Publications of Bogaards, M
Case-based research on democratization. Democratization. 2019;26(1):61-77.
Case-based research on democratization
Empirical research on democratization is dominated by case studies and small-N comparisons. This article is a first attempt to take stock of qualitative case-based research on democratization. It finds that most articles use methods implicitly rather than explicitly and are disconnected from the burgeoning literature on case-based methodology. This makes it difficult to summarize the substantive findings or to evaluate the contributions of the various approaches to our knowledge of democratic transition and consolidation. There is much to gain from a closer collaboration between methods experts and empirical researchers of democratization.
Consociationalism. In: Turner B, editor. Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory.; 2018.
Consociationalism
A comprehensive, interdisciplinary compendium of original entries focusing on the origins, evolution, and global development of contemporary social theory. Presents a comprehensive, interdisciplinary overview and analysis of all aspects of social theory Features more than 850 in-depth, original entries contributed by international experts Includes all major theories, theorists, schools of thought, disciplines, debates, doctrines, developments, epistemologies, and methodologies relating to the development of modern social theory Brings in concepts from contemporary cultural studies, feminism, post-secularism, and postmodernism Explores controversial contemporary debates relating to the clash of civilization, environmentalism, post-colonialism, post-humanism, cyborgs, and the life-extension project
Making waves: democratic contention in Europe and Latin American since the revolutions of 1848, by Kurt Weyland. Vol 25.; 2018. (Democratization; vol 25; no 2).
Kinder, Gentler, Safer? A Re-Examination of the Relationship between Consensus Democracy and Domestic Terrorism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 2018.
Kinder, Gentler, Safer? A Re-Examination of the Relationship between Consensus Democracy and Domestic Terrorism
Can inclusive institutions tame the threat of domestic terrorism? In a series of recent publications, the political scientists Arend Lijphart and Matt Qvortrup claim that consensus democracies are not only kinder and gentler, but also safer: consensus democracies are less likely to experience deadly domestic terrorism and when they do, they suffer fewer fatalities than majoritarian democracies. This article reexamines the logic and the evidence. It argues that the underlying grievance theory of terrorism contains important gaps and that the statistical results are based on a problematic coding of cases and lack robustness. Lijphart and Qvortrup have opened up an important new line of inquiry, but their results do not withstand scrutiny.
De-democratization in Hungary: Diffusely Defective Democracy. Democratization. 2018;25(8):1481-99.
De-democratization in Hungary: Diffusely Defective Democracy
Scholarly attention has started to shift from democratization and democratic consolidation to trends of democratic deconsolidation, backsliding, regression, and erosion. This article examines Hungary as a deviant and exemplary case for understanding de-democratization. The starting point is the literature on defective democracy, which provides a unified framework of analysis for the causes and the outcomes of democratization. However, as the case of Hungary shows, de-democratization is not simply the mirror of democratization. In Hungary, both the outcome and the process of de-democratization defy expectations. The democratic defects do not conform to any of the standard types, instead resembling a “diffusely defective democracy”. Moreover, existing explanations fail to account for their emergence. The case of Hungary indicates that our knowledge of democratization may be a poor guide to understanding de-democratization.
Deliberative Democracy and Electoral Reform in South Africa: A Campus Experiment. Politikon. 2018;45(2):181-98.
Deliberative Democracy and Electoral Reform in South Africa: A Campus Experiment
In the transition to an inclusive democracy, South Africa changed its electoral system for the national parliament to proportional representation. Ever since, there have been suggestions of electoral reform. So far, the debate has rarely involved ordinary citizens. This article presents the results of a Deliberation Day on Electoral Reform in South Africa at the University of Cape Town. This campus experiment in deliberative democracy was part of a project-based course for MA students in Political Studies. The outcomes are as predicted in the literature: the knowledge of the 47 student participants increased and their opinions became more coherent. The student participants were highly critical about South Africa’s political system and demanded more accountability through the electoral system. The most striking, and encouraging, outcome was the unanimous support for more deliberation on campus. The findings presented here suggest the potential of deliberative democracy for organising the national debate on electoral reform as well as for communication inside South Africa’s universities.
Microscope or Telescope? The Study of Democratization Across World Regions. Political Studies Review. 2018;16(2):125-35.
Microscope or Telescope? The Study of Democratization Across World Regions
This review article brings together six recent books on democratisation. They cover Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, East Central Europe and the Balkans, Eurasia, and East and South East Asia. The review asks what we can learn from reading about democratisation in different parts of the world. The aim is twofold: to identify regionally specific processes of democratisation and to explore cross-regional commonalities. When viewed in combination, these regional studies of democratisation reveal the limitations of area studies and the need for comparative area studies.
Coding, Concessions, Conclusions: A Reply to Matt Qvortrup. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism. 2018.
Ethnic Lebanon: How Civil War Transformed Consociationalism. In: McGarry J, McCulloch A, editors. Power Sharing: Empirical and Normative Critiques. London: Routledge; 2017. p. 148-65.
Ethnic Lebanon: How Civil War Transformed Consociationalism
Power-sharing is an important political strategy for managing protracted conflicts and it can also facilitate the democratic accommodation of difference. Despite these benefits, it has been much criticised, with claims that it is unable to produce peace and stability, is ineffective and inefficient, and obstructs other peacebuilding values, including gender equality. This edited collection aims to enhance our understanding of the utility of power-sharing in deeply divided places by subjecting power-sharing theory and practice to empirical and normative analysis and critique. Its overarching questions are: Do power-sharing arrangements enhance stability, peace and cooperation in divided societies? Do they do so in ways that promote effective governance? Do they do so in ways that promote justice, fairness and democracy? Utilising a broad range of global empirical case studies, it provides a space for dialogue between leading and emerging scholars on the normative questions surrounding power-sharing. Distinctively, it asks proponents of power-sharing to think critically about its weaknesses. This text will be of interest to students, scholars and practitioners of power-sharing, ethnic politics, democracy and democratization, peacebuilding, comparative constitutional design, and more broadly Comparative Politics, International Relations and Constitutional and Comparative Law.
Comparative Political Regimes: Consensus and Majoritarian Democracy. In: Thompson W, editor. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.; 2017.
Comparative Political Regimes: Consensus and Majoritarian Democracy
Ever since Aristotle, the comparative study of political regimes and their performance has relied on classifications and typologies. The study of democracy today has been influenced heavily by Arend Lijphart’s typology of consensus versus majoritarian democracy. Scholars have applied it to more than 100 countries and sought to demonstrate its impact on no less than 70 dependent variables. This paper summarizes our knowledge about the origins, functioning, and consequences of two basic types of democracy: those that concentrate power and those that share and divide power. In doing so, it will review the experience of established democracies and question the applicability of received wisdom to new democracies.
Lessons from Brexit and Trump: populism is what happens when political parties lose control. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. 2017;11(4):513-8.
Wahlsysteme in der Vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft. In: hans-Joachim Lauth, Kneuer M, Pickel G, editors. Handbuch Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS; 2016. p. 415-27.
Wahlsysteme in der Vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft
Das Handbuch Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft stellt - erstmals im deutschsprachigen Raum - Beträge zu den wichtigsten Aspekten der Vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft zusammen. Neben der Darstellung der zentralen Begriffe und Kategorien sowie konzeptionellen und methodischen Ausführungen bietet der Band zudem Übersichten über die relevanten komparativen Forschungen und Forschungsergebnisse in den jeweiligen Bereichen. Mit über sechzig Beträgen wird ein umfassender Überblick zur Entwicklung und aktuellen Situation dieser Teildisziplin gegeben.
Elections and democracy: representation and accountability, edited by Jacques Thomassen. Vol 23.; 2015. (Democratization ; vol 23; no 7).
Deliberation by, with, and for University Students. Journal of Political Science Education. 2015;11(2):221-32.
Deliberation by, with, and for University Students
This research note about a project-based course on deliberative democracy shows how political theory, research methods, and civic engagement can be fruitfully combined. The novel course format allowed students to practice and study democracy at the same time. Our undergraduate students organized a Deliberation Day on campus and then analyzed the results. As predicted in the literature, the deliberative experience increased the knowledge of the participants, which resulted in opinion change and stimulated engagement. Moreover, Deliberation Day put the issue of student community service on the university’s agenda.
Competitive authoritarianism in Africa revisited. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. 2015;10(1):5-18.
Competitive authoritarianism in Africa revisited
Competitive authoritarianism has emerged as a major concept in the study of political regimes. The introduction of this special issue revisits Levitsky and Way’s seminal study Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. Although Africa is the world region with the highest absolute number of competitive authoritarian regimes, political scientists working on Africa have rarely engaged with Levitsky and Way’s modern classic. In this introduction, we summarize their arguments, outline the empirical findings for Africa, and review the critiques. In doing so we provide the background for the contributions to this special issue.
Making a Difference: An Interview with Arend Lijphart. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. 2015;9(1-2):83-96.
Democracy and Social Peace in Divided Societies: Exploring Consociational Parties. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian; 2014.