Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Die Demokratie im Zeichen der Demokratieforschung

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Demokratie und Autokratie in der vergleichenden Demokratieforschung

  • 4661 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

In der Demokratieforschung verliert die liberale Demokratie ihren exklusiven Status. Auch solche Regime gelten noch als demokratisch, die sich zwar auf Wahlen einlassen, aber Defizite bei der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und der Gewaltenkontrolle aufweisen. Damit erweitert sich der Gegenstandsbereich der Demokratieforschung um den von ihr bevorzugten Objektbereich im Werden befindlicher, schwacher und ungefestigter Demokratien in Lateinamerika, Asien und Afrika. Auch lässt sich die Demokratie damit weiter in die Vergangenheit projizieren, als wenn der Maßstab der liberalen Gegenwartsdemokratie zu Grunde gelegt würde. Damit weichen die definitorischen Grenzen zwischen der Demokratie und der Autokratie auf.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Aberbach, J. D., Putnam, R. D., & Rockman, B. A. (1981). Bureaucrats and politicians in western democracies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aberbach, J. D., Krauss, E., Muramatsu, M., & Rockman, B. A. (1990). Comparing Japanese and American administrative elites. British Journal of Political Science, 20, 461–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A. (1990). A discipline divided: Schools and sects in political science. Newbury Park: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A., & Genco, S. J. (1977). Clocks, clouds, and the study of politics. World Politics, 29, 489–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A., & Powell, J. B. (2012/1966). Comparative politics: A developmental approach (6. Aufl.). New York: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armony, A. C., & Schamis, H. F. (2005). Babel in democratization studies. Journal of Democracy, 1, 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Beyme, K. (1994). Systemwechsel in Osteuropa. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Beyme, K. (2013). Von der Postdemokratie zur Neodemokratie. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boas, T. C. (2005). Television and neopopulism in Latin America: Media effects in Brazil and Peru. Latin American Research Review, 40, 27–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boix, C., Miller, M., & Rosato, S. (2012). A complete data set of political regimes, 1800–2007. Comparative Political Studies, 46, 1523–1554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borchert, J. (Hrsg.). (1999). Politik als Beruf. Die politische Klasse in westlichen Demokratien. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brendel, P., Croissant, A., & Rüb, F. W. (Hrsg.). (2002). Zwischen Diktatur und Demokratie. Zur Konzeption und Empirie demokratischer Grauzonen. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, S. (2004). Did Protestantism create democracy? Democratization, 11, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradimg. Journal of Democracy, 13, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D., & Levitsky, S. (1997). Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics, 49, 430–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C. (2013/2003). Postdemokratie (10. Aufl.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (1989). Beyond authoritarianism and totalitarianism: Strategies for democratization. Washington Quarterly, 12, 141–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (2002). Thinking about hybrid systems. Journal of Democracy, 23, 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (2012). The coming wave. Journal of Democracy, 13, 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L., & Morlino, L. (2005). Introduction. In Diamond, L. & Morlino, L. (Hrsg.), Assessing the quality of democracy (S. ix–xliii), Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (2006). Revolutions without enemies: Key transformations in political science. American Political Science Review, 100, 487–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, G. (2011/1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, R. R. (1990). Rethinking state and regime: Southern Europe’s transition to democracy. World Politics, 42, 422–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. London: Hamilton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2012). Dealing with inequality. In F. Fukuyama, L. Diamond, & M. F. Plattner (Hrsg.), Poverty, inequality, and democracy (S. 3–14). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2013). Democracy and the quality of the state. Journal of Democracy, 24, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabardi, W. (2001). Contemporary models of democracy. Polity, 33, 547–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. W. (2002). Political theory, political science, and politics. Political Theory, 30, 577–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. (1998/1996). Kampf der Kulturen. Die Neugestaltung der Weltpolitik im 21. Jahrhundert (2. Aufl.). Berlin: Siedler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, J. C. (2014). Restructuring the social sciences? A reflection from the editor of perspectives on politics. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47, 279–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jellinek, G. (1976/1928). Allgemeine Staatslehre (3. Aufl.). Kronberg: Athenäum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaina, V. (2008). Die Messbarkeit von Demokratiequalität als ungelöstes Theorieproblem. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 49, 518–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, G. (2013). Restructuring the social sciences: Reflections from Harvard’s Institute for quantitative social sciences. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47, 165–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, G., Keohane, R., & Verba, S. (2012/1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, B. C. (1989). Japan’s administrative elite. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, H.-J. (2004). Demokratie und Demokratiemessung. Eine konzeptionelle Grundlegung für den interkulturellen Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, H.-J. (2011). Quality criteria for democracy: Why responsiveness is not the key. In G. Erdmann & M. Kneuer (Hrsg.), Regression of Democracy? Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft/Comparative Governance and Politics. Special Issue 1 (S. 59–80). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luke, T. W. (2013). Stultifying politics today: The „Natural Science“ model in American political science – How is it natural, science, and a model? New Political Science, 35, 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFaul, M. (2002). The fourth wave of democracy and dictatorship: Noncooperative transition in the postcommunist world. World Politics, 54, 212–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W. (1994). Einleitung. In W. Merkel (Hrsg.), Systemwechsel 1. Theorien, Ansätze und Konzeptionen (S. 9–20). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W. (2004). Embedded and defective democracies. Democratization, 11, 33–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W. (2010). Systemtransformation. Eine Einführung in die Theorie und Empirie der Transformationsforschung (2. überarb. u. erw. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W., & Croissant, A. (2000). Formale und informale Institutionen in defekten Demokratien. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 41, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W., Puhle, H.-J., Croissant, A., Eicher, C., & Thiery, P. (2003). Defekte Demokratie (Bd. 1). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Møller, J., & Skaaning, S.-E. (2011). Requisites of democracy: Conceptualization, measurement and explanation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller, J., & Skaaning, S.-E. (2013). Regime types and democratic sequencing. Journal of Democracy, 24, 124–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morlino, L. (2004). „Good“ and „Bad“ Democracies: How to conduct research into the quality of democracy. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 20, 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morlino, L. (2009). Qualities of democracy: How to analyze them. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munck, G. (2007). Debating the direction of comparative politics: An analysis of leading journals. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munck, G., & Verkuilen, J. (2002). Conceptualizing and measuring democracy. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narizny, K. (2012). Anglo-American primacy and the global spread of democracy: An international geneology. World Politics, 54, 341–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. (1994). Delegative democracy. Journal of Democracy, 5, 55–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. (2007). Dissonances: Democratic critiques of democracy. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. (2009). Twenty-five years, fifteen findings. Journal of Democracy, 21, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G., & Schmitter, P. (1986). Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oren, I. (2006). Can political science emulate the natural sciences? The problem of self-disconfirming analysis. Polity, 38, 72–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickel, G., & Pickel, S. (Hrsg.). (2006). Demokratisierung im internationalen Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, T. J. (2010). Optimism, pessimism, and coalitional presidentialism. Debating the institutional design of Brazilian democracy. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 29, 18–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, A. (1991). Democracy and the market; political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1973). The beliefs of politicians: Ideology, conflict, and democracy in Britain and Italy. New Haven: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosales, A. (2013). Going underground: The political economy of the „Left Turn“ in South America. Third World Quarterly, 34, 1443–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people: A realist’s view of American democracy. Hinsdale: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A. (2001). Taking uncertainty seriously: The blurred boundaries of democratic transitiion. Democratization, 8, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M. G., Ostheim, T., Siegel, N. A., & Zohlnhöfer, R. (Hrsg.). (2007). Der Wohlfahrtsstaat. Eine Einführung in den historischen und internationalen Vergleich. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, P. C., & Karl, T. L. (2009). What democracy is… and is not. In L. Diamond & M. F. Plattner (Hrsg.), Democracy: A reader (S. 3–46). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, E. (2009). Challenging neoliberalism in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steffani, W. (1979/1962). Gewaltenteilung im demokratisch-pluralistischen Rechtstaat. In W. Steffani (Hrsg.), Parlamentarische und präsidentielle Demokratie. Strukturelle Aspekte westlicher Demokratie (S. 9–36). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suleiman, E. N. (1974). Politics, power, and bureaucracy in France: The administrative elite. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (2000). Processes and mechanisms of democratization. Sociological Theory, 18, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (2007). Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players: How institutions work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdés, J. G. (1995). Pinochet’s economists: The Chicago School in Chile. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigell, M. (2008). Mapping „Hybrid Regimes“? Regime types and concepts in comparative politics. Democratization, 15, 230–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodberry, R. D., & Shah, T. S. (2004). Christianity and democracy: The pioneering Protestants. Journal of Democracy, 15, 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Helmut-Schmidt-Universität/Universität der Bundeswehr, Hamburg, Deutschland

    Jürgen Hartmann

Authors
  1. Jürgen Hartmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jürgen Hartmann .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hartmann, J. (2015). Die Demokratie im Zeichen der Demokratieforschung. In: Demokratie und Autokratie in der vergleichenden Demokratieforschung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-07479-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-07479-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-07478-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-07479-1

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation