Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy and the Global Recession of Democracy

46
Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy and The Global Recession of Democracy

description

Презентація до лекції Ларрі Даймонда "Визначення демократії: виборча, ліберальна демократія, якість демократії", що відбулася в НаУКМА 9 вересня 2013 року у співпраці з Українською школою політичних студій. Ларрі Даймонд розглядає різницю між виборчою та ліберальною демократією та визначає показники оцінки якості демократії. Він також аналізує світові тенденції виборчої і ліберальної демократії та пояснює, чому якість демократії тісно пов'язана зі стабільністю та консолідацією демократії. Ларрі Даймонд є професором Стенфордського університету та старшим науковцем Інституту Гувера. Також він працював в якості радника численних урядових і міжнародних організацій, в тому числі Державного департаменту США, ООН, Світового банку.

Transcript of Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy and the Global Recession of Democracy

Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy

and The Global Recession

of Democracy

Themes

I. Electoral DemocracyII. Liberal DemocracyIII. The Quality of DemocracyIV. The Trends in DemocracyV. Why a Recession of Democracy

What is Electoral Democracy?

A system of government at the level of the nation-state

A means for the people (with equal political rights as citizens) to choose their political leaders and (if they wish) to replace their leaders in regular, meaningful, free, and fair elections

Sufficient freedom for elections to be meaningful, free and, fair

Liberal (High-Quality) Democracy1. Democracy: “Majority rule”

Popular sovereignty and control over governmentCompetition, participation, vertical accountability,

responsiveness

2. Liberal government: “Minority rights” Freedom, Equality, Civic Culture

3. Republican government: “Good Governance” Rule of law, horizontal accountability, state

effectiveness

Components of Liberal (or High-Quality) Democracy

1. Liberty: Extensive freedoms of:• Speech• Press (print and broadcast)• Association• Assembly, and peaceful protest• Movement• Thought and belief• Religion & religious practice• Language, identity, cultural expression

Liberty (Freedom) cont.and freedoms from:

• Torture• Warrantless search and seizure• Corrupt demands and impositions• Violence and coercion by state and non-state

actors

Liberal Democracy 2: Rule of Lawprotects rights of citizens, maintains order, & limits

power of government• All citizens are equal under the law• No arbitrary arrest, exile, or imprisonment• No one is above the law• Government power is limited; no official may

violate these legal and constitutional limits• The courts are independent in structure and

in fact

Rule of Law, cont.

• Right to know the charges against you, presumption of innocence

• Right to a fair, speedy, and public trial by an impartial court

• No one may be taxed or prosecuted except by a law established in advance

• No one may be subjected to torture or cruel and inhumane treatment

Power is separated and dispersed among multiple, independent branches and institutions of government (checks & balances)

• Executive power is limited, constrained and scrutinized by an independent legislature, judiciary, and other institutions

Liberal Democracy 3: Horizontal Accountability

Horizontal Accountability, cont.• Independent institutions to monitor &

control corruption & abuse of power Counter-corruption commission Ombudsman (public complaints comm) Parliamentary investigative committees Supreme audit agency (GAO) Prosecutors and courts National electoral commission Central Bank

Liberal Democracy 4:Civilian Control of the Military, Police,

and Intelligence• Armed forces are directed by and

subordinate to civilian elected officials and their appointees

• Elected, civilian commander in chief• Top military command appointments are

made or approved by civilians

Civilian Control of the Security Sector, cont.

• Budgets of armed forces, intelligence and other state security agencies are reviewed, understood, and approved by civilian executive and legislative authorities

• Professional civilian capacity in defense ministry, presidential (or PM) office, and parliamentary committees to supervise military and security agencies

Civilian Control of the Security Sector, cont.

• Armed forces and intelligence agencies may not operate domestically except under extraordinary & explicit constitutional circumstances, with close civilian supervision

• Armed forces are non-partisan, non-political• Police are professional, depoliticized, and

supervised and monitored by democratic, civilian authorities

Liberal Democracy 5, Competitiveness• At least two political parties with significant

representation in parliament and a meaningful chance to win control of national government

• Low barriers to entry of new political parties• No gerrymandering of electoral districts

(independent commission)• Open, fair access to the mass media for all

Competitiveness, cont.

• Limited or no use of government resources to reelect ruling party

• Virtually no vote buying or other electoral fraud

• Balanced access to party and campaign finance Public funding of parties and campaigns? Public guarantees of TV & radio air time? Limits on campaign expenditures?

• Over time, electoral alternation (ruling parties lose)

Liberal Democracy 6, Civic Pluralism• Numerous NGOs and interest groups represent a

broad range of interests and values in society• NGOs and think tanks monitor the political process,

expose abuses, and lobby for political reform• Alternative sources of information: public has

access to a variety of sources of information in the mass media, independent of government control.

• Very limited government ownership and regulation of the mass media

• Independent public broadcasting

Liberal Democracy 7, Vertical Accountability

The people hold their agents (public officials) accountable to them

Type 1: Electoral Accountability Party system is sufficiently competitive, Competition is sufficiently fair, Voters are sufficiently informed and aware of

their interests,So that elected officeholders can be periodically held accountable, and removed for bad performance

Vertical Accountability, cont.

Type 2: Societal Accountability• Civil society is sufficiently pluralistic, resourceful,

and independent of government,• Mass media are sufficiently independent and

professional,• Public is sufficiently vigilant and mobilized,So that unpopular policies & abuses of power can be

challenged and reversed.

Liberal Democracy 8: ParticipationCitizens take an active role in politics & the making

of public policies and decisions• High rates of voter turnout• Extensive public interest in and awareness of

major issues, government conduct, & party positions on issues

• High membership rates & active participation in civil society organizations (CSOs)

• Individuals and CSOs petition and lobby government

Liberal Democracy 9: Equality

• Citizens have relatively equal political resources, at least in education, organization, and citizenship rights

• Women have substantial representation (ideally, one-half) in the cabinet, parliament, and other representative bodies

• Economic inequalities are not so severe that they rob large groups of political voice and power

Equality, cont.• Ethnic minorities have representation in

parliament, & provincial & local legislatures, in rough proportion to their shares of the population

• All citizens are treated equally by government agencies and institutions (including the judiciary), regardless of their class, region, religion, ethnicity, gender, party, or beliefs

Liberal Democracy 10: ResponsivenessGovernment Responds to Citizen Demands and

Preferences• Government changes its policies in response to

clear, consistent, and fairly deliberated expressions of majority preference

• There is substantial correlation over time between government policies and citizen preferences and desires

Responsiveness, cont.• Aggrieved groups of citizens are able to win

redress of wrongs and abuses committed by government

• Significant manifestations of citizen interest and protest are able to have access to the public agenda, and to be heard by legislative and executive bodies

Liberal Democracy 11, Civic CultureCompeting parties and groups are:

• Tolerant of opposing views & groups• Law-abiding, & respectful of the

constitution• Peaceful, and rejecting of violence• Willing to compromise• Unwilling to coalesce with undemocratic,

anti-system actors

Civic Culture, cont.The vast majority of citizens & groups

• Believe in the legitimacy of democracy• Are loyal to the constitutional system• Know their rights & obligations as citizens• Respect the outcome of elections• Question but respect authority• Condemn acts of intolerance and violations of

constitutional norms

Liberal Democracy 12, State Effectiveness

The state has legitimate authority: It is widely viewed as having the right to make and enforce laws, exercise a monopoly of force, and extract and distribute resources

The state has administrative capacity: A professional, meritocratic, honest, and politically neutral bureaucracy is able to regulate, tax, maintain order, and produce public goods

The Dimensions of Democratic QualityDimension Type Measures

1. State Effectiveness Good Governance Government Effectiveness (WB)Regulatory Quality (WB)

2. Rule of Law Good Governance Rule of Law (WB)

3. Horizontal Accountability/Corruption Control

Good Governance Control of Corruption (WB)Corruption Perceptions Index (TI)

4. Competition Democratic Procedure Political Rights (FH)Voice and Accountability (WB)

5. Participation Democratic Procedure Political Rights (FH)Voter Turnout Rates

6. Vertical Accountability Democratic Procedure Political Rights (FH)Voice and Accountability (WB)

7. Freedom Democratic Content Political Rights (FH)Civil Liberties (FH)Voice and Accountability (WB)

8. Equality Democratic Content Political Rights (FH)Civil Liberties (FH)Gini Coefficient

9. Responsiveness Democratic Results Public Opinion Surveys

The Global Expansion and Recession of Democracy

1974-2012

The Democratic Boom—The Third Wave of Democratization

• In 1974, less than a third of all states were democracies

• By 1984, there were 59 democracies (36%)• By 1990 there were 76 (46%)• Then the Berlin Wall came crashing down:– 1991: 88 democracies (48%)– 1995: 112 democracies (58%)– 1999: 118 democracies (61.5%)– 2005: 121 democracies (62.5%)

The Global Expansion of Democracy, 1974-2012

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

29.1%

33.5%37.0%

45.7%

58.1% 59.9%62.5%

60.0%

20.9%23.6%

26.1%

30.5%33.0%

35.9%

41.1%45.6%

Electoral Democracies Liberal Democracies

Year

Expansion of Liberal DemocracyAbout two-thirds of the world’s democracies (77) are reasonably high-quality or “liberal”: • electoral competition is institutionalized, fair,

and open, • civil liberties are better protected,• there is a rule of law • there are low levels of political violence and

abuses or impunity by state security services.

The Globalization of Democracy

During this period, democracy became a global phenomenon. Today:

28 of 33 Latin Am states are democracies (85%)

17 of 29 in Eastern Europe and FSU (59%) 10 of 25 in Asia (40%) +(10 of 12 Pacific Island) 17 of 49 in Sub-Saharan Africa (35%) (or less?) Only 3 of 19 in the Middle East

Democracy by Region, January 2013

Eur/Anglo

LAC EE+FSU Asia Pacific Is.

SS Africa MENA0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 100

85

63

38

83

37

21

100

67

43

21

75

22

5

Democracy

Liberal Democracy

% o

f to

tal

Global Trends in Freedom, 1974-2012

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

4.474.31

4.243.85

3.64 3.483.22 3.30 3.31

5.05 4.84 4.76

4.354.08 3.89

3.613.70 3.69

World Developing World

Year

Regional Trends in Freedom, 1974-2012

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

-198

319

8519

8719

8919

9119

9319

9519

9719

9920

0120

0320

0520

0720

0920

11

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

6.19

3.81

2.37

1.94

3.70

2.62

2.42 2.39

4.42

4.193.86

3.51

5.45 5.36

4.444.41

6.50

4.50

5.17 5.175.28 5.32

5.505.16

CEE LAC Asia-Pacific SS Africa FSU MENA

Year

The Democratic Recession

The expansion of democracy peaked in 2005 at 62.5% of all states. Since then it has declined from 120 to 117 democracies.

No significant gain in number of democracies in seven years

Seven consecutive years of declining freedom scores, losses outpacing gains.

Significant erosion of democracy in Africa.

Democratic Recession cont. The rate of democratic breakdown since 1999

has been nearly twice the pace of the preceding 12 years.

30 breakdowns or reversals of democracy since 1999 (More than half of the total during the third wave).

These have come in some large strategic states: • Pakistan, Russia, Nigeria, Venezuela, Thailand,

Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Kenya.

Ratio of Declines to Gains in Freedom, 1991-2012

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Year

Breakdowns of Democracy (examples)

Type of Breakdown Number of Such Breakdowns

Percent of all Democracies (171) during Third Wave

Countries with dates of democratic breakdown and

renewal

Breakdown with subsequent return to democracy

29 17.0%

India (1975, 1977)Turkey (1980, 1983)Ghana (1981, 2000) Nigeria (1983, 1999) Fiji (1987, 1997)Thailand (1991,1993) Peru (1992, 2001)Lesotho (1994, 2002) Zambia (1996, 2001)Bangladesh (2007, 2008)Philippines (2007, 2010)Thailand (2006, 2011)Niger (2009, 2011)Georgia (2008, 2012)

Breakdowns of Democracy, examples

Type of Breakdown

Number of Such

Break-downs

Percent of all Democracies (171) during Third Wave

Countries with dates of democratic breakdown and renewal

Breakdown with no return to democracy by 2011

27 15.8%

Lebanon (1975) Sudan (1989)The Gambia (1994) Pakistan (1999)Fiji (2000) Kyrgyzstan (1998)Russia (2000) Nepal (2002)Nigeria (2003) Venezuela (2005)Kenya (2007) Mauritania (2008)Honduras (2009) Madagascar (2009) Mozambique (2009) Haiti (2010)Burundi (2010) Sri Lanka (2010)Guinea Bissau (2010) Nicaragua (2011)Mali (2012) Maldives (2012)

56 32.7%

Rate of Democratic Breakdown1974-2011

1974

-198

5

1986

-199

8

1999

-201

1

1974

-201

10%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

16.00%

11.72%

19.86%

31.95%

Time Period

Freedom before Democratic Breakdowns 1999-2011

BYBY-3

BY-5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

Political Rights Civil Liberties

Other Worrisome Trends

The authoritarian backlash against civil society Fiscal disarray (weakening of democracy?) in

the West

Why Democracy is in Danger

1. Weak Rule of Law Corruption, abuse of power Abuse of ind rights, impunity Violence, criminality, lawlessness

2. Executive abuse of power; weak constraints on executives by constitution, parliament, civil society

Why Democracy is in Danger 2

3. Ethnic & religious divisions 4. Weak & Ineffective Political

Institutions (parties, parliaments, systems of horizontal accountability)

5. Poor Economic Performance• Poverty, inequality, injustice BAD

GOVERNANCE

Trends In Political Rights, ROL, and Civil Liberties in Africa, 2005-2011

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.60

0.500.51 0.50

0.49

0.470.46

0.48

0.420.41 0.41 0.40

0.39 0.38 0.38

0.54 0.54 0.540.53 0.52

0.51 0.51

Political/Electoral Rights Transparency/Rule of Law Civil Liberties