暴力时期会促使东道国当局同意举行自决全民投票。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Independence Referendums: Why Do Some States Accept Them while Others Do Not?
ABSTRACT This article aims to explain why some central governments accept to hold independence referendums while others refuse to do so. For this purpose, this investigation assesses a series of seven hypotheses on 131 international cases of secession consultations from 1944 to 2021 extracted from an updated version of the Contested sovereignty dataset. The results of the logistic regression model identify four relevant variables. In the first place, the competition/proximity model and the time variable explain the support brought by central governments for the organisation of self-determination referendums. Additionally, the study shows that the quality of democracy influences the decision to allow minorities to hold independence consultations. Finally, and with a lower level of significance, it is also argued that periods of previous violence incite host state authorities to agree to hold self-determination referendums.
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
Geopolitics
Geopolitics Multiple-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: The study of geopolitics has undergone a major renaissance during the past decade. Addressing a gap in the published periodical literature, this journal seeks to explore the theoretical implications of contemporary geopolitics and geopolitical change with particular reference to territorial problems and issues of state sovereignty . Multidisciplinary in its scope, Geopolitics includes all aspects of the social sciences with particular emphasis on political geography, international relations, the territorial aspects of political science and international law. The journal seeks to maintain a healthy balance between systemic and regional analysis.
×
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