容纳自由主义联盟:地区br案例和非正式机构在联盟模式中的作用

IF 1.2 Q3 ETHNIC STUDIES
A. Zdeb
{"title":"容纳自由主义联盟:地区br<e:1>案例和非正式机构在联盟模式中的作用","authors":"A. Zdeb","doi":"10.1080/17449057.2021.1973729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Assuming the primacy of established patterns of bargaining over the formal ones, in transitional, unstable settings—well-known to the power-sharing systems—informal institutions can emerge as the preponderant rules of interaction. Yet, there is significant negligence in the power-sharing literature that should have been devoted to the informalities embedded in the political systems of divided societies. Filling in this gap, the paper analyses the creation, role and meaning of informal institutions in the consociational model. Using the case study of the Brčko District in Bosnia and Herzegovina and framework offered by Helmke and Levitsky (‘Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda’, Perspectives on Politics, 4, 724–740, 2004), it claims that the presence of informal-corporate institutions is crucial for the functioning of its consociational system and necessary to accommodate the existing formal-liberal ones. The detailed case study analysis brings conclusions that could extend the current understanding of the power-sharing model and tackle the debate about liberal consociationalism being the preferred version of power sharing.","PeriodicalId":46452,"journal":{"name":"Ethnopolitics","volume":"21 1","pages":"517 - 537"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accommodating Liberal Consociations: The District Brčko Case and the Role of Informal Institutions in the Consociational Model\",\"authors\":\"A. Zdeb\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449057.2021.1973729\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Assuming the primacy of established patterns of bargaining over the formal ones, in transitional, unstable settings—well-known to the power-sharing systems—informal institutions can emerge as the preponderant rules of interaction. Yet, there is significant negligence in the power-sharing literature that should have been devoted to the informalities embedded in the political systems of divided societies. Filling in this gap, the paper analyses the creation, role and meaning of informal institutions in the consociational model. Using the case study of the Brčko District in Bosnia and Herzegovina and framework offered by Helmke and Levitsky (‘Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda’, Perspectives on Politics, 4, 724–740, 2004), it claims that the presence of informal-corporate institutions is crucial for the functioning of its consociational system and necessary to accommodate the existing formal-liberal ones. The detailed case study analysis brings conclusions that could extend the current understanding of the power-sharing model and tackle the debate about liberal consociationalism being the preferred version of power sharing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46452,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethnopolitics\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"517 - 537\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethnopolitics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2021.1973729\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnopolitics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2021.1973729","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要假设既定的谈判模式优先于正式的谈判模式,在权力分享制度所熟知的过渡、不稳定的环境中,非正式制度可以成为主要的互动规则。然而,权力分享文献中存在重大疏忽,本应专门研究分裂社会政治制度中的非正规性。为了填补这一空白,本文分析了非正式制度在联合模式中的产生、作用和意义。利用波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那Brčko区的案例研究和Helmke和Levitsky提供的框架(“信息机构和比较政治:研究议程”,《政治视角》,4274-7402004),它声称,非正式公司制度的存在对其联合制度的运作至关重要,也是适应现有正式自由制度的必要条件。详细的案例分析得出的结论可以扩展目前对权力分享模式的理解,并解决关于自由主义联盟主义是权力分享的首选版本的争论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accommodating Liberal Consociations: The District Brčko Case and the Role of Informal Institutions in the Consociational Model
ABSTRACT Assuming the primacy of established patterns of bargaining over the formal ones, in transitional, unstable settings—well-known to the power-sharing systems—informal institutions can emerge as the preponderant rules of interaction. Yet, there is significant negligence in the power-sharing literature that should have been devoted to the informalities embedded in the political systems of divided societies. Filling in this gap, the paper analyses the creation, role and meaning of informal institutions in the consociational model. Using the case study of the Brčko District in Bosnia and Herzegovina and framework offered by Helmke and Levitsky (‘Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda’, Perspectives on Politics, 4, 724–740, 2004), it claims that the presence of informal-corporate institutions is crucial for the functioning of its consociational system and necessary to accommodate the existing formal-liberal ones. The detailed case study analysis brings conclusions that could extend the current understanding of the power-sharing model and tackle the debate about liberal consociationalism being the preferred version of power sharing.
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
Ethnopolitics
Ethnopolitics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
37
×
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