权力的分配和包容性跨越时间的深度

IF 12.5 1区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Gary M. Feinman, David Stasavage, David M. Carballo, Sarah B. Barber, Adam Green, Jacob Holland-Lulewicz, Dan Lawrence, Jessica Munson, Linda M. Nicholas, Francesca Fulminante, Sarah Klassen, Keith W. Kintigh, John Douglass
{"title":"权力的分配和包容性跨越时间的深度","authors":"Gary M. Feinman,&nbsp;David Stasavage,&nbsp;David M. Carballo,&nbsp;Sarah B. Barber,&nbsp;Adam Green,&nbsp;Jacob Holland-Lulewicz,&nbsp;Dan Lawrence,&nbsp;Jessica Munson,&nbsp;Linda M. Nicholas,&nbsp;Francesca Fulminante,&nbsp;Sarah Klassen,&nbsp;Keith W. Kintigh,&nbsp;John Douglass","doi":"10.1126/sciadv.aec1426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div >This study presents a global, deep-time comparative analysis of governance, questioning entrenched viewpoints about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Drawing on archaeological and textual data from 40 case observations across 31 polities, we develop a quantitative framework to assess governance along a collective-autocratic axis, defined by two key dimensions: concentration of power and citizen inclusiveness. Using bridging arguments and robust proxies, we construct an autocracy index to assess where cases fall on this axis and examine them in relation to population size, hierarchical complexity, geographic region, modes of fiscal financing, bureaucratic structure, ritual practices, and socioeconomic inequality. Neither polity population nor geographic region tightly correlates with the collective-autocratic axis of governance, challenging extant neoevolutionary models. Instead, the strongest associations for autocratic governance are with external financing, patrimonial bureaucracy, spectacular ritual, and high inequality. The study underscores the diversity and persistence of collective governance, offering a scalable methodology for future comparative research and reframing historical narratives.</div>","PeriodicalId":21609,"journal":{"name":"Science Advances","volume":"12 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The distribution of power and inclusiveness across deep time\",\"authors\":\"Gary M. Feinman,&nbsp;David Stasavage,&nbsp;David M. Carballo,&nbsp;Sarah B. Barber,&nbsp;Adam Green,&nbsp;Jacob Holland-Lulewicz,&nbsp;Dan Lawrence,&nbsp;Jessica Munson,&nbsp;Linda M. Nicholas,&nbsp;Francesca Fulminante,&nbsp;Sarah Klassen,&nbsp;Keith W. Kintigh,&nbsp;John Douglass\",\"doi\":\"10.1126/sciadv.aec1426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div >This study presents a global, deep-time comparative analysis of governance, questioning entrenched viewpoints about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Drawing on archaeological and textual data from 40 case observations across 31 polities, we develop a quantitative framework to assess governance along a collective-autocratic axis, defined by two key dimensions: concentration of power and citizen inclusiveness. Using bridging arguments and robust proxies, we construct an autocracy index to assess where cases fall on this axis and examine them in relation to population size, hierarchical complexity, geographic region, modes of fiscal financing, bureaucratic structure, ritual practices, and socioeconomic inequality. Neither polity population nor geographic region tightly correlates with the collective-autocratic axis of governance, challenging extant neoevolutionary models. Instead, the strongest associations for autocratic governance are with external financing, patrimonial bureaucracy, spectacular ritual, and high inequality. The study underscores the diversity and persistence of collective governance, offering a scalable methodology for future comparative research and reframing historical narratives.</div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science Advances\",\"volume\":\"12 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aec1426\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Advances","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aec1426","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究对治理进行了全球性、深度的比较分析,质疑了关于民主制度起源和演变的根深蒂固的观点。利用来自31个国家40个案例观察的考古和文本数据,我们开发了一个定量框架,以集体专制为轴心评估治理,该框架由两个关键维度定义:权力集中和公民包容性。通过桥接论证和强大的代理,我们构建了一个专制指数,以评估案例落在这个轴上的位置,并将其与人口规模、等级复杂性、地理区域、财政融资模式、官僚结构、仪式实践和社会经济不平等联系起来。政体人口和地理区域都与集体专制的治理轴心没有紧密联系,这对现存的新进化模型构成了挑战。相反,专制统治与外部融资、世袭官僚主义、壮观的仪式和高度不平等联系在一起。该研究强调了集体治理的多样性和持久性,为未来的比较研究和重新构建历史叙述提供了可扩展的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The distribution of power and inclusiveness across deep time

The distribution of power and inclusiveness across deep time
This study presents a global, deep-time comparative analysis of governance, questioning entrenched viewpoints about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Drawing on archaeological and textual data from 40 case observations across 31 polities, we develop a quantitative framework to assess governance along a collective-autocratic axis, defined by two key dimensions: concentration of power and citizen inclusiveness. Using bridging arguments and robust proxies, we construct an autocracy index to assess where cases fall on this axis and examine them in relation to population size, hierarchical complexity, geographic region, modes of fiscal financing, bureaucratic structure, ritual practices, and socioeconomic inequality. Neither polity population nor geographic region tightly correlates with the collective-autocratic axis of governance, challenging extant neoevolutionary models. Instead, the strongest associations for autocratic governance are with external financing, patrimonial bureaucracy, spectacular ritual, and high inequality. The study underscores the diversity and persistence of collective governance, offering a scalable methodology for future comparative research and reframing historical narratives.
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
Science Advances
Science Advances 综合性期刊-综合性期刊
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
1.50%
发文量
1937
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: Science Advances, an open-access journal by AAAS, publishes impactful research in diverse scientific areas. It aims for fair, fast, and expert peer review, providing freely accessible research to readers. Led by distinguished scientists, the journal supports AAAS's mission by extending Science magazine's capacity to identify and promote significant advances. Evolving digital publishing technologies play a crucial role in advancing AAAS's global mission for science communication and benefitting humankind.
×
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
小红书