The Experts below are selected from a list of 33126 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Patricia Ehrkamp - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the limits of multicultural tolerance Liberal Democracy and media portrayals of muslim migrant women in germany
Space and Polity, 2010Co-Authors: Patricia EhrkampAbstract:This article examines how Muslim migrant women's sexuality is instrumentalised to erect gendered and cultural boundaries of citizenship and Liberal Democracy in Germany. German newspaper articles on forced marriages and honour killings for a period of 10 years (1998–2008) are analysed to show how constructions of social, religious and spatial differences serve to homogenise the space of Liberal Democracy and the exclusion of Islam from it, thereby undermining such ideals of Liberal democratic citizenship as equality.
Hugh Ward - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Liberal Democracy and sustainability
Environmental Politics, 2008Co-Authors: Hugh WardAbstract:Although theory strongly suggests that Liberal democracies should perform better than autocracies on sustainability indicators, the empirical evidence is unclear. Using multivariate statistical techniques, political factors such as the stability of the system, public opinion, the nature of the party system and other institutional features such as presidentialism are considered. Liberal Democracy is given qualified endorsement: it typically promotes weak sustainability, and stable core autocracies perform worse on strong sustainability measures than stable core democracies. Presidentialism generally is bad for sustainability. However, there is no compelling evidence that public opinion matters, even allowing for the intervening effects of the party system and institutional structure, which raises questions about the nature of the democratic process.
Doh Chull Shin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
President Park Geun-hye and the Deconsolidation of Liberal Democracy in South Korea: Exploring its Cultural Roots President Park Geun-hye and the Deconsolidation of Liberal Democracy in South Korea: Exploring its Cultural Roots
2017Co-Authors: Doh Chull ShinAbstract:For years, many political scientists and research institutes endorsed South Korea (Korea hereafter) as a fully consolidated Liberal Democracy. This non-Western icon of Liberal Democracy recently underwent a series of setbacks due to the restoration of autocratic governance by the President Park Geun-hye government. Why did Liberal Democracy backslide in the highly globalized and modernized country, contrary to what is expected from modernization and other prominent theories of democratization? To explore this question, we propose a cultural theory of democratic deconsolidation, and test it with the latest wave of the Asian Barometer Survey conducted in Korea in 2015. The analysis indicates that socioeconomic development under the sponsorship of the state and big businesses has failed to “emancipate” both the ruling class and the masses from the Confucian legacies of political paternalism and social harmony. Moreover, it has failed to instill them with “the bourgeois impulse” to become a free and equal being. As the habits of their hearts and minds, these legacies powerfully motivate both groups to reembrace or condone the resurgence of autocratic political practices. Theoretically, therefore, the deconsolidation of Liberal Democracy in Korea and the prevalence of affinity for paternalistic autocracy among its people can be considered two solid pieces of evidence confirming the thesis of “No bourgeois, no Democracy”. They can further be considered to support the orthodox Asian Values Thesis that Confucianism is inherently incompatible with Liberal Democracy.
Kenneth A. Bollen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Liberal Democracy series i 1972 1988 definition measurement and trajectories
Electoral Studies, 2009Co-Authors: Kenneth A. BollenAbstract:The purpose of this paper is to provide the definitional and empirical background to the Liberal Democracy Series I Index of Democracy that is available in Bollen (1998) but whose rationale has not been published. More specifically, the paper (1) gives a definition of Liberal Democracy that has guided the formation of this index, (2) describes measures that correspond to this definition, (3) provides a measurement model that links the indicators of Democracy to the latent variables that represent the concept, (4) explains the construction of the Liberal Democracy Series I Index, and (5) compares the Series I Democracy measure to two other widely used Democracy measures in a latent curve model. The Liberal Democracy Series I Index provides a simple unweighted measure of Liberal Democracy that minimizes the bias in expert ratings, is highly reliable and highly correlated with the latent Liberal Democracy variable. The evidenced reviewed here suggests that its measurement properties are superior to the Polity and Vanhanen Democracy indices with the exception that it is available for a more limited period of years than these latter two.
-
Liberal Democracy: Validity and Method Factors in Cross-National Measures
American Journal of Political Science, 1993Co-Authors: Kenneth A. BollenAbstract:This paper examines the definition and measurement of Liberal Democracy. Specifically, my purposes are (1) to propose a working definition of Liberal Democracy; (2) to outline a theory of "method factors" in subjective measures of Liberal Democracy; (3) to provide the first estimates of the proportion of variance due to systematic error, validity, and random error in commonly used measures; (4) to replicate these results across several years; and (5) to estimate the degree of Liberal Democracy in more than 150 countries. All but one measure contain systematic error, and in some cases the bias component is large. Furthermore, a new Liberal Democracy index has a .96 squared correlation with the Liberal Democracy latent variable and has negligible correlations with the method factors that are present in the individual indicators. The results suggest that the current practice of treating unadjusted Democracy indicators as error free can be misleading.
David Sebudubudu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Towards understanding Botswana and South Africa’s ambivalence to Liberal Democracy
Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 2016Co-Authors: Nicola De Jager, David SebudubuduAbstract:ABSTRACTDespite their recognised democratic successes, Botswana and South Africa have had ambivalent experiences with Liberal Democracy. It is contended that they fall somewhere in-between what scholars refer to as electoral and Liberal democracies; dominant party systems within Carothers’ ‘gray zone’. Two explanations are offered. The first relates to the underlying political culture of the ruling elite: the Liberal democratic values of the founders and early elites of both the African National Congress (ANC) and the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) were never fully embedded; instead, their political cultures were influenced by traditions and ideologies with ilLiberal values. The second explanation focuses on a key feature of a Liberal Democracy – restraining of power, namely through encouraging an autonomous civil society and limiting executive access to the state. It is argued that for fear of losing their dominant positions, the ANC and the BDP resist restraints on their access to state power.
