Cultural and economic prerequisites of democracy: Reassessing recent evidence
Cultural and economic prerequisites of democracy: Reassessing recent evidence
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf02686166
复制
发表时间：
2005-12-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Teorell, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hadenius, A;Teorell, J
本文旨在重新评价两种有影响力的民主发展理论：民主文化理论和经济发展理论。每个领域的领先前辈--罗纳德·英格尔哈特和亚当·普热沃斯基--是分析的主要目标。我们对这些作者最近提出的证据提出异议，理由有三：证据（1）混淆了民主的“基本”标准与可能的“质量”标准（Inglehart）;（2）将民主概念化为二分法而不是连续术语（Przeworski）;（3）未能解释内生效应和偶然效应（Inglehart）。在纠正这些缺点时，我们提出了惊人的结果。就民主文化而言，这一理论缺乏支持;对民主的公开支持和“自我表达价值观”都不会影响民主的发展。就经济发展而言，必须改进早先的研究结果。虽然现代化的影响最大的是在民主化程度较高的国家，但我们也发现了“半民主”国家的影响。"
The purpose of this article is to reassess two influential theories of democratic development: the theory of democratic culture and the theory of economic development. The leading predecessors in each domain-Ronald Inglehart and Adam Przeworski-are the prime targets of analysis. We take issue with recent evidence presented by these authors on three grounds: the evidence (1) confuses "basic" criteria of democracy with possible "quality" criteria (Inglehart); (2) conceptualizes democracy in dichotomous rather than continuous terms (Przeworski); and (3) fails to account for endogeneity and contingent effects (Inglehart). In correcting for these shortcomings, we present striking results. In the case of democratic culture, the theory lacks support; neither overt support for democracy nor "self-expression values" affect democratic development. In the case of economic development, earlier findings must be refined. Although the largest impact of modernization is found among more democratized countries, we also find an effect among "semi-democracies."