Why Election Monitoring Does Not Always Lead to Democratization: from the Perspective of Information on the International Standards of Electoral Integrity
Why Election Monitoring Does Not Always Lead to Democratization: from the Perspective of Information on the International Standards of Electoral Integrity
复制标题
为什么选举监督并不总能带来民主化：从选举诚信国际标准的信息角度来看
DOI：
10.1017/s1468109918000087
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
YUKAWA TAKU
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sebastian Maslow（著者）/ Sebastian Harnisch（編者）;Mischa Hansel（編者）;Nadine Godehardt（編者）;マスロー セバスティアン;Sebastian Maslow;中村 綾乃;詫摩佳代;詫摩佳代;詫摩佳代;詫摩佳代;詫摩佳代;湯川 拓;Kayo Takuma;YUKAWA TAKU
本文从理论上提出了一个新的结构，从国际标准的角度来看，选举监督对政治变革的实际影响的信息。具体而言，有一种观点认为，在选举监测之后，发表一份报告，因此，在受监测的国家中，有关选举完整性国际标准的信息变得清晰。然后，如果一个国家清楚地认识到它无法达到国际社会所要求的标准，那么这个国家可能会放弃努力满足国际要求，它的独裁倾向可能会加强。因此，由于选举监督而澄清关于公平选举诚信的国际标准的信息，可能会导致向独裁主义转变。本文通过一个案例研究，说明了非洲民主化的理论框架可以对非洲民主化问题提出新的解释。许多非洲国家在1990年代开始废除一党制或军事独裁，并实行多党选举。结果，他们举行了建国选举。人们经常指出的是，与创始选举相比，第二次选举的舞弊程度有所增加。虽然一直没有适当的解释，本文提出了一个理论解释这一令人困惑的趋势。
This paper theoretically presents a new structure from the perspective of information on international standards with regards to the actual impact that election monitoring has on political change. Specifically, there is the point of view that after the election monitoring, a report is published, and as a result information relating to international standards of electoral integrity becomes clear in the countries subject to monitoring. Then if it becomes clear, for example, to one country that it is unable to meet the standards required by the international community then that country might abandon trying to meeting international requirements and its inclination toward authoritarianism might strengthen. Therefore, the clarification of information on the international standards of fair electoral integrity as a result of election monitoring could result in a shift toward authoritarianism. Through a case study, this paper shows that new interpretations of democratization in Africa can be advanced by its theoretical framework. Many African countries started to get rid of one-party systems or military dictatorships in the 1990s and to introduce multi-party elections. As a result, they held founding elections. What is often pointed out is that compared to the founding elections, the degree of fraud increased at the second elections. Although there has been no appropriate explanation, this paper suggests a theoretical explanation for this puzzling trend.