The role of ordinary people in democratization

Journal of Democracy

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 126-140

  Welzel, Christian ^a,b   Inglehart, Ronald ^c  

^a JACOBS UNIVERSITY BREMEN   (Germany)

^b World Values Survey Executive Committee

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39349097452     PISSN: 10455736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/jod.2008.0009     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Electoral definitions go back to Joseph Schumpeter and are used by Adam Przeworski and Fernando Limongi, "Modernization: Theories and Facts," World Politics 49 (January 1997):155-83.
2. The notion that democracy emerges as a product of strategic elite agreements is advanced by Guillermo O'Donnell and Phillippe C. Schmitter in Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions About Uncertain Democracies (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986).
3. The liberal notion of democracy, which considers a wide set of civil and political rights to be an integral part of democracy, is proposed by Robert A. Dahl in Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971).
4. The argument that democracy emerges and survives in a setting of widespread participatory resources and self-expression values, supported by empirical evidence from more than seventy societies, is made by Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
5. The Polity Index measures democracy in terms of constitutional limitations on executive power and channels of popular participation.
6. The Freedom House ratings are based on expert ratings of civil liberties and political rights.
7. Since they include a Civil Liberties scale, one might think that Freedom House's freedom ratings would measure liberal democracy rather than mere electoral democracy. But Freedom House's dichotomous distinction between "electoral democracies" and "nondemocracies" shows a .88 correlation with its 13-point freedom ratings. As they are actually coded, these ratings do not go much beyond electoral democracy.
8. David Collier and Steven Levitsky emphasize the distinction between effective democracy and deficient democracy in "Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research," World Politics 49 (April 1997): 430-51;
9. Larry Diamond also emphasizes the importance of this distinction in "Thinking About Hybrid Regimes," Journal of Democracy 13 (April 2002): 21-35.
10. See Richard Rose, "A Diverging Europe," Journal of Democracy 12 (January 2001): 93-106.
11. See Daniel Kaufmann, Aart Kraay, and Massimo Mastruzzi, "Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996-2002," World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3106.
12. For a detailed discussion of this index of effective democracy, see Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, ch. 7.
13. Ronald Inglehart, Modernization and Postmodernization (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997);
14. Ronald Inglehart and Wayne Baker, "Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values," American Sociological Review 65 (February, 2000): 19-51;
15. Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy.
16. Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, chapter 2 explains how self-expression values are measured.
17. Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, 150.
18. Inglehart and Welzel, 155.
19. Inglehart and Welzel, 249-58.
20. Inglehart and Welzel, 196-208.
21. Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1989).
22. Ronald Inglehart, "How Solid Is Mass Support for Democracy-And How Do We Measure It?" PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (January 2003): 51-57.
23. This finding is confirmed in Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, ch. 11,
24. and draws further support from Christian Welzel, "Are Levels of Democracy Influenced by Mass Attitudes?" International Political Science Review 28 (September 2007): 397-424.
25. For further support of this claim, see Christian Welzel, "Democratization as an Emancipative Process," European Journal of Political Research 45 (October 2006): 871-896.
26. Welzel, "Are Levels of Democracy Influenced by Mass Attitudes?" 418. A multilevel analysis of World Values Survey data, which includes 250,000 respondents from the full range of societies-from plainly authoritarian to fully democratic, finds that self-expression values do lead people to participate in elite-challenging mass actions, regardless of how undemocratic a given regime may be.
27. Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, chs. 8 and 9.
28. The cross-culturally virtually universal impact that a sense of free choice has on life satisfaction is demonstrated in Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, 140.
29. Carles Boix, Democracy and Redistribution (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003);
30. Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005);
31. and Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, James A. Robinson and Pierre Yared, "Income and Democracy," NBER Working Paper No. W11205 (2005), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=689386.
32. Robert D. Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993).
33. For evidence, see Inglehart and Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy, 118-26 and 224-27.