The Woman King POLI 214 Combined Slides PDF

n g n Ki o ma e W T h Comparative Politics (POLI214) Combined Slides 0550277123  DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE n g...

n g n Ki o ma e W T h Comparative Politics (POLI214) Combined Slides 0550277123  DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE n g BA POLITICAL SCIENCE Ki Second semester (2021/2022) a n W om POLI 214: Introduction to Comparative Politics (3 CREDITS) T h e Lecture note 1: Introducing Comparative Politics DR EMMANUEL YEBOAH-ASSIAMAH 1  n g n Ki om a e W T h 2  Introduction n g Ki  Comparative politics is about a critical assessment, evaluation and a n comparison of politics (struggle for power, use of power, W om maintenance of power, authoritative allocation of values, who gets e what) across political systems. T h  Politics, at it were, is about acquisition of power, use of such power to make collective decisions, it is about conflict and cooperation.  How does the political process or interaction affect the performance of administrative structures and decisions?  Overview of comparative politics n g Ki  Comparative politics is the study and comparison of politics n across countries. (Politics????) om a e W  Who makes political decisions? T h  where does the authority to make such decisions come from  What decisions have been taken, why and how do they affect the life of societies? Dr. E. Yeboah-Assiamah  n g Ki Studying politics in this way helps us examine a n major questions of political science; W om for example, why do some countries have T h e democratic regimes whereas others experience authoritarianism? Why and how do regimes change? Why do some countries experience affluence and growth, but others endure poverty and decline?  Conceptualizing Comparative politics n g Comparative politics entails the study of political, n Ki administrative institutions, processes, and behaviors om a across organizational, national, and cultural W boundaries (Jreisat, 2011) T h e In other words, it connotes the comparative study of the institutions, processes, and behaviours of public management systems either to build a theory of what works or to transfer best practices of public management to poor performing areas. Dr. E. Yeboah-Assiamah The task of the comparativist n g n Ki om a e W T h  Critical Questions in CP: why,… n g Ki 1. Why are some political systems stable while a n others are volatile? W om 2. Who makes political decisions? T h e 3. How did they acquire the authority to make such decisions? 4. where does the authority to make such decisions come from? 5. What decisions have been taken, why and how do they affect the life of society? What is the scope and focus of CP? n g Ki What do we compare? a n What are we interested in ? W om T h e 9  What do we compare? n g Ki Comparative politics is mainly concerned with a n i. internal political structures (institutions such as W om parliament, executive, electoral systems etc); T h e ii. individual and collective actors (voters, political parties, social movements, interest groups) iii.and processes (policy making, communication, communication processes and culture) 10 Alternative perspectives: The Five ‘I’s n g Ki Guy Peters discusses five alternative perspectives (a a n sixth one) that comparative analysis focuses on W om  Institutions h e  Interests T  Ideas  Individuals  International environment  Interactions  The Distinctiveness of Comparative Politics n g Ki Caramani (2014) identifies and discusses three main sub-fields of a n Political Science om  Comparative politics e W  Political theory T h  International relations How would you distinguish comparative politics from international relations and political theory? (take home discussion and tutorial)  n g Ki Political theory is more concerned with normative n and critical questions about equality, democracy, om a justice etc whilst e W CP deals with empirical questions. T h CP is empirical and value-neutral International relations is concerned with interactions between political systems (balance of power, war, trade, diplomacy) whilst CP deals with interactions within political systems.  n g  For eg whilst IR would analyse wars between states, CP n Ki would rather investigate which party is in government and om a why it has decided to favour military intervention. What W kind of electoral system brought about such leaders? How T h e strong is the arms industry in such countries?  As a subject matter, CP is concerned with power relationships between power relationships between individuals, groups, and organizations, classes, and institutions within political systems  Goal of comparative politics n g n Ki om a  The main goal is empirical and seeks to describe, explain, and e W predict similarities and differences across political systems (be T h it countries, regions, or supra-national systems)  This can be realized through the intensive analysis of more cases few cases or one case. Why the need for comparative politics n g Ki Theory development: Comparative analysis is the most n reliable process of generating knowledge and developing om a principles to underpin a good theory of public management W (Riggs, 1991). T h e “Comparison has long been acknowledged as the ‘very essence of the scientific method’” (Brans, 2007: 169). “It is almost certainly right to argue that theory in the social sciences proceeds largely by comparison.” (Peters, 1988:2) Dr. E. Yeboah-Assiamah  n g Ki “Not to be comparative is to be naively parochial” (Riggs, 1998:23). a n om The common objective is to generate knowledge, W enhance understanding, and determine successful h e functional practices that could be transferred to enhance T the performance of the underperforming public management systems (Jreisat 2011). “Comparison recognizes similarities and differences and underscores successful practices, thus, expanding options and alternative strategies for improving the performance of public institutions” (Jreisat 2011:33).  CP AT WORK: Classifying Political Systems n g Ki The first such system devised – and one of the earliest examples of comparative politics at work – was Aristotle’s a n om classification of the 158 city-states of ancient Greece between W 500 and 338 bce. h e They were small settlements with variety in their forms of T rule. Approach/method???? Such diversity provided an ideal laboratory for Aristotle to consider which type of political system provided what he looked for in a government: stability and effectiveness. 18  Criteria and conclusion n g Ki  Aristotle based his scheme on two dimensions. n 1. the number of people involved in the task of governing: one, few or om a many. (form & nature of participation) W 2. In whose interest did the rulers rule? Common interest (genuine h e form) or ‘their own interest (the perverted form)?? T Observations/conclusions  a political system would be more stable and effective when its rulers governed in the long-term interests of the community. 19  Crisscrossing the two dimensions n g Ki Form Rule by one manfew W o h e many T Genuine Kinship Aristocracy Polity Perverted Tyranny Oligarchy Democracy ARISTOTLE’S CLASSIFICATION OF GOVERNMENTS 20 Typology by Baron de Montesquieu n g Ki  The Spirit of the Laws, a treatise on political theory Baron de Montesquieu (1748). a n om  Montesquieu identified three kinds of political system: W republican systems in which the people or some of the h e people have supreme power, T  monarchical systems in which one person ruled on the basis of fixed and established laws, and  despotic systems in which a single person ruled on the basis of their own priorities and perspectives 21  Cold war typology: three world systems n g Ki  Cold War (late 1940s–early 1990s) was the Three Worlds system n  This was less a formal classificatory template developed by political om a scientists than a response to geopolitical realities, dividing the W world into three groups of countries based on ideological goals and h e political alliances: T 1. First World: wealthy, democratic industrialized states, most of which were partners in the Western alliance against communism. 2. Second World: communist systems, including most of those states ranged against the Western alliance. 3. Third World: poorer, less democratic, and less developed states, some of which took sides in the Cold War, but some of which did not 22  n g Ki The end of the Cold War meant the end of this a n particular W om  typology. T h e In contemporary times, – the Democracy by the Economist Intelligence Unit, and the Freedom in the World index by Freedom House – are among the most often quoted sources that attempt at typologies 23  THE END THANK YOUKi n g END OF PRESENTATION m a n W o T h e 24  DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE n g BA POLITICAL SCIENCE Ki Second semester (2021/2022) a n W om POLI 214: Introduction to Comparative Politics (3 CREDITS) T h e Lecture note 2: The Comparative Research Method DR EMMANUEL YEBOAH-ASSIAMAH 1  Introduction n g Ki Comparison is one of the oldest tools of political a n om science, found in the work of Aristotle. W Some have even argued that the scientific study of T h e politics is unavoidably comparative (Almond, 1966; Lasswell 1968), and that ‘comparison is the methodological core of the scientific study of politics’ (Powell et al., 2014).  Comparative research methods n g Ki The methods available for the comparative study of n politics and government are many and varied. om a The choice among them, argues Landman (2008: 24) W depends on a combination of the research question h e being asked, T the time and resources available, the method with which the researcher is most comfortable, and the epistemological preferences of the researcher; that is, how they believe that understanding is best acquired.  Traditions in Comparative Politics n g Ki  In attempt to find out ‘how politics works or operates, n comparative politics entails 3 main traditions which help to om a achieve the goal e W  The first tradition is the Study of single countries T h  The second tradition is Methodological and is concerned with establishing rules and standards of comparative analysis.  This tradition addresses the question of how comparative analysis should be carried out in order to enhance their potential for the descriptive information, causal explanations and associations between key variables, and prediction  n g  3. the third tradition of CP is analytical and it combines n Ki empirical substance and methods om a  Concerned with identification and explanation of differences W and similarities between countries and their institutions, T h e actors, and processes through systematic comparison  It can be based on ‘large-N’ or ‘small-N’ research designs (N is the number of cases concerned)  It can either be quantitative or qualitative or logical or statistical techniques for testing hypothesis and causal explanations  What exactly does CP do in practice? Contd from last week n g Ki CP involves the analysis of similarities and a n differences between cases. W om Are there differences? How large are they? And T h e how can we explain them? To compare means that similarities and differences are described. CP describes the world and building on these descriptions establishes classifications and typologies Similarities and differences are explained.  n g Ki i. Why did social revolutions occur in the newly independent n African countries in the early 1960s? om a ii. Why did newly independent African countries attempt to e W establish many SOEs? And outcomes T h  CP aims at formulating predictions.  If we know that proportional representation electoral systems favour proliferation of parties in legislature, could we logically predict?  What exactly does CP compare? Contd from last week n g Ki 1.Non-national political systems (sub-national regional bodies such a n as states in US and Nigeria; Lander in Germany, regions and W om MMDAs in Ghana, e  Regions (Western Europe, North America, Latin America, Asian T h Tigers, Sub-Saharan Africa)  Supra-national organizations (European Union, African Union) 2. Types of political systems can be compared (eg a comparison between democratic and authoritarian regimes in terms of eg economic performance 3. Single elements of political systems rather than whole system  From institutions to functions n g Ki  CP has gone through some trajectories a n  CP before world war II was mainly concerned with the state W om  Classical cases of CP has been on national political h e systems and institutions and biased towards Western T Europe and North America  Institutions were conceptualized in the narrow sense overlapping with state powers (legislative, executive, judiciary).  In the 1960s, there was a revolution which many scholars describe as ‘Golden Age of comparative politics (see Dalton 1991).  What triggered this revolution? Read Caramani (esp p. 5-6)  CP before and after the behavioural revolution n g Ki Dimension Before After of analysis a n om Unit State Political system e W Subject Regimes and their formal All actors in the process T h matter institutions, leadership of decision-making Cases Major democracies: US, Objective extension of Britain, France, analysis of cases (decolonization) democratic breakdown in and subjective extension Germany and Italy, with spread of discipline authoritarianism in Spain in various countries and Latin America  g Dimension Before After Ki n of analysis n Indicators West-centric, Abstract concepts om a qualitative categories (functionalism), empirical W or universals, quantitative h e variables T variables Method Narrative accounts and Machine-readable datasets juxtapositions between and statistics, quasi- cases experimental comparative method Data Constitutional and legal Survey and aggregate data texts  Types of comparative study methods n g Ki typology Number focus strategy a n of cases W om Case study One Case Intensive study of a single instance with wider e significance T h Qualitative A few Case Holistic comparison of two or more cases (small-N) within their natural settings. Quantitative Many Variabl Statistical assessments of the relationships (large-N) e between variables involving large numbers of cases. Historical One or a Proces Traces the process leading to a known few s outcome. (small-N)  Case study n g Ki  A research method involving the detailed study of a particular object (a person, institution, country, phenomenon, etc.) as well the context a n om within which it exists. W  The case study method typically involves a single case, and thus h e might not seem to be comparative at first glance, T  but a case is necessarily comparative because it needs to be an example of something larger, against which it can then be juxtaposed.  Single cases are not as widely used as they once were,  but they have the advantage of depth, and other researchers can use two or more single-country studies to explore broader similarities and differences,  and single cases can usefully be compared with an ideal type or a typology  n g Often researchers will use their own country as a n Ki representative example. om a For instance, researchers may be interested in e W h the formation of coalition governments in T general, but choose to study in detail how governments form in their homeland. The home country is the research site but the hope is that the results will contribute to broader understanding.  Five types of case study n g Ki typology Definition Example m a n o Prototypical Expected to become Sophisticated use of the internet W typical in US election campaigns T h e Exemplary Created the category British Parliament Deviant Exception to the rule India as a stable democracy in a poor country. Critical If it works here, it will Promoting democracy in work anywhere Afghanistan Representati Typical of the category Coalition government in Finland. ve  Deviant case g  The purpose of a deviant case study is to seek out the exceptional and the Ki n untypical, rather than the norm: the few countries which remain communist, or which are still governed by the military, or which seem to a n be immune from democratizing trends. om  Deviant cases are often used to tidy up our understanding of exceptions W and anomalies. h e  Why does India contradict the thesis that democracy presupposes T prosperity?  Why did tiny Switzerland adopt a federal architecture when many federations are found in large countries?  Why has voter turnout stayed high in Denmark even as it has fallen elsewhere (Elkit et al., 2005)?  Deviant cases always attract interest and, by providing a contrast with the norm, enhance our understanding of representative examples.  But since the exceptional tends to the exotic, the danger is over-study. Comparative politics should be more than a collection of curios.  Critical case n g  A critical case (also known as a ‘crucial case’) enables a proposition to Ki be tested in the circumstances least favourable to its validity. n  The logic is simple: if it is true here, then it is true everywhere. om a  For instance, if we were to find that most Germans opposed further W European integration, we could anticipate that the same would hold true e in other EU countries such as Britain which have historically been more T h suspicious of the European project.  In this way, critical case studies can be highly efficient, providing exceptional returns on the research investment; by studying just one country, we can generalize to others.  However, the pay-off comes with risk: a critical case design builds a potential for generalization into a single investigation but involves a bet that the relevant proposition will, in fact, be confirmed in the conditions least favourable to its validity.  Prototypical case n g  a prototypical case is chosen not because it is representative but Ki because it is expected to become so. a n  ‘In other words, their present is our future, om  Studying a pioneer can help us understand a phenomenon e W which is growing in significance elsewhere. T h  One famous early example of a prototypical case study was Democracy in America, written by the French politician Alexis de Tocqueville  as a product of his travels in the United States in 1831 to 1832.  He had been sent by the French government to study the American prison system,  but the book he wrote became a broader analysis of democracy and  n g Ki representative government, using the US as a case. a n De Tocqueville regarded the United States as a W om harbinger of democracy and therefore a guide to T h e Europe’s own future (1835, ch. 1). More recent examples of prototypical cases would be Tunisia as the first instance of the Arab Spring,  Exemplary case n g  Where the study of prototypical cases aims to reveal how similar Ki cases may evolve in the future, exemplary cases are the n archetypes that are considered to have generated the category of om a which they are taken as representative. W  For instance, the parliamentary system was born in Britain, h e  and thus a study of the features of the British Parliament will T give us insights into the manner in which legislatures and executives work in all those countries using this system.  In similar fashion, the US presidency does far more than illustrate the presidential system of government:  it is the model which influenced later political systems, notably in Latin America.  While an exemplar is often defined as a case to be emulated, in research design the term refers more neutrally to an  Qualitative study n g  The qualitative method is what we usually associate with the Ki comparative method, a n om  and involves comparing anything from two to a dozen or more W cases (otherwise known as small-N, for the number of cases). h e  The qualitative method is most often used in research that falls T between single-case and large-N studies,  and concentrates on the intensive examination of two cases  (a paired or binary comparison), three cases (a triangular comparison), or more.  Cases are usually selected to introduce variation into the dependent variable, thus overcoming an inherent limit of the single case study  Features of qualitative study n g Ki The qualitative approach has the following features: a n A limited number of cases are studied in depth. W om It is descriptive rather than predictive. T h e An effort is made to understand the interaction of multiple variables. Meaning is allowed to emerge from the objects of study. Observation is the main means of data collection. Phenomena are studied within their natural setting  Quantitative n g Ki  Where the qualitative method takes an intensive approach to a n understanding political phenomena, om  using small-N cases in their natural setting, the quantitative e W method takes a narrower approach based on a large number of T h cases, more variables, and statistical analysis.  It typically tries to quantify data and to generalize the results to a larger population, and generates information through experiments and survey research.  It is also heavily statistical  n g  Qualitative: Qualitative research is expressed in words. Ki  It is used to understand concepts, thoughts or experiences. a n om This type of research enables you to gather in-depth insights W on topics that are not well understood. T h e  Quantitative: Quantitative research is expressed in numbers and graphs. It is used to test or confirm theories and assumptions. This type of research can be used to establish generalizable facts about a topic. Eg Surveys, experimental research,  Qualitative vs Quantitative method n g Ki Dimension Qualitative Quantitative n Goal To understand underlying reasons and To quantify data and generalize om a motivations in the setting of a results from a sample to the W phenomenon population of interest e Method Exploratory or ‘bottom-up’; hypotheses Confirmatory or ‘top-down’; T h and hypotheses and theory tested theory generated from data with data View of human Contextual, personal and unpredictable Regular and predictable thought and behaviour Sample size Small large Core principles Interpretive, exploratory Scientific, conclusive Types of Open-ended, narrative, non-numerical, Statistical, numerical information words, images, themes Information Interviews, focus groups, case studies, Experiments, audits, survey observation research, rating scales  n g n Ki om a e W T h  Approaches in case selection: Most Similar System n g  The selection of cases is important, and there are two core strategies Ki involved (Przeworski and Teune, 1970). a n  The most common – known as the most similar system (MSS) W om design – involves selecting those cases which are as similar as h e possible except in regard to the object of study (the dependent T variable).  The underlying logic is that ‘the more similar the units being compared, the more possible it should be to isolate the factors responsible for differences between them’ (Lipset, 1990:xiii).  If the states being studied are similar in, say, their history, culture, and government institutions, it should be possible to rule out such common factors as explanations for the particular difference being studied  Most-Different-System (MDS) n g Ki  The most different system (MDS) design follows the opposite track.  Here, we seek to test a relationship between two factors by discovering whether it can be a n observed in a range of countries with contrasting histories, cultures, and so on. om  If so, our confidence that the relationship is real, and not due to the dependence of both W factors on an unmeasured third variable, will increase (Peters, 1998). h e  A well-known example of this approach is the historical analysis by Theda Skocpol T (1979) of revolutions in France, Russia, and China.  These three cases had quite different political economic and social systems, so she set out to ask what they had in common that would produce a similar political outcome.  She concluded that regimes which were internationally weak and domestically ineffective became vulnerable to insurrection when well-organized agitators succeeded in exploiting peasant frustration with an old order to which the landed aristocracy offered only limited support.  Another example is provided by Rothstein (2002), who examined the evolution of social and political trust in two contrasting democracies, Sweden and the United States, assuming that any trends shared between these two countries should also be observable in other democracies.  Challenges of comparison g Too few cases, The problem of having more explanatory factors Ki n too many for a given outcome than there are cases available n variables to study. Counterfactuals om a Selection bias The cases selected for study are often an W unrepresentative sample, limiting the significance of T h e the findings. The selection may be influenced in particular by survivorship, value, or confirmation bias. Understanding The ‘same’ phenomenon can mean different things in meaning different countries, creating difficulties in comparing like with like. Globalization States cannot be regarded as entirely independent of each other, thus reducing the effective number of cases available for testing theories.  Key terms used in comparative research method n g Ki Methodology: The systematic analysis of the methods n used in a given field of enquiry. om a Also used to describe the body of methods used in a e W discipline, or the means used to reach a particular set of T h conclusions Unit of analysis: The object of study in comparative politics. Level of analysis: The level of study in comparative politics, ranging from the political system level to the individual level Variable: A changeable feature, factor, quantity, or  Hypothesis n g Ki  At the heart of research in almost every field of study is the formulation and testing of a hypothesis. a n  This is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon that can be supported om (confirmed) or refuted (falsified) through observation or W experimentation. e  Hypotheses should not be confused with theories, which are explanatory T h frameworks from which hypotheses might flow, and which can in turn be tested in order to support or refute theories (see Chapter 5).  Examples of hypotheses include the following:  Plurality electoral systems always produce a two-party system (otherwise known as Duverger’s law – see Chapter 15).  The wealthier a country, the more likely it is to sustain a stable democracy.  The violent end to a dictatorial regime is more likely to bring chaos than democracy. Colonialism is the root cause of the problems of the world’s poorest states.  Variables n g Ki  We have also seen how variables play a key role in research, particularly in comparison. n  The object is usually to explore the extent to which variables or factors co-vary om a with one another, such that knowing a country’s score on one variable (for W instance, literacy) allows us to predict its score on another (for instance, electoral turnout). h e  In such analyses, one variable is dependent, in the sense that it is the one we T want to better understand, while the others are independent, in the sense that we believe that they may explain or impact the dependent variable.  For example:  Higher participation in politics may be driven by factors such as greater wealth and higher education.  The incidence of military coups may be tied to poverty, social division, and the past incidence of coups.  An assertive foreign policy may be driven by a high sense of mission, the power of the defence industry, fear of the foreign, or (as in the case of Putin’s Russia) a desire to reassert lost influence.  Key Terms in Comparative Method contd n g Ki  Case: A case denotes the units of observation to be compared, n such as, countries. om a  Variable: A variable is a concept that can be systematically W observed (and measured) in various situations (such as height, h e weight, GDP, population or over time). T  It allows us to understand the similarities and differences between observed phenomenon.  n g  Dependent variable: This is the analysis – what is to be n Ki explained? om a  What does the researcher seek to find out? e W  Independent variable: These are explanatory factors that T h help to seek answers to the issue a researcher attempts to find (they are also called explanatory variables)  Eg  Democracy and economic performance??  Demand and price of commodity??  n g n Ki om a e W T h  n g n Ki om a e W T h Dependent and independent variables n g n Ki om a e W T h  n g  Theory: A theory is a meaningful statement about the n Ki relationship between two real-world phenomena: X, the om a independent and y, the dependent variable. W  It is expected that a change in one variable will be related T h e to a change in the other.  Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge within the limits of critical bounding assumptions. Eg RCT, public choice theory;  From cases to variables n g Ki Small ‘N n Large ‘N’ om a Return to small ‘N’: there has been a methodological e W shift back to small N which stresses the intrinsic T h advantages of the study of few cases. They argue that small-N comparisons allow for in- depth analysis in which configurations or combinations of factors are privileged in explanations. Cases are seen as wholes rather than being divided into isolated variables  Note n g CP employs statistical techniques when research designs n Ki include many cases and quantitative indicators (variable- om a oriented large-N studies), or ‘comparative methods’ when W research designs include few cases and qualitative T h e indicators (case-oriented small-N studies) The purpose of CP is descriptive, explanatory, and predictory. That regard, research designs aim either at selecting similar cases and explaining their different outcomes (Most Similar System Designs, the method of difference) or at selecting different cases and explain their similar outcomes (Most Different Systems Designs, Method of Agreement)  Forms of comparative analysis n g Ki Peters identified the following four types of n comparative analysis: om a W Comparative organizational analysis: h e Comparing variations across two or more T organizations Comparative sector analysis: Comparing variations across two or more sectors (e.g. public sector versus private sector)  n g Ki Comparative historical analysis: Comparing n variations across different time periods. Sometimes om a called cross-time analysis. e W Comparative national analysis: Comparing T h variations across two or more countries. Usually also called cross-national analysis. Note: More than one type of comparative analysis may be used in the same research study to strengthen the robustness of the findings.  n g n Ki om a e W T h Comparative national analysis of ‘business climate’: six African states n g n Ki om a e W T h Comparative national and cross-time analysis n g n Ki om a e W T h country 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 g Global CP Score Global i n ranking ranking n K New Zealand 1 87 87 89 90 1st 91 o m a Denmark 1 87 90 1st 91 W Singapore 4 85 85 84 84 7th 85 T h e United States 23 69 71 75 74 18th 76 United Kingdom 12th 77 80 82 81 10th 81 Botswana 34 61 61 61 60 35th 63 Ghana 80 41 41 40 43 70th 47 Rwanda 51 53 56 55 54 50th 54 Namibia 56 52 53 51 52 53rd 53 Somalia 180 9 10 9 10 176th 8  THE END THANK YOUKi n g END OF PRESENTATION m a n W o T h e 47  DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE BA POLITICAL SCIENCE Second semester (2021/2022) n g Ki POLI 214: Introduction to Comparative Politics (3 CREDITS) Lecture note 4: State a n W om T h e DR EMMANUEL YEBOAH-ASSIAMAH 1  n g n Ki om a e W T h 2  Outline of presentation n g Ki Emergence of state system a n om The expansion of state e W h Diversity of states T  introduction n g Ki The standard unit of analysis in comparative a n politics is the state. W om It is by no means the only such option, but states T h e are the most common point of reference for the comparative study of political systems. For this reason, we need to understand what states are, how they work, how they evolved, the varieties in which they can be found  Notes n g Ki The state is the most powerful and successful political n organization that has ever existed. om a All states have four defining qualities: population, e W legitimacy, territory, and sovereignty. T h The modern state was born in Europe, and its form was exported to the rest of the world by imperial powers such as Britain, France, and Spain. States are formally equal but vary dramatically in (among other attributes) their size, economic importance, international significance and even the extent to which they control ‘their’ territory.  Conceptualizing the state n g Ki The legal and political authority of a territory n containing a population and marked by borders. om a The state connotes the political authority of which e W government is the managing authority; that authority T h is regarded as both sovereign and legitimate by the citizens of the state and the governments of other states (Hague et al 2016, p.21 ). According to Max Weber, it involves ‘a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory  State and government n g Ki How does a state differ from a government? n In essence, the state defines the political community of which om a government is the managing agent. e W By successfully claiming a monopoly of authorized force, the T h state creates a mandate for rule which the government then puts into effect. This distinction between state and government is reflected in the characteristic separation in many countries of the roles of head of state (e.g. the monarch or non-executive president) and head of government (e.g. the prime minister) 7  What was, before the modern state? n g Ki  Before the modern state, government mainly consisted of kingdoms, empires and cities. a n om  These units were often governed in a personal and highly decentralized W fashion, lacking the idea of an abstract political community focused on a e defined territory which characterizes today’s states. T h  Even so, many of these ancient formations were substantial in area and population.  For example, the ancient Chinese empire ‘proved capable of ruling a population that eventually grew into the hundreds of millions over a period of millennia – albeit control was not always complete and tended to be punctuated by recurring periods of rebellion’ (van Creveld, 1999: 36).  Ancient history quickly dispels the idea that all modern states are larger and more stable than every traditional political system Chinese Empire and Chinese State n g n Ki om a e W T h 9  Examples of empires n g n Ki om a e W T h 10  Key features of the state n g n Ki Population States contain populations, without whom the territory om a concerned would be little more than a block of real W estate T h e Legitimacy States are normally recognized both by their residents and by other states as having jurisdiction and authority within their territory. Territory States operate within a fixed territory marked by borders, and control the movement of people, money, and goods across those borders. Sovereignty States have sovereignty over that territory, its people and resources, meaning that they have the sole authority to impose laws and taxes States and their territories n g n Ki om a e W T h E. KWEKU OSAM/UG/LNGS 412 AKAN 12 SEMANTICS/SEMESTER 2/2020-21  State and other territories n g Ki  If all were neat and tidy, then every square metre of land in the world would be part of one state or another. a n om  But there are numerous parcels of territory around the world W that lack one or more of the qualities of a state, and cannot h e be considered states for the purposes of analysis: T  examples include Taiwan, Palestine, Western Sahara, and Hong Kong.  It should be noted that states are often described as countries, but the term country strictly speaking refers only to a territory and not to the mechanisms of government and power.  Emergence of the state n g Ki  The state emerged from the embers of medieval Europe (c.1000– n 1500). om a  In the Middle Ages, European governance had been dominated by W the transnational Roman Catholic Church and powerful feudal lords. h e  Sandwiched between these forces, monarchs occupied a far weaker T position than do today’s rulers.  The process of change was long, slow, and complex.  Drivers of state’s dominant position n g Ki How did the modern state acquire the dominant a n position it occupies in the modern world? What W om factors drove this crucial transformation? h e If there was any single force that was responsible T for the transition to the modern state, it was war. As Tilly (1975: 42) wrote, ‘war made the state, and the state made war’. 15  Key phases in the state formation n g Ki  introduction of gunpowder in the C14th altered military scale n and tactics, as organized infantry and artillery replaced the om a knight on horseback. W  Led to an aggressive, competitive, and expensive arms race in h e Europe, T  rulers were then obliged to employ administrators to recruit, train, equip, and pay for standing armies, laying the foundation of modern bureaucracies.  Political units became larger, and the growth of bureaucracy meant that local patterns of administration and justice became more uniform.  Commerce grew more freely, and rulers began to establish formal diplomatic relations with their overseas counterparts. 16 Peace of Westphalia and birth of the modern state n g Just as war-making weakened the feudal pillar of the Ki medieval framework, so the Reformation destroyed its a n om religious foundations. W From around 1520, Protestant reformers led by Martin h e Luther condemned what they saw as the corruption and T privileges of the organized Church. This reform movement brought profound political consequences, shattering the Christian commonwealth as antagonism developed between Protestant and Catholic rulers. The birth of the modern state system is often tied to a single event: the 1648 Peace of Westphalia.  n g Ki This brought an end to both the Thirty Years’ War n in the Holy Roman Empire, om a W and the Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the h e Dutch Republic. T  Impact of the war and Peace of Westphalia n g Ki 1. It made several adjustments to European state n borders, om a W 2. gave new definition to the idea of sovereignty, T h e 3. and helped make national secular authority superior to religious edicts from Rome, giving rise to what is often known as the Westphalian system. 4. Several states predated the Peace, including England, Ireland, France, Spain, and Portugal, but it gave clearer definition to the powers of states. 19  n g Ki National self-determination; Precedent for n ending wars through diplomatic congresses; om a W Peaceful coexistence among sovereign states h e as the norm; Maintained by a balance of T power among sovereign states and acceptance of principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other sovereign states 20  Sovereignty (powerful) and consent (tamed/limits & control) n g Ki  The French philosopher Jean Bodin argued that, within society, a single sovereign authority should be responsible for five major functions: legislation; war and a n peace; public appointments; judicial appeals; and the currency. om  But the sovereign still needed to be subject to limits and controls, and here the e W English philosopher John Locke played a vital role. T h  He argued that citizens possess natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that these rights must be protected by rulers governing through law.  According to Locke, citizens agree to obey the laws of the land, even if only by tacit means such as accepting the protection which law provides.  But should rulers violate citizens’ natural rights, the people ‘are thereupon absolved from any further Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men against force and violence’ – the right to resist (Locke, 1690: 412).  So, in Locke’s work we see a modern account of the liberal state, with sovereignty limited by consent.  In theory, at least, government had become servant rather than master.  Emergence of the modern state n g Ki  This modern idea of the state emerged in Europe between C16th and C18th , (1500- 1799) a n  with the use of the word state as a political term coming into common use towards W om the end of this period. e  The number of states grew slowly: there were only 19 in existence in 1800, and T h barely 30 more had been established by 1900.  At a global level, the real expansion of the state system began after the Second World War as decolonization saw the end of European empires.  In addition, the number of international organizations and list of international treaties began to grow.  Until the Second World War, government and politics around the world  had been driven mainly by the preferences and the actions of a few Western democracies, but the picture became increasingly complex as debates about sovereignty, authority, and self-determination broadened and deepened  n g Ki  Where great powers such as Britain, Germany, and France had been prominent, a n om  the picture changed with the emergence of the United States W and the Soviet Union as superpowers after 1945, h e  with the independence of nearly 70 mainly African and T Asian states in the 1960s and 1970s,  with the final break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991, and the rise of emerging powers such as China, India, and Brazil in the 1990s.  States today have a quite different and more complex relationship with one another than they did even two generations ago.  The expansion of states n g Ki  During the nineteenth century, the outlines of the state became more precise, especially in Europe. a n om  Borders slowly turned into barriers as maps marked out W defined frontiers. h e  Lawyers established that a country’s territory should extend T into the sea as far as the reach of a cannonball and, later, above its land to the flying height of a hot-air balloon.  Reflecting this new concern with boundaries, passports were introduced in Europe during the First World War.  To travel across frontiers became a rite of passage, involving official permission expressed in an official stamp.  n g Ki  Economically, too, the second half of the nineteenth century saw the end of an era of relatively liberal trade. a n om  Stimulated by economic depressions, many European W states introduced protectionist trade policies. h e  National markets gained ground against both local and T international exchange, meaning that economies became more susceptible to regulation by central government.  Internally, the functions performed by the state expanded to include education, factory regulation, policing, and gathering statistics (literally, ‘state facts’).  Era of warfare n g Ki  As with the original emergence of European states, this expansion was fuelled by war. a n  The first and second world wars were examples of total war, fought W om between entire countries, rather than just between specialized armed forces. e  To equip massive forces with the necessary tanks, planes and bombs T h demanded unparalleled mobilization of citizens, economies and societies.  The ability to tax effectively and systematically – described by Bräutigam et al. (2008: 137) as ‘the central pillar of state capacity’ – grew further.  Because total wars were expensive, tax revenues as a proportion of national product almost doubled in Western states between 1930 and 1945 (Steinmo, 2003: 213).  The twentieth century was an era of the state because it was also an age of war.  Era of welfare after Total War n g  Peace in 1945 did not initially lead to a corresponding reduction Ki in the role of the state. a n  Rather, Western governments sought to apply their enhanced om administrative skills to domestic needs. W  Throughout Western Europe, the warfare state gave way to the T h e welfare state, with rulers accepting direct responsibility for protecting their citizens from the scourges of illness, unemployment and old age.  In this way, the European state led a post-war settlement – termed the ‘Keynesian welfare state’ (after the British economist John Maynard Keynes) –  which integrated full employment and public welfare with an economy in which the private sector continued to play a substantial part. Expansion of state to other worlds n g  Meanwhile, important developments were taking place further afield. Ki  Although the state was born in Europe, its form was exported to the rest of a n the world by imperial powers such as Britain, France, and Spain. om  Consequently, most states in today’s world are postcolonial. W  As Armitage (2005:3) points out, ‘the great political fact of global history h e in the last 500 years is the emergence of a world of states from a world of T empires.  The few states without a history as a colony (leaving aside the ex-colonial powers themselves) include China, Ethiopia, Iran, Japan, and Saudi Arabia.  Although the term post-colonial is usually confined to countries achieving independence in the aftermath of the Second World War, settler societies such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States provide early examples of states formed from colonies. Wave Period Examples of Countries First nineteenth the Spanish and Portuguese territories of Latin wave century America. n g Second around the end of Europe and the Middle East; with the final collapse of the Austro- Ki the First Hungarian, Russian, and Ottoman empires. The first of wave n World War these dissolved into five separate states: Austria, Hungary, om a Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia. W with the retreat from empire by European states diminished by war. Third after 1945 e Asian countries, such as the Philippines (in 1946) and India T h and (in 1947), were the first to achieve independence but many other colonies, in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Middle East, followed largest suit. Between 1945 and 1989, nearly 90 independent wave states, almost half the world’s current total, were created fourth final decade of The dissolution of the communist bloc previously dominated by the Soviet Union led to independence for more than a and the twentieth dozen Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe (e.g. Poland). century a Russian In addition, the Soviet Union itself – in effect, final wave empire – dissolved into 15 successor states (e.g. Ukraine).  Patterns of State Formation n g We can distinguish at least five paths in state formation. Ki Through absolutist kingship, which obtained independent power by n 1. a building up armies and bureaucracies solely responsible to monarchs (e.g. om France, Prussia). W 2. Through kingship-facing judges and representative bodies (and, h e within them, eventually political parties), which developed sufficient strength T to become independent powers (e.g. England, Sweden). 3. State formation from below through confederation or federation, intended to preserve some degree of autonomy for the constituent ‘states’ and a general emphasis on the division of power within the centre through ‘checks and balances’ (e.g. Switzerland, US). 4. State formation through conquest and/or unification (e.g. Germany, Italy). 5. State formation through independence (e.g. Ireland, Norway, and cases of break-up of empires: Habsburg and Ottoman empires). Adapted from Daalder (1991: 14)  Diversity of States n g Ki Population: n Some states are very large. China’s population of 1.35 billion om a is greater than that of the 160 smallest countries in the e W world combined. T h The smallest states – microstates – are mainly islands in the Caribbean, the Pacific or off the African coast, along with five European states, including the Vatican City. States that are small in both population and territory. Andorra, Barbados, Palau, and the Maldives 31  n g n Ki om a e W T h E. KWEKU OSAM/UG/LNGS 412 AKAN 32 SEMANTICS/SEMESTER 2/2020-21  Most populous countries 2022 n g Ki State Population (2022) 1 China 1,425,887,337 a n om 2 India 1,417,173,173 W 3 United States 338,289,857 e 4 Indonesia 275,501,339 T h 5 Pakistan 235,824,862 6 Nigeria 218,541,212 7 Brazil 215,313,498 8 Bangladesh 171,186,372 9 Russia 144,713,314 10 Mexico 127,504,125 11 Japan 123,951,692 12 Ethiopia 123,379,924 33  n g n Ki om a e W T h 34  n g n Ki om a e W T h 35  Population of UG alone?? i n g The student population is approximately n K a 61,000 W o m https://www.ug.edu.gh/about/overview T h e Greater Accra 5,455,692 Region?? 36  Top 10 Smallest Countries in the World (by Population) n g Ki Vatican City — 800 n Nauru — 10,876 om a W Tuvalu — 11,931 h e Palau — 18,169 T San Marino — 34,017 Liechtenstein — 38,250 Monaco — 39,511 Saint Kitts and Nevis — 53,544 Marshall Islands — 59,610 Dominica — 72,167 37  Micro states n g Ki These are states with very smaller population. n Archer and Nugent write, ‘ultimately a om a W judgmental element must creep into the h e exercise of categorising states by size’ (2002, T 5). Variables like territorial size, population and economic outputs are commonly cited as ways to define small states (Amstrup 1976; Ogashiwa 1991; Crowards, 2002; Ingebritsen et al. 2006; Maass 2009; Archer et al. 2014). 38  n g n Ki om a e W T h 39  Based on political authority n g Ki Quasi-states m a n W o h e De facto states T 40  Key terms used in the study of states: Quasi-state n g Ki  Quasi-states: They exist and are recognized under international law but their governments control little of the a n om territory under their jurisdiction. W  States that won independence from a former colonial power h e but have since lost control over much of their territory. T  They are recognized by the international community as having all the rights and responsibilities of a state,  but they barely exist as a functioning entity.  Somalia is a prime example:  the outbreak of a civil war in 1991 led to the collapse of centralized government and the emergence of several entities  De facto states n g Ki  They control territory and provide governance, but are mainly n unrecognized by the international community (and thus have no om a legal or de jure existence). W  So while quasi-states are legitimate no matter how ineffective they are, h e de facto states are illegitimate no matter how effective they are. T  Key examples include Somaliland, and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.  Somaliland provides a strong contrast with Somalia; the latter has a seat in the United Nations and is recognized internationally even though it is ineffective, while the former remains unrecognized despite the fact that it has been governing the northern one-third of Somalia in relative peace since 1991. 42  n g Ki  Taiwan would have been a member of the UN had it not been expelled n in 1971 when China made it clear that it would not have diplomatic om a ties with any country that recognized Taiwan. W  In almost all respects, though, it is structured and continues to h e function as a state. T  Kosovo – part of the former Yugoslavia – has been recognized diplomatically by more than 100 other states, including most of the member states of the European Union, and is a member of several key international bodies (including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund), but cannot be considered a political and diplomatic equal of UN member states. E. YEBOAH-ASSIAMAH/POLI 214 COMPARATIVE POLITICS SEM 2/2022 43  De facto States n g n Ki om a e W T h 44  So How many states exist? n g Ki  This is not an easy question to answer. n  A benchmark point of reference is the membership roster of the om a United Nations, which currently stands at 193. e W  But this number includes 4 small European enclave states T h (Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, and San Marino), which meet the legal definition of a state but play a minimal role in interstate relations, and are for all practical purposes parts of the larger states that surround them.  Meanwhile, the UN membership list excludes several territories that function much like states but are lacking either independence and/or legitimacy; these include Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan, and Western Sahara.  n g Ki  Taiwan would have been a member of the UN had it not been expelled in 1971 when China made it clear that it would not have diplomatic ties with any country that a n recognized Taiwan. om  In almost all respects, though, it is structured and continues to function as a state. e W  Kosovo – part of the former Yugoslavia – has been recognized diplomatically by T h more than 100 other states, including most of the member states of the European Union, and is a member of several key international bodies (including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund), but cannot be considered a political and diplomatic equal of UN member states.  So while the question ‘How many states are there?’ is likely to elicit the response ‘It depends what you mean by a state’,  Hague et al opt for the number 189: the current membership of the United Nations, less the 4 European enclave states.  But we should not overlook the discussion of microstates, quasi-states, and de facto states. 46  BASED ON INCOME? n g Ki The World Bank analyzes the economic health of all the world's countries and places each into one of four categories, using gross national income (GNI) per a n capita. om GNI is a metric that essentially measures the average income of a country's W citizens, making it a very useful tool for evaluating a country's economic health. T h e The World Bank adjusts the dividing line between categories every year, to reflect global inflation. For the fiscal year 2022, high-income countries are those with a per-capita GNI of $12,696 (USD) or more. Middle-income countries are split into two categories: upper-middle-income nations, which have per capita incomes between $12,695 and $4,096, and lower-middle-income nations, which have a GNI per capita of $4,095 to $1,046. Finally, those countries whose GNI per capita was computed to be $1,045 or less were placed in the low-income category 47  WB Classification of States Based on Income n g n Ki The high-income Developed economies of Europe, North om a category America, Australasia, and parts of Asia. W upper-middle The category includes two of the BRIC T h e income countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China), a designation invented in 2001 by an economist at the investment firm Goldman Sachs (O’Neill, 2001). Lower-middle Mainly in Africa and Asia. income countries the low income together with some Asian countries, such as countries consist Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Burma mainly of African  Classifying states based on Income n g gross national Ki income examples n per capita* (July om a 2021) W High income > 12,695 Germany, Poland, Japan, US T h e Upper- 4,096 -12,695 Brazil, China, Iran, Mexico, South middle Africa income Lower-middle 1,046 – 4,095 Algeria, Angola, Bangladesh, Benin, income Bhutan, Bolivia, Cabo Verde, Cambodia Low income Less than Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Haiti, Somalia. $1,045 Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad,  COUNTRIES GNI PER CAPITA (2021) Botswana $ 6, 940 China $11, 890 n g Cote d’Ivoire $2,450 Ki DR Congo $580 a n om Egypt $3,510 W France $43,880 h e Ghana $2,360 T Nigeria $2,100 Russia $11,600 Rwanda $850 South Africa $6,440 United Kingdom $45,380 US $ 70, 430 50  All 27 of the World's Low-Income Countries (World Bank 2022) n g Ki Afghanistan Guinea Rwanda n Burkina Faso Guinea-Bisseau Sierra Leone om a W Burundi Liberia Somalia h e Central African Republic Madagascar South Sudan T Chad Malawi Sudan DR Congo Mali Syrian Arab Republic Eritrea Mozambique Togo Ethiopia Niger Uganda Gambia North Korea Yemen 51  THE END THANK YOUKi n g END OF PRESENTATION m a n W o T h e 52  DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE BA POLITICAL SCIENCE Second semester (2021/2022) n g Ki POLI 214: Introduction to Comparative Politics (3 CREDITS) Lecture note 5: Democracies a n W om T h e DR EMMANUEL YEBOAH-ASSIAMAH 1 Introduction: Overview of democracy n g n Ki om a e W T h  Presentation Outline n g Ki Definition of democracy a n W om Features of democracy T h e Waves of democracy Comparing democracies Democracy Index  Notions of democracy n g Ki There are two distinct approaches to a n conceptualizing democracy: W om Procedural vs substantive notions T h e Procedural definitions: This notion of democracy focuses on how a regime is organized and the processes by which representation, accountability, and legitimacy are assured. procedural structures such as free, fair and frequent elections, access to alternative sources of information,  Conceptualization (procedural) n g Ki The democratic method is ‘…that institutional n arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which om a individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a W competitive struggle for the people’s vote’ (Schumpeter T h e 1947, p.269)  Substantive definitions: n g Ki This notion deals with the goals and effectiveness of the n regime, and the extent to which the will of the people om a might be served in a more purposive sense. e W Here, particular goals are also envisaged, such that real T h democracy cannot be defined by process alone but also entails efforts at promoting equality, fairness and inclusion. substantive concerns may affect the viability of an effective democratic system, pointing out the difficulty for democratic procedures in contexts of extreme poverty (Held, 1997; Sartori, 1987; Sorensen, 1993)  Features of democracies n g Ki Periodic elections a n om Separation of powers and checks and balances W Rule of law and Equality before the law T h e Respect for fundamental human rights Freedom of association and expression Independence of judiciary Respect for minority rights and interests Multi-party system Liberal and illiberal democracies n g  Liberal democracies are defined as those with acceptance of popular Ki democracy and of government by the people; n  Liberal democracies embrace the notion of a freely elected government a but adds a distinct concern with limits on the executive’s W om scope. e  Liberal democracy connotes ‘’limited government’’. T h  Illiberal democratic regimes have been defined as electoral democracies, whilst there is acceptance of popular election, this is combined with the persistence or even reintroduction of restrictions and limits on individual freedoms and rights.  It is characterised by the formal establishment of a democratic electoral process but with major shortcomings in terms of the provision of constitutional liberties and the establishment of any limits on the arbitrary exercise of executive power  Forms of democracy n g Ki Direct democracy: The citizens themselves debate and a n reach decisions on matters of common interest. om  This was exemplified in the 5th century BC in Athens. e W  Under this type, the citizens themselves are the primary agent for T h reaching collective decisions  so the core principle of democracy is self-rule The word democracy itself comes from the Greek demokratia meaning ‘’rule’’ (kratos) by the ‘’people’’ (demos)  n g Ki  The model is a form of self government in which all n adult citizens participate in shaping collective decisions om a in an environment of equality and deliberations. W  In a direct democracy, state and society become one. T h e Challenges of the direct democracy n g Ki  Citizenship was restricted to men whose parents were n themselves citizens om a  Participation was not in practice so much extensive as e W claimed. Most citizens were absent from most assembly T h meetings.  Was hardly an exercise in lean government.  A management consultant would conclude the system was time consuming, expensive and over complex especially for such a small society  The principle of self government did not always lead to decisive and coherent policy.  Representation n g Ki  At national level, all contemporary liberal democracies are a n om representative (indirect) W  ‘’the moment a people gives itself representatives, it is no h e longer free. It ceases to exist’’ (Jean-Jacques Rosseau) T  A representative stands for another person, group or entity.  As large states emerged, so too did the requirement for a new way in which the people could shape collective decisions  n g Ki  The issue became one of evaluating the different n models of democracy in terms of their effectiveness, om a stability, and legitimacy W  The merits and demerits of either presidential and T h e parliamentary models was key.  Waves of democratization n g Ki  In Political Science, a wave of democracy refers to a major n surge of democracy in history. om a  "a group of transitions from nondemocratic to democratic e W regimes that occur within a specified period of time and that T h significantly outnumber transitions in the opposite directions during that period of time.” (Huntington 1991, 15)  Mainwaring and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán (2014, 70) offer a similar definition: "any historical period during which there is a sustained and significant increase in the proportion of competitive regimes (democracies and semi-democracies).“  n g Ki  Democratization waves have been linked to sudden shifts in the distribution of power among the great powers, which creates a n om openings and incentives to introduce sweeping domestic reforms W  It was popularized by Samuel P. Huntington, a political scientist h e at Harvard University in his article published in the Journal of T Democracy and further explicated in his 1991 book The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century  Countries undergoing or having undergone a transition to democracy during a wave are subject to democratic backsliding when countries encounter great reversals in the democratic transition First wave: This lasted from 1828 to 1926. n g Ki  Nearly 30 countries established at least minimally democratic n national institutions including Germany, Argentina, Australia, om a Britain, Canada, France, US, Scandinavian W  Reversal began in 1922, when Benito Mussolini rose to power in h e Italy. T  The collapse primarily hit newly formed democracies, which could not stand against the aggressions rise of expansionist communist, fascist and militaristic authoritarian or totalitarian movements which systematically rejected democracy (1920s and 1930s).  The nadir of the first wave came in 1942, when the number of democracies in the world dropped to a mere 12.  A distinctive feature was that it was sequential and slow.  Second wave: This came after second world war ( period after 1945). n g Ki Some of the countries were India, Israel, a n Japan, West Germany. W om This wave was reversed in the 1960s and T h e 1970s. with 36 recognised democracies in the world. The Second wave ebbed as well at this point, and the total number dropped to 30 democracies between 1962 and the mid- 1970s.  Third wave: Began in Portugal in 1974; peak levels after 1989. n g Ki It included the historic democratic transitions in Latin n America in the 1980s, Asia Pacific countries (Philippines, om a South Korea, and Taiwan) from 1986 to 1988, Eastern e W Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and sub- T h Saharan Africa beginning in 1989. The expansion of democracy in some regions was stunning. In Latin America only Colombia, Costa Rica, and Venezuela were democratic by 1978 and only Cuba and Haiti remained authoritarian by 1995, when the wave had swept across twenty countries  Drivers of the third wave n g Ki  The ending of right-wing dictatorships in Southern Europe (Greece, n Portugal, and Spain) in the 1970s om a  The retreat of the generals in much of Latin America in the 1980s W  The collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe T h e at the end of the 1980s  Thus far, there have not been any serious reversals  By the end of twentieth century, the number of democracies had rapidly increased and come to form almost 75% of the world’s politics.  Since then the process has continued not least with the Arab Spring of 2011  Huntington’s three waves of democratization n g Ki Wave Examples a n Britain, France, m First wave 1828-1926 W o USA Third T h e Second wave India, Israel, Japan, 1943-1962 West Germany Southern and wave 1974/91 Eastern Europe, Latin America, parts of Africa  Democratic Development: Trajectories n g Ki Dahl (1966) contends that there have been three (3) great milestones n in the development of democracies (developing democracies) om a 1. Incorporation: when the mass of the citizenry was gradually W admitted into political society; (extension of suffrage) (Germany, T h e France and Switzerland universal male suffrage for first time in 1848) followed by US in 1870 when former slaves were enfranchised. Female suffrage was a bit slower. The first countries to introduce universal female suffrage and hence universal suffrage were New Zealand (1833); Australia (1902); Finland (1907) UK accorded women equal voting rights with men in 1928 In UK, until 1950, university graduates had an additional vote in the so-called university constituencies  n g 2. That of representation: when the rights to organize parties Ki was accepted and have these to participate in Parliament on a n om equal terms W Formal registration and recognition and ease with which they T h e could participate in Parliament varied from system to system. There has been a major shift from majoritarian to PR formulae The threat of mobilization posed by new political parties  n g Ki 3. Organized opposition: when citizens won the right to a n appeal for votes against the government. om Dahl here was referring to the stages that were reached e W during Huntington’s long first wave of democratization in T h which these milestones were passed one by one…  How do we know which democracy is doing well? n g Ki Many new democracies are seen to have democratized only n in terms of elections and to have neglected the building of om a corresponding constitutional guarantees and liberties. e W How do we know the classification of democracies? T h Freedom House https://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index: Democracy Index 2021 provides a snapshot of the state of democracy worldwide for 167 independent states. From full democracy through to authoritarian regime,  The Democracy Index n g  The Democracy Index by the Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU) classifies Ki countries into 4 main groups depending on their levels of democratic n elements. om a  the Democracy Index is a weighted average based on the answers of 60 W questions, each one with either two or three permitted answers e  The questions are clustered into five classifications: T h 1. electoral process and pluralism; 2. civil liberties, 3. functioning of government, 4. political participation, 5. political culture.  It ranks countries using a 0-10 point scale and classifies countries into 4 typologies  The higher the better  n g n Ki om a e W T h  Based on its 2020 report which of the four typologies does your country typify?  Ghana’s score of 6.63 in 2019 means what?  What does Ghana’s score of 6.50 in 2020 mean?  n g Full democracies are nations where civil liberties and fundamental Ki political freedoms highly respected and also reinforced by a political a n culture that is favorable to the full operationalization of democratic om principles. e W a valid system of governmental checks and balances, an independent T h judiciary whose decisions are enforced, governments that function adequately, and diverse and independent media. These nations have only limited problems in democratic functioning. Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honoured but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement and minor suppression of political opposition and critics). These nations have significant faults in other democratic aspects, includin