2Резюме_Порошин_English_12.12.2018 (Условия устойчивости однопартийного доминирования в политических режимах различного типа)
Описание файла
Файл "2Резюме_Порошин_English_12.12.2018" внутри архива находится в папке "Условия устойчивости однопартийного доминирования в политических режимах различного типа". PDF-файл из архива "Условия устойчивости однопартийного доминирования в политических режимах различного типа", который расположен в категории "". Всё это находится в предмете "политические науки" из Аспирантура и докторантура, которые можно найти в файловом архиве НИУ ВШЭ. Не смотря на прямую связь этого архива с НИУ ВШЭ, его также можно найти и в других разделах. , а ещё этот архив представляет собой кандидатскую диссертацию, поэтому ещё представлен в разделе всех диссертаций на соискание учёной степени кандидата политических наук.
Просмотр PDF-файла онлайн
Текст из PDF
National Research UniversityHigher School of EconomicsAs a manuscriptAlexander PoroshinDETERMINANTS OF SINGLE-PARTY DOMINANCEPERSISTENCE IN VARIOUS TYPES OF POLITICAL REGIMESSUMMARY OF THE DISSERTATIONfor the purpose of obtaining academic degreeDoctor of Philosophy in Political Science HSEAcademic Supervisor:Oxana Kharitonova,PhD in Political ScienceMoscow, 2018Research designStatement of research problem. The existing academic literature on thefactors of dominant party regimes persistence mostly focuses on regimes with anyduration. There is a problem of insufficient attention to specific factors influencingthe durability of single-party dominance within the set of "absolute" dominant partyregimes that overcome a critical duration threshold.Thus, the following question needs to be clarified: "why are dominant partyregimes that overcome a critical duration threshold have different longevity?" Mainfocus of existing literature is oriented to revealing determinants of the emergence ofsingle-party dominance.
My research aims to fill the gap and concentrates on singleparty dominance persistence among regimes that overcome a critical longevitythreshold.Literature review. Dominant party regime’s1 extraordinary longevity is apart of the mainstream research in political science, but most of academic literaturerelates to case-study research on country-specific regimes characteristics.Most significant contribution to developing the comprehensive understandingof the dominant party regimes and the nature of the emergence and persistence ofsingle-party dominance is provided by K.Greene2, S.Huntington and C.Moore3,A.Arian and S.H.Barnes4, S.Levitsky and L.Way5, T.Pempel6, H.Giliomee andThe terms ‘single-party dominance’ and ‘dominant party regime’ are used as a synonyms in the research.Greene K.F.
Why Dominant Parties Lose?: Mexico’s Democratization in Comparative Perspective. – New York:Cambridge University Press, 2007; Greene K.F. (2008) Dominant Party Strategy and Democratization // AmericanJournal of Political Science, 52; Greene K.F. (2002) Opposition Party Strategy and Spatial Competition in DominantParty Regimes: A Theory and the Case of Mexico // Comparative Political Studies, 35; Greene K.F. (2010) ThePolitical Economy of Single-Party Dominance // Comparative Political Studies, 43; Greene K.F.
A Resource Theoryof Single Party Dominance: The PRI in Mexico // Bogaards M., Boucek F. (eds.) Dominant Political Parties andDemocracy: Concepts, Measures, Cases, and Comparisons. – New York: Routledge, 2010.3Huntington S.P., Moore C. Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-partySystems. – New York: Basic Books, 1970; Huntington S.P. Political Order in Changing Societies. – New Haven: YaleUniversity, 1968.4Arian A., Barnes S.H. (1974) The Dominant Party System: a Neglected Model of Democratic Stability // The Journalof Democracy, 36.5Levitsky S., Way L. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War.
– Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2010.6Pempel T.J. Introduction: Uncommon Democracies: the One-party Dominant Regimes // Pempel T.J. (ed.)Uncommon Democracies: The One-Party Dominant Regimes. – Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990; Pempel T.J.Conclusion: One-Party Dominance and the Creation of Regimes // Pempel T.J. (ed.) Uncommon Democracies: TheOne-Party Dominant Regimes. – Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990.122C.Simkins7,B.Magaloni8,A.McGann9,F.Boucek10,K.A.Templeman11,A.Schedler12, O.J.Reuter and T.Remington13, B.Geddes14, J.Brownlee15, J.Gandhiand A.Przeworski16, M.Svolik17, D.Slater and N.Smith18.Studies by G.Sartori19, M.Duverger20, A.Arian and S.H.Barnes21, K.MatlosaandS.Karume22,D.Anckar23,M.Bogaards24,7A.Lijphart25,J.Coleman26,Giliomee H., Simkins C. Conclusion // Giliomee H., Simkins C.
(eds.) The Awkward Embrace: One-partyDomination and Democracy. – Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1999; Simkins C. Stability andCompetitiveness in the Political Configurations of Semi-Developed Countries // Giliomee H., Simkins C. (eds.) TheAwkward Embrace: One-party Domination and Democracy. – Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1999.8Magaloni B. Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico. – New York: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2006; Magaloni B., Kricheli R. (2010) Political Order and One-Party Rule // Annual Review ofPolitical Science, 13; Diaz-Cayeros A., Magaloni B. (2001) Party Dominance and the Logic of Electoral Design inMexico’s Transition to Democracy // Journal of Theoretical Politics, 13(3); Magaloni B.
(2008) Credible PowerSharing and the Longevity of Authoritarian Rule // Comparative Political Studies, 41(4-5).9McGann A. The Modal Voter Result: Preference Distributions, Intra-Party Competition, and Political Dominance.Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, Duke University, 1999.10Boucek F. Electoral and Parliamentary Aspects of Dominant Party Systems // Pennings P., Lane J.E. (eds.),Comparing Party System Change. – London: Routledge, 1998.11Templeman K.A.
The Origins and Decline of Dominant Party Systems: Taiwan’s Transition in ComparativePerspective. – Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 2012.12Schedler A. The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism. – New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 2013; Schedler A. The Logic of Electoral Authoritarianism // Schedler A. (ed.) Authoritarianism:The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. – Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006; Schedler A. Sourcesof Competition under Electoral Authoritarianism // Lindberg S.I. (ed.) Democratization by Elections: A New Modeof Transition. – Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009; Schedler A. The Contingent Power ofAuthoritarian Elections // Lindberg S.I.
(ed.) Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition. – Baltimoreand London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009.13Reuter O.J., Remington T.F. (2009) Dominant Party Regimes and The Commitment Problem. The Case of UnitedRussia // Comparative Political Studies, 42(4); Reuter O.J. The Origins of Dominant Parties: Building AuthoritarianInstitutions in Post-Soviet Russia. – Cambridge University Press, 2017.14Geddes B. Politician’s Dilemma: Building State Capacity in Latin America. – Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 1994; Geddes B., Zaller J.
(1989) Sources of Support for Authoritarian Regimes // American Journal of PoliticalScience, 33; Geddes B. Minimum-Winning Coalitions and Personalization in Authoritarian Regimes // AnnualMeetings of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, 2004; Geddes B. Why Parties and Elections inAuthoritarian Regimes? Revised Version of a Paper Prepared for Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanPolitical Science Association. – Washington, D.C., 2005.15Brownlee J. Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization. – Cambridge University Press, 2007.16Gandhi J.
Political Institutions under Dictatorship. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008; Gandhi J.,Przeworski A. (2007) Authoritarian Institutions and the Survival of Dictators // Comparative Political Studies, 40(11).17Svolik M. The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.18Slater D., Smith N.R.
The Power of Counterrevolution: Contentious Origins of Dominant Party Durability in Asiaand Africa. Paper presented at the APSA Annual Conference, Washington, D.C., 2010.19Sartori G. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.20Duverger M. Politicheskie partii (in Russian, ‘Political parties’). – Moscow: Academic project, 2002.21Arian A., Barnes S.H.
(1974) The Dominant Party System: a Neglected Model of Democratic Stability // The Journalof Democracy, 36.22Matlosa K., Karume S. (2004) Ten Years of Democracy and the Dominant Party System in South Africa // ElectionUpdate 2004: South Africa, 5(10).23Anckar D. (1997) Dominating Smallness: Big Parties in Lilliput Systems // Party Politics, 3(2).24Bogaards M. (2004) Counting Parties and Identifying Dominant Party System in Africa // European Journal ofPolitical Research, 43.25Lijphart A.
Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. – New Haven:Yale University Press, 1999.26Coleman J. The Politics of Sub-Saharan Africa // Almond G., Coleman J. (eds.) Politics of the Developing Areas.– Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960.3S.Mainwaring and T.Scully27, G.Cox28, B.O’Leary29, M.Kuenzi and G.Lambright30,N.Van de Walle31, A.Ware32, P.Dunleavy33, J.Blondel34, O.Reuter35, R.McDonald36,J.-F.Caulier and P.Dumont37 are important due to conceptualization andoperationalization of single-party dominance.G.Sartori38,H.Templeman39,A.Lijphart40,J.Linz41,S.Mainwaring42,M.Shugart and J.Carey43, M.Laver44, A.Hicken and H.Stoll45, J.Hsieh46,O.Kharitonova47 consider effects of institutional design on the emergence andpersistence of dominant-party regimes.
Particularly, H.Templeman argues thatparliamentary regimes are more durable. However, this argument requires re27Mainwaring S., Scully T. (eds.) Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. - Stanford:Stanford University Press, 1995.28Cox G. Making Votes Count.