受到攻击的公民社会:横向问责机构的后果

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q3 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Hannah Smidt, Jessica Johansson, Thomas Richter
{"title":"受到攻击的公民社会:横向问责机构的后果","authors":"Hannah Smidt, Jessica Johansson, Thomas Richter","doi":"10.1007/s12116-023-09423-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Existing research shows that the activity of independent civil society organizations (CSOs) is an important ingredient of democratization and democratic consolidation. Yet, what happens when governments impose restrictions on CSO activity? This manuscript investigates how restrictions on CSOs affect the quality of horizontal accountability institutions like parliaments and courts. CSOs monitor and mobilize against violations of democratic norms. Thus, if governments impose restrictions on CSO activity, they may face fewer barriers (i.e., less scrutiny and criticism) to dismantling horizontal checks and balances. In addition, when restrictions prevent CSOs from supporting horizontal accountability institutions (e.g., with monitoring and expertise), the latter’s ability to control and constrain governments likely declines. Our large-<i>N</i> cross-country analysis supports this argument, suggesting that the imposition of restrictions on CSOs diminishes the quality of horizontal accountability institutions. We examine alternative explanations (i.e., prior autocratization trends and the authoritarian nature of governments) and offer qualitative evidence from Kenya and Turkey to illustrate the expected causal pathways. Our results imply that a crackdown on CSOs serves as a warning sign of deteriorating horizontal oversight.</p>","PeriodicalId":47488,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Comparative International Development","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Civil Society Under Attack: The Consequences for Horizontal Accountability Institutions\",\"authors\":\"Hannah Smidt, Jessica Johansson, Thomas Richter\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12116-023-09423-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Existing research shows that the activity of independent civil society organizations (CSOs) is an important ingredient of democratization and democratic consolidation. Yet, what happens when governments impose restrictions on CSO activity? This manuscript investigates how restrictions on CSOs affect the quality of horizontal accountability institutions like parliaments and courts. CSOs monitor and mobilize against violations of democratic norms. Thus, if governments impose restrictions on CSO activity, they may face fewer barriers (i.e., less scrutiny and criticism) to dismantling horizontal checks and balances. In addition, when restrictions prevent CSOs from supporting horizontal accountability institutions (e.g., with monitoring and expertise), the latter’s ability to control and constrain governments likely declines. Our large-<i>N</i> cross-country analysis supports this argument, suggesting that the imposition of restrictions on CSOs diminishes the quality of horizontal accountability institutions. We examine alternative explanations (i.e., prior autocratization trends and the authoritarian nature of governments) and offer qualitative evidence from Kenya and Turkey to illustrate the expected causal pathways. Our results imply that a crackdown on CSOs serves as a warning sign of deteriorating horizontal oversight.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Comparative International Development\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Comparative International Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-023-09423-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Comparative International Development","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-023-09423-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现有研究表明,独立民间社会组织(CSO)的活动是民主化和民主巩固的重要因素。然而,当政府对民间社会组织的活动施加限制时,会发生什么情况呢?本手稿研究了对民间组织的限制如何影响议会和法院等横向问责机构的质量。民间组织对违反民主准则的行为进行监督和动员。因此,如果政府对民间社会组织的活动施加限制,他们在拆除横向制衡机制时可能会面临更少的障碍(即更少的监督和批评)。此外,如果限制措施阻碍了民间组织对横向问责机构的支持(如监督和专业知识),后者控制和制约政府的能力就可能下降。我们的大 N 值跨国分析支持这一论点,表明对民间组织施加限制会降低横向问责机构的质量。我们研究了其他解释(即先前的专制趋势和政府的独裁性质),并提供了肯尼亚和土耳其的定性证据来说明预期的因果关系。我们的研究结果表明,对民间组织的打击是横向监督恶化的警示信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Civil Society Under Attack: The Consequences for Horizontal Accountability Institutions

Civil Society Under Attack: The Consequences for Horizontal Accountability Institutions

Existing research shows that the activity of independent civil society organizations (CSOs) is an important ingredient of democratization and democratic consolidation. Yet, what happens when governments impose restrictions on CSO activity? This manuscript investigates how restrictions on CSOs affect the quality of horizontal accountability institutions like parliaments and courts. CSOs monitor and mobilize against violations of democratic norms. Thus, if governments impose restrictions on CSO activity, they may face fewer barriers (i.e., less scrutiny and criticism) to dismantling horizontal checks and balances. In addition, when restrictions prevent CSOs from supporting horizontal accountability institutions (e.g., with monitoring and expertise), the latter’s ability to control and constrain governments likely declines. Our large-N cross-country analysis supports this argument, suggesting that the imposition of restrictions on CSOs diminishes the quality of horizontal accountability institutions. We examine alternative explanations (i.e., prior autocratization trends and the authoritarian nature of governments) and offer qualitative evidence from Kenya and Turkey to illustrate the expected causal pathways. Our results imply that a crackdown on CSOs serves as a warning sign of deteriorating horizontal oversight.

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
3.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Studies in Comparative International Development (SCID) is an interdisciplinary journal that addresses issues concerning political, social, economic, and environmental change in local, national, and international contexts. Among its major emphasis are political and state institutions; the effects of a changing international economy; political-economic models of growth and distribution; and the transformation of social structure and culture.The journal has a tradition of presenting critical and innovative analytical perspectives that challenge prevailing orthodoxies. It publishes original research articles on the developing world and is open to all theoretical and methodical approaches.
×
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