Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: Opposition Party Strategy in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes

在塞缪尔·亨廷顿所说的第三次民主化浪潮中，近100个国家开始了民主化进程。 这些国家建立了民主制度，开始举行选举，许多国家放宽了对媒体以及公民和政治权利的限制。 虽然许多东欧国家的民主化努力总的来说是成功的，但非洲和中东的许多国家却辜负了人们的期望。 事实上，在第三波民主化浪潮中，只有20%的国家成功转型。 因此，存在着许多既不完全民主也不完全专制的国家。 此外，这些半民主（或半专制）国家定期举行国家和地方选举，反对派团体参加选举，并在国家立法机构中赢得一些席位。 第三次浪潮失败的转型产生了一个有趣的现象：独裁选举。 我们不完全理解这些选举是否重要以及如何重要，也不完全理解选举在民主过渡中的作用。 独裁选举是为进一步民主化创造了机会，还是仅仅维持了独裁政府？ 为了澄清选举在专制政权中的作用，本项目研究了选举抵制的原因和后果，以及随后的政权反应。 通过考察政府在何种条件下应对抵制的反对党的要求，我们可以确定哪些选举有利于民主化，哪些选举不利于民主化。虽然抵制的情况越来越多，但文献中还没有充分解释以下两个问题：（1）政党为什么决定抵制选举？（2）何时以及为什么抵制是一种成功的策略？ 本项目认为，为了回答这些问题，更好地解释选举抵制，我们需要考虑的机构下，选举操作（选举规则）和反对派政党内的派别主义的存在。在这个项目中，抵制选举的理论是使用博弈论模型。 该模型被用来发展一个因果关系帐户之间的关系，选举规则和选举抵制和党内派系和选举抵制。 然后使用定性和定量工具对从模型中得出的命题进行测试。 该模型参考了2009年在约旦进行的研究，将在阿尔及利亚进行为期三个月的实地研究，以评估该模型提出的建议。还将使用由1990年至2006年民主和专制政权的700多场国家级选举组成的数据集对这些主张进行测试。 鉴于非洲、亚洲和中东许多国家正在举行选举，但民主化努力停滞不前，本研究报告是对文献的及时补充。该项目对约旦和阿尔及利亚的历史理解以及我们对民主过渡的理解具有更广泛的影响。因此，更广泛的影响是双重的。首先，在约旦和阿尔及利亚实地考察期间收集的信息和数据将增加我们对两国最近选举历史的了解，并解释和澄清反对派如何？最近的参与和不参与模式影响了这两个州的民主过渡。 第二，在确定反对党行为的后果方面，本项目将对民主转型的过程得出更一般的结论。 因此，这项研究不仅对加强我们对阿尔及利亚和约旦的了解很重要，而且通过对这些国家的广泛研究，文献将更好地了解选举在民主过渡中的作用。

During what Samuel Huntington called the Third Wave of Democratization, nearly 100 countries began the process of democratization. These countries set up democratic institutions, began holding elections, and many liberalized restrictions on the media and on civil and political rights. Although the democratization efforts of many Eastern European countries have generally been successful, many countries in Africa and the Middle East have belied expectations. In fact, just 20% of countries democratizing under the third wave successfully transitioned. As a result, there exists a wide range of countries that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian. Moreover, these semi-democratic (or semi-authoritarian) countries hold regular elections at the national and local levels in which opposition groups participate and win some seats in the national legislature. The failed transitions of the third wave have produced an interesting phenomenon: authoritarian elections. We do not fully understand whether and how these elections are important and the role of elections in democratic transitions. Do authoritarian elections create opportunities for further democratization or do they simply sustain authoritarian governments? In order to clarify the role of elections in authoritarian regimes, this project examines the causes and consequences of election boycotts, and the subsequent regime response. Determining the conditions under which governments respond to the demands of boycotting opposition parties will allow us to identify those elections that further democratization and establish the criteria that distinguish them from those elections that impede it. Although boycotts occur with increasing frequency, the literature has yet to sufficiently explain the following two questions: (1) Why do political parties decide to boycott an election? and (2) When and why are boycotts a successful strategy? This project argues that in order to answer these questions and better explain election boycotts, we need to account for the institutions under which elections operate (the electoral rules) and the existence of factionalism within opposition political parties. In this project, a theory of election boycotts is developed using a game theoretic model. The model is used to develop a causal account for the relationship between electoral rules and election boycotts and between intraparty factionalism and election boycotts. The propositions derived from the model are then tested using both qualitative and quantitative tools. The model was informed from research conducted in Jordan in 2009 and three months of field research will be undertaken in Algeria to evaluate the propositions derived from the model. The propositions will also be tested using a dataset consisting of over 700 national-level elections in both democratic and authoritarian regimes from 1990-2006. Given the vast number of countries across Africa, Asia and the Middle East that are now holding elections, but have stalled in their democratization efforts, the present study represents a timely addition to the literature. The project has broader implications for both the historical understanding of Jordan and Algeria, and also for our understanding of democratic transitions. The broader impact is thus twofold. First, the information and data collected during fieldwork in Jordan and Algeria will increase our understanding of the recent electoral histories of both countries, and explain and clarify how the opposition?s recent pattern of participation and non-participation has affected the democratic transition in both states. Second, in determining the consequences of opposition party behavior this project will have more general conclusions about the process of democratic transition. This study, therefore, is important not only for enhancing our understanding of Algeria and Jordan, but also through an extensive study of these countries, the literature will gain an improved understanding of the role elections play in democratic transitions.