好种子长好收成?公民社会与独立后民主水平的关系

IF 0.7 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Sandra Grahn, Anna Lührmann
{"title":"好种子长好收成?公民社会与独立后民主水平的关系","authors":"Sandra Grahn, Anna Lührmann","doi":"10.1080/17448689.2021.2003139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The impact of civil society on democracy is contested. Some argue that Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are important ‘schools of democracy’ and may foster democratic consolidation. Others emphasize that anti-democratic CSOs may undermine democracy. This debate is particularly relevant in the context of newly independent states. At that critical juncture, both democratic and authoritarian regime trajectories are possible. Societal preconditions – such as the state of civil society – can therefore be particularly relevant for the way forward. To what extent does the nature of CSOs prior to independence has an impact on the subsequent level of democracy? We argue that the existence of democratic CSOs prior to independence strengthens post-independence democracy whereas non-democratic CSOs have a detrimental effect. For the first time, this argument is empirically tested, using Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data on 91 cases of independence since 1905. The empirical results demonstrate that the presence of democratic CSOs prior to independence is positively correlated, whereas non-democratic CSOs are negatively correlated to democracy levels following independence.","PeriodicalId":46013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Civil Society","volume":"17 1","pages":"297 - 322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Good seed makes a good crop? The relationship between civil society and post-independence democracy levels\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Grahn, Anna Lührmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17448689.2021.2003139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The impact of civil society on democracy is contested. Some argue that Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are important ‘schools of democracy’ and may foster democratic consolidation. Others emphasize that anti-democratic CSOs may undermine democracy. This debate is particularly relevant in the context of newly independent states. At that critical juncture, both democratic and authoritarian regime trajectories are possible. Societal preconditions – such as the state of civil society – can therefore be particularly relevant for the way forward. To what extent does the nature of CSOs prior to independence has an impact on the subsequent level of democracy? We argue that the existence of democratic CSOs prior to independence strengthens post-independence democracy whereas non-democratic CSOs have a detrimental effect. For the first time, this argument is empirically tested, using Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data on 91 cases of independence since 1905. The empirical results demonstrate that the presence of democratic CSOs prior to independence is positively correlated, whereas non-democratic CSOs are negatively correlated to democracy levels following independence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Civil Society\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"297 - 322\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Civil Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2021.2003139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Civil Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2021.2003139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

公民社会对民主的影响是有争议的。一些人认为,公民社会组织(CSOs)是重要的“民主学校”,可能促进民主巩固。另一些人则强调,反民主的民间社会组织可能会破坏民主。这场辩论在新独立国家的背景下尤为重要。在这个关键时刻,民主和威权政体的轨迹都是可能的。因此,社会先决条件——例如公民社会的状态——可能与前进的道路特别相关。独立前公民社会组织的性质在多大程度上影响了随后的民主水平?我们认为,独立前民主的公民社会组织的存在加强了独立后的民主,而非民主的公民社会组织则有不利的影响。这一论点第一次得到了实证检验,使用了自1905年以来91个独立案例的民主多样性(V-Dem)数据。实证结果表明,独立前民主型公民社会的存在与独立后民主程度呈正相关,而非民主型公民社会的存在与独立后民主程度呈负相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Good seed makes a good crop? The relationship between civil society and post-independence democracy levels
ABSTRACT The impact of civil society on democracy is contested. Some argue that Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) are important ‘schools of democracy’ and may foster democratic consolidation. Others emphasize that anti-democratic CSOs may undermine democracy. This debate is particularly relevant in the context of newly independent states. At that critical juncture, both democratic and authoritarian regime trajectories are possible. Societal preconditions – such as the state of civil society – can therefore be particularly relevant for the way forward. To what extent does the nature of CSOs prior to independence has an impact on the subsequent level of democracy? We argue that the existence of democratic CSOs prior to independence strengthens post-independence democracy whereas non-democratic CSOs have a detrimental effect. For the first time, this argument is empirically tested, using Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data on 91 cases of independence since 1905. The empirical results demonstrate that the presence of democratic CSOs prior to independence is positively correlated, whereas non-democratic CSOs are negatively correlated to democracy levels following independence.
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
Journal of Civil Society
Journal of Civil Society POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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