Civil society, Democratization and development (II): Two country cases

Democratization

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 1995, Pages 56-84

  White, Gordon ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CIVIL SOCIETY; COMPARATIVE STUDIES; DEMOCRATISATION; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON; POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT; POLITICAL ROLE;

KOREA(SOUTH); ZAMBIA;

EID: 0029531478     PISSN: 13510347     EISSN: 1743890X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13510349508403430     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. The first part of this article was published in Democratization, Vol.1, No.3 (1994).
2. World Bank, World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp.218-9.
3. D. Rueschemeyer, E.H. Stephens and J.D. Stephens, Capitalist Development and Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992), p.76.
4. B.L. Billet, ‘South Korea at the Crossroads: An Evolving Democracy or Authoritarianism Revisited?’, Asian Survey, Vol.XXX, No.3 (1990), p.300.
5. For the notions of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ authoritarianism in the East Asian context, see E.A. Winckler, ‘Institutionalization and Participation in Taiwan: From Hard to Soft Authoritarianism?’, China Quarterly, No.99 (1984), pp.481-99.
6. Kim Kwang Woong, ‘The Nature and Limits of Democratization in Korea’, in T. Vanhanen (ed.), Strategies of Democratization, (London: Crane Russak, 1992), pp.99-111.
7. Different estimates are assessed by Dong Wonmo, ‘The Democratization of South Korea: What Role Does the Middle Class Play?’, Korea Observer, Vol.XXII, No.2 (1991), pp.257-82.
8. Dong Wonmo, ibid., p.271.
9. Kuk Minho, ‘The Governmental Role in the Making of Chaebol in the Industrial Development of South Korea’, Asian Perspective, Vol.12, No.1 (1988), pp. 107–33.
10. Suh Jae Jean, ‘The Social and Political Networks of the South Korean Capitalist Class’, Asian Perspective, Vol. 13, No.2 (1989), p.132.
11. C.J. Eckert, ‘The South Korean Bourgeoisie: a Class in Search of Hegemony’, Journal of Korean Studies, Vol. 7 (1990), p.125.
12. R. Bianchi, ‘Interest Group Politics in the Third World’, Third World Quarterly, Vol.8, No.2 (1986), pp.507-39.
13. Kim Young Rae, ‘Korean Labour Movement and Political Participation’, Korea Observer, Vol.XXIII, No.1 (1992),p.6.
14. For an overview of the role of labour in the transition, see Asia Monitor Resource Centre, Min-Ju No-Jo: South Korea's New Trade Unions: The Struggle for Free Trade Unions (Hong Kong, 1988).
15. K. Eggleston, ‘Kwangju 1980 and Beijing 1989’, Asian Perspective, Vol. 15, No.2 (1991), pp.33-73.
16. R.E. Bedeski, ‘State Reform and Democracy in South Korea’, Journal of East Asian Affairs,Vol.VI, No.1 (1992), pp.152-3.
17. See Kim Young Rae, ‘Korean Labour Movement’, p.6.
18. M.A. Launius, ‘State-Labor Relations in Democratizing South Korea’, Pacific Focus, Vol.VI,No.1 (1991), p.44.
19. Christian Institute for the Study of Justice and Development, Lost Victory: An Overview of the Korean People's Struggle for Democracy in 1987 (Seoul: Minjungsa, 1988), pp.256-7.
20. Lee Su-hoon, ‘Transitional Politics of Korea, 1987-1992: Activation of Civil Society’, Pacific Affairs, Vol.66, No.3 (1993), p.359.
21. See Kim Kwang Woong, ‘The Nature and Limits’, p.109.
22. B. Gills, ‘Korean Capitalism and Democracy’, in B, Gills, J. Rocamora and R. Wilson (eds.), Low Intensity Democracy: Political Power in the New World Order (London: Pluto Press, 1993), pp.226-57.
23. Kihl Young Whan, ‘South Korea in 1990: Diplomatic Activism and a Partisan Quagmire’, Asian Survey, Vol.XXXI, No.1 (1991), pp.64-70.
24. Lee Hong Yung, ‘South Korea in 1992: a Turning Point in Democratization’, Asian Survey, Vol.XXXIII, No.1 (1993), pp. 34-42.
25. Eckert, ‘The South Korean Bourgeoisie’, p. 148.
26. Lee Chong-Sik and Sohn Hyuk-Sang, ‘South Korea in 1993: the Year of the Great Reform’, Asian Survey, Vol.XXXIV, No.1 (1994), pp.1-9.
27. H. Blair, ‘Defining, Promoting and Sustaining Democracy: Formulating an AID Strategy for Development Assistance and Evaluation’, USAID (23 Sept. 1992), p.22.
28. For a review of political decline in the region, see R. Jeffries, ‘The State, Structural Adjustment and Good Government in Africa’, Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, Vol.31, No.1 (1993), pp.21-3.
29. R.H. Bates and P. Collier,‘The Politics and Economics of Policy Reform in Zambia’, in R.H. Bates and A.O. Krueger (eds.), Political and Economic Interactions in Economic Policy Reform: Evidence from Eight Countries (Oxford; Blackwell, 1993), p.429.
30. For analyses of the dynamics of Zambia's one-party system, see C. Gertzel, C. Baylies and M. Szeftel (eds.), The Dynamics of the One-Party State in Zambia (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984).
31. N. Mijere, ‘The State and Development: A Study of the Dominance of the Political Class in Zambia’, Africa Today (1988), pp.21-36.
32. B.J. Phiri, ‘Zambia: the Myth and Realities of One-party Participatory Democracy’, Genève-Afrique, Vol.XXIX, No.2 (1991), pp.9-24.
33. G.F. Lungu, ‘The Church, Labour and the Press in Zambia: The Role of Critical Observers in a One-Party State’, African Affairs, Vol.85, No.340 (1986), pp.394-404.
34. For a valuable analysis of the political role of the trade-union movement in Zambia, see L. Rakner, Trade Unions in Processes of Democratisation: A Study of Party Labour Relations in Zambia (Bergen: Christian Michelsen Institute, Department of Social Science and Development, 1992:6, 1992).
35. For a regional review, see W. Tordoff, ‘Political Liberalization and Economic Reform in Africa’, Democratization, Vol.1, No.1 (1994), pp. 100-115.
36. P. Woodward, ‘Democracy and Economy in Africa: the Optimists and the Pessimists’, Democratization, Vol.1,No.1 (1994),pp.116-32.
37. D. Woods, ‘Civil Society in Europe and Africa: Limiting State Power Through a Public Sphere’, African Studies Review, Vol.35, No.2 (1992), p.89.
38. S.C. Nolutshungu, ‘Africa in a World of Democracies: Interpretation and Retrieval’, Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, Vol.30, No.3 (1992), p.318.
39. For example, in early 1994 the government lost four ministers who resigned or were sacked amid allegations of corruption and drug-trafficking. Africa Research Bulletin, No.11291,1-31 Jan. 1994.
40. Nolutshungu,‘Africa’, p.324.
41. Many analysts of the African scene, though arguing from different perspectives, agree on the critical problem posed by the weakness of state institutions and the consequent danger of strengthening ‘civil society’ while ignoring the issue of state capacity. For example, Jeffries, ‘The State’, and N. van de Walle, ‘Political Liberation (sic) and Economic Policy Reform in Africa’, World Development, Vol.22, No.4 (1994), pp.483-500.
42. S.J. Kpundeh and S.P. Riley, ‘Political Choice and the New Democratic Politics in Africa’, The Round Table, No.323 (1992), pp.265,270.
43. Blair,‘Defining’,p.13.
44. Lee Hong Yung, ‘South Korea in 1992’, p.39.
45. M. Bratton, ‘Zambia Starts Over’, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 3, No.2 (1992), pp. 81-94.
46. For example, Kpundeh and Riley, ‘Political Choice’.
47. S. Decalo, ‘Democracy in Africa: Towards the 21st. Century’, in T. Vanhanen (ed.), Strategies, pp. 131-42.
48. R. Lemarchand, ‘Uncivil States and Civil Societies: How Illusion Becomes Reality’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol.30, No.2 (1992), p.190.
49. R. Lemarchand, ‘African Transitions to Democracy: an Interim (and Mostly Pessimistic) Assessment’, Africa Insight, Vol.22, No.3 (1992), p. 182.
50. B. Parekh, ‘The Cultural Particularity of Liberal Democracy’, Political Studies, Vol.XL (1992), pp.160-75.
51. For an example of this kind of argument, see J.-F. Bayart, ‘Civil Society in Africa’, in P. Chabal (ed.), Political Domination in Africa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp.109-25.
52. S.P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), pp,209-10.
53. This argument is made in the European and South American contexts in J. Linz and A. Stepan, ‘Political Crafting of Democratic Consolidation or Destruction: European and South American Comparisons’, in R.A. Pastov (ed.), Democracy in the Americas (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1989), pp.41-61.
54. For a comparative review of ‘one-party dominant regimes’, see T.J. Pempel (ed.), Uncommon Democracies: The One-Party Dominant Regimes (London: Cornell University Press, 1990).
55. For analysis of the Botswana polity, see P.P. Molutsi and J.D. Holm, ‘Developing Democracy When Civil Society is Weak: The Case of Botswana’, African Affairs, Vol.89, No.356 (1990), pp.323-40.
56. For example, Cheng Tun-jen and L.B. Krause advocate a corporatist model for South Korea: ‘Democracy and Development: With Special Attention to Korea’, Journal of Northeast Asian Studies, pp.3-25).
57. Corporatist systems are notoriously difficult to establish and maintain; for a review of the difficulties, see R. Bianchi, ‘Interest Groups’, pp.507-39.