Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Define democratic consolidation.
- Identify characteristics of democratic consolidation.
- Recognize modern theories of democratic consolidation.
Introduction
Democratization, also referred to as democratic consolidation, is a type of regime transition whereby new democracies evolve from fledgling regimes, making them less at risk to fall back into authoritarian regimes. These transitions from non-democratic, to democratic, to consolidated democracies are of major interest to scholars. A regime itself can be defined as a system in which a particular administration, system, or prevailing social system or pattern retains power and domestic (but not necessarily international) legitimacy. Regime transitions are not the same as government changes, but are instead broader political conversions. Indeed, governmental changes can occur within a given regime without creating a true regime transition.
Political scientist Ronald Francisco (2000) argues that regime change is, at its core, a political event, meaning that the changes which occur center around political issues. Accordingly, the most important results include the new constellation of rules, institutions, and authority that are established or developed over time. Although there is no unanimous consensus among scholars on how to pinpoint precisely when a regime transition has concluded, most agree that the establishment and legitimization of a national constitution are often indicative of such a change. Regime transitions have been studied at length, with attention paid to the quality of democracy that is established, and whether democratic institutions become stronger over time.
Many scholars assert that democratic consolidation occurs when the regime transition to democracy has ended. However, the qualities that led to the regime transition may not be the same qualities required to make a democracy endure. At this point, it is critical to ask, what are the indicators of a consolidated democracy? In other words, how do we know when a democracy is consolidated or not?
- The two-election test, also known as the transfer of power test, asks if a democracy is consolidated when a government that had been freely and fairly elected is defeated in a subsequent election and the election outcome is accepted by both sides. Since the peaceful transition of power is critical in any democracy, this test makes sense. At the same time, this test has some flaws. What if a country has a dominant party system wherein the same political party seems to be elected to power over and over again? Does that mean democracy is not consolidated? If that’s true, then a number of democracies in existence would be excluded from being considered consolidated.
- The longevity test suggests that if a country has been able to hold free and fair elections for an extended period of time, perhaps over two decades, then perhaps the democracy is consolidated. Here too, there are problems. Maybe elections can be held over time, but the continued elections simply benefit one party. This is to say, the longevity of a regime may not translate into the quality of a democracy. Beyond this, longevity gives no indication, in and of itself, that democracy, if it exists, will continue to be of high quality. There is great difficulty gauging whether democracy is in danger of backsliding into authoritarianism.
Below are a few theories that have been proposed regarding the likelihood of a democracy becoming consolidated. This list is not a complete one, as there are dozens of theories about what circumstances or conditions best lend to a consolidated democracy.
Theory 1
The regime type that existed prior to the democracy will affect whether a country can experience a consolidated democracy.
According to this theory, there will be some types of regimes that, prior to becoming democracies, may be better suited to eventually become consolidated democracies. If the previous regime had any democratic characteristics, whether these were partially free or fair elections. If there were any institutions that were representative of the people, perhaps these regimes will eventually have a higher likelihood of consolidating. On another point, if there is a deeply embedded military dictatorship preceding a democracy, perhaps it will have more difficulty eventually becoming a democracy. Perhaps the people will be fearful of the regime backsliding into a military dictatorship. Perhaps this will limit the opportunities to fully democratize over time. Some authors have argued that it does not necessarily matter what the regime was prior to the transition. What is important is an established state which had some form of legitimacy. To this end, Beethem wrote: “A 'state' which is incapable of enforcing any effective legal or administrative order across its territory is one in which the ideas of democratic citizenship and popular accountability can have little meaning.” (Beethem, 1994 pg. 163)
This theory is difficult to test, though not impossible. Case studies, combined with the medium to large N, could add to the field. The main challenge in a quantitative study would be finding ways to quantify the various aspects of previous regimes.
Theory 2
The type of transition that occurs will affect whether a country can experience a consolidated democracy.
Do the circumstances under which the regime transitioned to democracy matter? Are there certain types of transition to democracy that may later inhibit its ability to consolidate? Huntington and Linz put forward options for the circumstances that are most conductive and least conducive to democratic consolidation. For instance, if the transition to democracy was imposed by external forces, this may not be a positive indicator for eventual consolidation. Also, there is the possibility of an authoritarian regime initiating a change to democracy, which may or may not lead to long-term democratic processes. Finally, a regime transition may be initiated by groups within the society. Some have argued that democracies have a better chance of success if it is the people who demand the change, and the change is not imposed by external or authoritarian forces.
Theory 3
The chances of democratic consolidation improve with economic development.
Some scientists have argued that states need a free market system and economic growth in order to experience democratic consolidation. This dovetails with modernization theory, which says a country will improve its processes towards modernizing because there could be economic and/or political benefits in doing so. Beethem described the general thoughts behind this theory when he wrote:
… a market economy disperses decisional and other forms of power from the state. This serves the cause of democracy in a number of ways: it facilitates the development of an autonomous sphere of 'civil society' which is not beholden to the state for resources, information or organisational capacities; it restricts the power and scope of a bureaucratic apparatus; it reduces what is at stake in the electoral process by separating the competition for economic and political power into different spheres. (Beethem, 1994 pg. 164-165)
Overall, if a state is willing/able to promote a free market with fair competition, then loosening power may be necessary. In choosing not to control all market outcomes, the state is more likely to experience economic growth. Generally, the more the economy improves, the more citizens within a state can experience prosperity and begin to engage in political life.
Theory 4
Some religions will deter or not support democratic consolidation.
This theory is somewhat controversial. Historically, some political scientists argued that Protestant-based countries had a better opportunity to democratize than, for instance, Catholic states. According to Max Weber, Protestants were more accepting of individual responsibility, focused on productive work, and were non-conformists. Later, this theory was used to suggest that certain religions were simply incapable of democratization. Without solid support, this theory was largely been revoked.
Overall, new theories of democratic consolidation have emerged over the last few decades. Yet, there is no consensus among scholars about what conditions and theories tend to have the greatest credence. That being said, regime transitions to democracy and the process of democratization likely rest on a variety of factors that need to be considered: historical context, political culture, identity politics, class structures, economic structures, institutions, types of government structure, and constitution types.
