权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

A Comparative Study on the Conditions of Democratic Consolidation

民主巩固条件的比较研究

基本信息

批准号：
14320027
负责人：
TSUNEKAWA Keiichi
金额：
$ 10.43万
依托单位：
The University of Tokyo
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
财政年份：
2002
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2002 至 2004
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/en/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-14320027/
关键词：
democratization democracy constructivism conflict structuralism rational choice 構成主義

项目摘要

This study presents the hypothesis that the most fundamental factor explaining the long-term endurance of democratic regimes is that people learn, through long and traumatic experiences of conflicts or repression, the importance or necessity of conforming to democratic procedures though being aware that these procedures do not necessarily satisfy their preferences. In addition, we propose to consider structural (both domestic and international) and institutional factors that facilitate or obstruct the democratic learning. This theoretical framework can be called a "structural-constructivist approach" since it emphasizes the democratic norms shaped under certain structural and institutional context. The case of Chile and Argentina confirms the importance of the change of social norms under highly repressive military regimes. However, it also emphasizes that a transformation of social structure lowered leftist forces' capability of mobilization and contributed to rightist forces' accepta … More nce of democratic procedures. The African cases also reveal the importance of structural and institutional factors, though, in these cases, they impede, not facilitate, democratic endurance. Many African countries fell into a vicious circle in which ethnic conflicts and weak state structure reinforce each other. The recent event in Ukraine is a case in which a large-scale confrontation can lead to democratization although it is not yet clear if the new democratic regime can survive for long. The Southeast Asian case demonstrates that the significance of conflicts changes over time. Democracy there became a reality, like in Thailand after 1992, only when democracy came to be regarded as alleviating rather than precipitating conflicts. In contrast, Korea experienced democratization as the result of a rational choice by authoritarian leaders within a conflictive situation rather than the transformation of social norms. Taiwan shares the rational-choice-related aspect with Korea although the conflict between the Chinese and the Taiwanese was also relevant in inducing the authoritarian leaders to compromise. Less

这项研究提出的假设是，解释民主政权长期存在的最根本因素是，人们通过长期和痛苦的冲突或镇压经历，认识到遵守民主程序的重要性或必要性，尽管知道这些程序不一定满足他们的偏好。此外，我们建议考虑促进或阻碍民主学习的结构性(国内和国际)和体制因素。这一理论框架可以称为“结构-建构主义方法”，因为它强调在一定的结构和制度背景下形成的民主规范。智利和阿根廷的情况证实了在高度专制的军事政权下改变社会规范的重要性。然而，它也强调，社会结构的转变降低了左翼势力的动员能力，并有助于右翼势力接受…更多的民主程序。非洲的案例也揭示了结构和体制因素的重要性，尽管在这些案例中，这些因素阻碍而不是促进了民主的持久。许多非洲国家陷入了种族冲突和脆弱的国家结构相互促进的恶性循环。乌克兰最近发生的事件表明，大规模对抗可以导致民主化，尽管尚不清楚新的民主政权能否长久存在。东南亚的案例表明，冲突的意义随着时间的推移而变化。民主在那里变成了现实，就像1992年后的泰国一样，只有当民主被视为缓解而不是加剧冲突时。相比之下，韩国的民主化是威权领导人在冲突局势中做出理性选择的结果，而不是社会规范转变的结果。台湾在理性选择方面与韩国有相同之处，尽管中国大陆和台湾之间的冲突在促使威权领导人妥协方面也起到了重要作用。较少