The Experts below are selected from a list of 146097 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Adam Luedtke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
global migration and Political Regime type a democratic disadvantage
British Journal of Political Science, 2012Co-Authors: Christian Breunig, Xun Cao, Adam LuedtkeAbstract:An indicator of globalization is the growing number of humans crossing national borders. In contrast to explanations for flows of goods and capital, migration research has concentrated on unilateral movements to rich democracies. This focus ignores the bilateral determinants of migration and stymies empirical and theoretical inquiry. The theoretical insights proposed here show how the Regime type of both sending and receiving countries influences human migration. Specifically, democratic Regimes accommodate fewer immigrants than autocracies and democracies enable emigration while autocracies prevent exit. The mechanisms for this divergence are a function of both micro-level motivations of migrants and institutional constraints on Political leaders. Global bilateral migration data and a statistical method that captures the higher-order dependencies in network data are employed in this article.
Simeon Mitropolitski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
explaining Political Regime diversity in post communist states an evaluation and critique of current theories
Social Science Research Network, 2007Co-Authors: Simeon MitropolitskiAbstract:This study seeks to assess theories of post-communist Political Regime diversity. Since 1989 tens of former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe and in the ex-Soviet Union developed into a rainbow of Regimes, from stable democracies to stable autocracies. Four major theoretical approaches attempt to explain this diversity by focusing respectively on legacies, institutional choices, Political leadership, and external influence. These approaches are tested using a sample of three post-communist countries representing different Political trajectories: democracy, authoritarianism, and intermediate Regimes. This study finds that none of these approaches comprehensively explains this diversity. "Unpacking" these approaches, however, and combining some elements from each, provides a good starting point for understanding the problem. Designing particular institutions like an electoral system and a strong presidential office may produce democratic or authoritarian trends. Particular legacies such as lack of shared public identity between rulers and the ruled can interfere and, despite institutional preconditions, keep post-communist countries in an intermediate Regime position.
Richard Jongapin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Political Regime change economic liberalization and growth accelerations
Public Choice, 2011Co-Authors: Richard Jongapin, Jakob De HaanAbstract:We examine whether the type of Political Regime, Regime changes, and economic liberalization are related to economic growth accelerations. Our results show that growth accelerations are preceded by economic liberalizations. We also find that growth accelerations are less likely to happen the longer a Political Regime—be it a democracy or an autocracy—has been in place, while (a move toward) more democracy according to the Polity IV dataset reduces the likelihood of growth accelerations.
-
on the measurement of Political instability and its impact on economic growth
European Journal of Political Economy, 2009Co-Authors: Richard JongapinAbstract:We examine the multidimensionality of Political instability using 25 Political instability indicators in an Exploratory Factor Analysis. We find that Political instability has four dimensions: Politically motivated violence, mass civil protest. instability within the Political Regime. and instability of the Political Regime. We examine the causal impact of Political instability on economic growth using a dynamic panel system Generalized Method of Moments model and find that the four dimensions of Political instability have different effects on economic growth. Only the instability of the Political Regime has a robust and significant negative effect on economic growth. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
-
on the measurement of Political instability and its impact on economic growth
Research Papers in Economics, 2006Co-Authors: Richard JongapinAbstract:We examine the relationship between Political instability and economic growth. Using an exploratory factor analysis we identify four dimensions of Political instability: (1) mass civil protest, (2) Politically motivated aggression, (3) instability within the Political Regime and (4) instability of the Political Regime. We show that individual Political instability indicators are generally poor proxies for the underlying dimensions of Political instability. Our panel estimates for a sample of 98 countries in the period 1984-2003 indicate that the various dimensions of Political instability have different effects on economic growth.
Konstantin Zamyatin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
russian Political Regime change and strategies of diversity management from a multinational federation towards a nation state
Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe : JEMIE, 2016Co-Authors: Konstantin ZamyatinAbstract:This paper explores the impact of the Political Regime change in post-Soviet Russia on the country’s strategy of diversity management. The paper will start with an overview of possible government responses to diversity. In this conceptual framework, the paper will follow the evolution of the place envisaged for diversity in the country’s Political identity and Political institutions in the post-Soviet period. The study will propose a periodization based on contrasting responses of the state to the diversity challenge in the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s. The Political Regime change correlated with the shift in the Political institutional model from a multinational federation towards a nation-state. The new vision of Political identity was reflected in the strategies of diversity management.
-
russian Political Regime change and strategies of diversity management from a multinational federation towards a nation state
Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe : JEMIE, 2016Co-Authors: Konstantin ZamyatinAbstract:IntroductionOne prediction of modernization theory is that economic development fosters democratization (Lipset 1959). Scholars in comparative politics also go beyond economic factors and emphasize the role of social and cultural factors in understanding democratization. The proliferation of 'civic' Political culture was identified as the first among Political factors (Almond & Verba 1965, Linz & Stepan 1996). Among other factors, modernizationists indicated national unity and effective state as necessary preconditions for democracy (Rustow 1970).If in the West a strong state and a subsequently imposed sense of national identity typically preceded democratization, then in Russia economic reforms coincided with nation and state-building at the time of transition (see Gel'man 2015: 44-50). Nationalist mobilization in Russia's republics complicated the construction of a new Political identity and Soviet institutional legacies largely influenced the formation of new state institutions. Republics represented national liberation as the main road to democratization, while many policymakers in the Centre viewed the existence of ethnic regions as an obstacle to the democratic development that reinforced ethnic cleavages and became associated with regional authoritarianism, ethnic conflict and the threat of the state's disintegration (see Drobizheva 2013: 88-89, 112-113). A weak state and an identity crisis contributed to the failure of democratization.The simultaneity of these processes and the fact that democratic transition was followed by democratic breakdown makes the post-Soviet period interesting for study because it allows for lifting the level of the analysis and exploring the reversed impact of Regime change on accompanying processes, inter alia, on the strategies of diversity management. Many studies have assessed diversity management devices in the Russian constitutional design and the evolution in the country's nationalities policy. In his model of the ethno-Political pendulum, Emil Pain contrasted the rise in minority nationalism in the early 1990s with the responsive majority nationalism since the mid-1990s (see Pain 2013). One can extend his pendulum metaphor back to the Soviet history and observe how the waves of liberalization and democratization after the state collapses in 1917 and 1991 were conjoined with minority-friendly policies, but were followed by periods of totalitarian and authoritarian rule and tightening control over the m inority nationalities.A negative correlation was found between building a strong state and building democracy (see Bunce 2013: 264-266). Indeed, the democratization and decentralization of the 1990s were followed by authoritarian tendencies and the recentralization of the 2000s, and the establishment of an authoritarian Regime and its unificationist urge in the 2010s. However, a study is still missing that would assess how the Regime simultaneously pursued both tasks of nation and state-building in relation to diversity management. As there is no generally accepted causal theory of democratization, only probabilistic arguments can be made. Was there any correlation between the Regime change and diversity management during the post-Soviet period?The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of the Political Regime change on diversity management both in institutional and ideological terms. The study utilizes the historical institutionalist method. If the Regime change amounts to a significant rearrangement in the set of Political actors and institutions, then the analysis in this study is restricted to finding out how the replacement of Political institutions influenced ideological justifications and institutional solutions for diversity management. The study is based on the existing research. The paper overviews only the key Political outcomes and does not go into the debates about the possibilities around some controversial issues. Another unavoidable restriction of overviewing is that the paper has to present only very briefly some separable and well-researched issues, such as national-cultural autonomy or assimilation through education and language policies. …
Christian Breunig - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
global migration and Political Regime type a democratic disadvantage
British Journal of Political Science, 2012Co-Authors: Christian Breunig, Xun Cao, Adam LuedtkeAbstract:An indicator of globalization is the growing number of humans crossing national borders. In contrast to explanations for flows of goods and capital, migration research has concentrated on unilateral movements to rich democracies. This focus ignores the bilateral determinants of migration and stymies empirical and theoretical inquiry. The theoretical insights proposed here show how the Regime type of both sending and receiving countries influences human migration. Specifically, democratic Regimes accommodate fewer immigrants than autocracies and democracies enable emigration while autocracies prevent exit. The mechanisms for this divergence are a function of both micro-level motivations of migrants and institutional constraints on Political leaders. Global bilateral migration data and a statistical method that captures the higher-order dependencies in network data are employed in this article.
