Search

Begin New Search Topic Democracy Political Geography Global Focus

31. People & Power - Disinformation and Democracy | People and Power

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
For democracies to flourish and succeed, voters need accurate information on which to base their decisions; to weigh up the relative merits of proposed policy A over proposed policy B, to judge whether this candidate is more trustworthy or reliable than that one, or that these promises are more likely to be kept than those. But recent elections, most notably that of Donald Trump as US President, have highlighted the dangers to this process posed by those using social media and the internet to spread malevolent propaganda and fake news.
Topic:
Corruption, Democracy, and Post Truth Politics
Political Geography:
Global Focus

32. Democracy’s Crisis: On the Political Contradictions of Financialized Capitalism

Author:
Nancy Fraser
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Centerpiece
Institution:
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
We are currently facing a crisis of democracy. That much is beyond dispute. What is less well understood, however, is that this crisis is not freestanding, and its sources do not lie exclusively in the political realm. Contra bien-pensant commonsense, it cannot be solved by restoring civility, cultivating bipartisanship, opposing tribalism, or defending truth-oriented, fact-based discourse. Nor, contra recent democratic theory, can our political crisis be resolved by reforming the political realm—not by strengthening “the democratic ethos,” reactivating “the constituent power,” unleashing the force of “agonism” or fostering “democratic iterations.”1 All these proposals fall prey to an error I call “politicism.” By analogy with economism, politicist thinking overlooks the causal force of extra-political society. Treating the political order as self-determining, it fails to problematize the larger societal matrix that generates its deformations. In fact, democracy’s present crisis is firmly anchored in a social matrix. It represents one strand of a broader, more far-reaching crisis, which also encompasses other strands—ecological, economic, and social. Inextricably entwined with these others, it cannot be understood in isolation from them. Neither freestanding nor merely sectoral, today’s democratic ills form the specifically political strand of a general crisis that is engulfing our social order in its entirety. Their underlying bases lie in the sinews of that social order—in the latter’s institutional structures and constitutive dynamics. Bound up with processes that transcend the political, democratic crisis can only be grasped by a critical perspective on the social totality.
Topic:
Democracy, Capitalism, Social Contract, and Social Order
Political Geography:
Global Focus

33. Abuse of State Resources Research and Assessment Framework

Author:
International Foundation for Electoral Systems
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Foundation for Electoral Systems
Abstract:
The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) recently concluded a two-year Technical Leadership project examining the abuse of state resources (ASR) in election campaigns. This research initiative, led by the Center for Applied Research and Learning and funded by the United States Agency for International Development under the Global Elections and Political Transitions mechanism, focused on ASR (sometimes referred to as administrative resources) for the purpose of gaining an electoral advantage. The Abuse of State Resources Research and Assessment Framework: Guidelines for the Democracy and Governance Community of Practice is an abbreviated companion document to the complete Abuse of State Resources Research and Assessment Framework developed in this effort. Both documents are based on in-depth, comparative analysis of laws and regulations that target ASR in election campaigns and the effectiveness of these provisions in deterring or remedying these abuses. In many countries, uses of state resources during electoral periods are not sufficiently regulated and enforcement of violations is weak or nonexistent due to deficits of political will or limited capacity of oversight institutions. As highlighted in an IFES publication, individuals and parties in power may capitalize on these gaps to marshal public goods – including state personnel, state funds and physical assets, and official government communications – in service of political campaigns. Beyond undermining electoral competitiveness, another often-overlooked component of this abuse of power is the role elections play in cycles of entrenched corruption. Not only do abuses during the campaign period undermine competitiveness by conferring an unfair electoral advantage, they threaten the appropriate distribution of government services and do long-term damage to the legitimacy of governance institutions. This is because abuses do not stop after parties use the assistance of the state apparatus to win elections; corrupt politicians subsequently use their access to levers of the state to enrich themselves and distribute perks to supporters. The cycle of government personnel, media, and other resources being used in service of political campaigns is then likely to continue. This ASR assessment tool focuses on legal and regulatory provisions specific to ASR, but it also delves into some other common areas of abuse (for example, government procurement and contracting, public works spending around elections, campaign finance, and vote buying). These guidelines were designed for use by international and domestic civil society actors, implementers, and advocates to evaluate the effectiveness of the ASR legal framework in a given country and develop additional tools for monitoring and advocacy. This shorter version of the tool will help these groups identify priority issues and vulnerabilities that they can use in developing their strategy for monitoring, addressing, and/or advocating for measures to mitigate ASR. Findings could also point to specific recommendations for improving transparency and enforcement surrounding ASR, including enhanced training programs, strengthened regulatory provisions, investments in investigative journalism, and increased transparency in public procurement.
Topic:
Corruption, Governance, Elections, Democracy, and Voting
Political Geography:
Global Focus

34. Shoring Up a Democracy Under Siege

Author:
Laleh Ispahani and Ryan Knight
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
The US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion of democratic institutions and norms under the Trump administration. While constitutional checks and balances are holding for now, we are seeing the kinds of challenges that have presaged a shift toward authoritarianism in other countries. If not countered, this kind of “constitutional regression” can develop into something that looks like a more lasting authoritarian condition, with institutions that are so hollowed out as to be ineffective, and with impact that outlives the Trump administration. Since November 2016, American civil society’s reform sector has adjusted, adapted, and innovated to meet these challenges. To facilitate their success, the philanthropic sector must likewise adapt. The Open Society Foundations (OSF) are a global philanthropy whose mission is to foster open societies in place of authoritarian ones.[i] Our founder, George Soros, was born in Hungary and lived through the Nazi occupation of 1944 to 1945, which resulted in the murder of over 500,000 Hungarian Jews. In 1947, as Communists consolidated power in Hungary, Mr. Soros left for London where, ultimately, he studied philosophy with Karl Popper, author of The Open Society and Its Discontents, at The London School of Economics and Political Science. In 1956, he emigrated to the US, where he worked in the worlds of finance and investment. He has used the fortune he amassed to support philanthropy that reflects Popper’s philosophy—that no ideology is the final arbiter of truth, and societies can only flourish when they allow for democratic governance, freedom of expression, and respect for individual rights.[ii] Mr. Soros began his philanthropy in 1979, giving scholarships to black South Africans under apartheid who might lead their country out of closed and authoritarian conditions, and into ones governed by democratic principles, respect for the rule of law, protection of the rights of minorities, and civil and political liberties. In the 1980s, he applied the same principles to help promote the open exchange of ideas in Communist Hungary, and across Eastern and Central Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. While the Foundations started as an effort to help those in countries emerging from more closed or authoritarian conditions, in 1996, OSF launched its first US-based programs; as Mr. Soros wrote in 2006, “America was an essentially open society [but] even open societies are open to improvement.” Since then, OSF and leaders of civil society have worked to protect democratic society and its institutions in the US and in over 140 countries around the world. At OSF, our guiding principle is that the world is imperfect, but that what is imperfect can be improved. With that comes a commitment to examining our own role in the world, a constant questioning as to whether our philanthropy—what we fund, and how we fund it—is responsive to the most pressing issues facing the world as it really is, and not as we perceive it to be. Still, even though we have spent the last two decades supporting U.S.-based efforts to counter what we view as threats to the American democratic project (e.g. the influence of big, secret money on politics, restrictions on the right to vote, the criminalization of poverty, racial disparities in the criminal justice system, a bipartisan tendency toward government secrecy), to date, we viewed that work as part of a project to ensure that a largely sound framework was improved so that it lived up to its promise. As we reflect on conditions a year after President Donald Trump’s election, however, we think that the US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion and hollowing out of democratic institutions and norms, and could be derailed from this course of improvement. This prompts us to consider how OSF might work differently in order to allow our civil society grantee institutions to more assiduously protect against further decline. Together, these shifts in civil society and philanthropy could erect the bulwark needed to counter both the threat of constitutional regression and the more remote risk of a total constitutional breakdown. These reforms are significantly informed by rights organizations and foundations operating in other countries that are contending with threats to democratic government.
Topic:
Civil Society, United Nations, Authoritarianism, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

35. Theories of Democratic Change II : Paths Away from Authoritarianism

Author:
Jeffrey Conroy-Krutz and Erica Frantz
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute of International Education
Abstract:
Despite the global spread of democracy following the end of the Cold War, dictatorships still rule about one-third of the world’s countries. The persistence of authoritarian governments poses a challenge for the international community on a variety of fronts: dictatorships are more likely to repress their citizens, instigate wars, and perpetrate mass killing, among others. This challenge is even more pressing given the gradual decline in the number of democracies worldwide over the last decade. Practitioners confront critical questions about which strategies are likely to pave the way for democratization versus which are likely to stifle it. Through a research grant funded by USAID’s Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (the DRG Center), under the Institute of International Education’s (IIE’s) Democracy Fellows and Grants Program, a research team from Michigan State University worked with the DRG Center to organize and evaluate the body of current academic scholarship that can contribute to understanding how and why countries move on paths from authoritarianism to democracy. The publication was informed and vetted in two peer review workshops by a group of democratization scholars from American University, Brown University, Columbia University, George Washington University, Harvard University, Pennsylvania State University, Rutgers University, and the University of Chicago. The publication begins by providing an overview of the concept of democratization and the difficulties of identifying and defining it. The theories related to democratization are offered in a simple theory matrix, allowing practitioners to quickly and easily: Survey the body of academic work dedicated to democratization through a succinct presentation of 34 theories organized within seven thematic theory families; Interpret the cause-and-effect relationships that academic research identifies through the presentation of brief hypotheses; Understand how scholars evaluate the strength and reliability of each hypothesis through a brief summary of the research team’s assessment of causal arguments and evidence; and Explore how each theory can support the assessment and design of development programs, through basic questions that offer guidance for how to determine the relevance of that theory’s specific cause-and-effect pathway to a particular context. Organizing the theories into seven thematic families enables a close comparison of related theories on democratization and clear distinctions to be drawn among them. The researchers note, however, where ideas overlap across these theory families.
Topic:
Democratization, Political Economy, Politics, Culture, Authoritarianism, Democracy, Political Science, Institutions, and USAID
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

36. Making Human Rights Campaigns Effective While Limiting Unintended Consequences: A Literature Review on Human Rights

Author:
Elizabeth Heger Boyle, Cosette Creamer, Amy Hill Cosimini, Yagmur Karakaya, Suzy McElrath, Florencia Montal, and Wahutu James Nicholas Siguru
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute of International Education
Abstract:
In 2016, USAID’s Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance launched its Learning Agenda—a set of research questions designed to address the issues that confront staff in USAID field offices working on the intersection of development and democracy, human rights, and governance. This literature review—produced by a team of political scientists, sociologists, and lawyers—synthesizes scholarship from diverse research traditions on the following Learning Agenda question: What are the consequences of human rights awareness campaigns? What makes a human rights awareness campaign successful? Why do many campaigns fail? What are the unintended negative consequences of both successful and failed campaigns? How do local norms and other cultural factors constrain or enable the translation of campaigns from one context to another? This report synthesizes scholarship bearing on these questions from diverse research traditions and assesses the interdisciplinary state of knowledge regarding the effects, both intended and unintended, of human rights awareness campaigns and the characteristics that make such awareness campaigns effective. This review is divided into five sections: A broad overview of the steps involved in designing an effective awareness campaign. A review of research on campaigns generally, drawn from a broad range of fields, such as marketing, communications, public health, and political science. An overview of human rights awareness campaigns specifically, building on the well-known precept that to be successful, human rights campaigns must be adapted to the local context. The authors identify the mechanisms that facilitate and the barriers that impede local adaption, particularly the use of frames. Drawing on framing theory, the report highlights four points in communication where framing is critical: contexts, communicators, targeted populations, and message design. A discussion of effective media strategies, including ways to approach both traditional and new media, with the most effective campaigns combining traditional print media strategies with new social media forms. A discussion of the unintended negative consequences of campaigns, including backlash, confusion, desensitization, and/or frustration among targeted audience. This section also identifies the typical causes of these outcomes and ways to avoid them.
Topic:
Development, Human Rights, Governance, Democracy, and USAID
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

37. Election Forensics Toolkit and Guide

Author:
Allen Hicken and Walter Mebane
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute of International Education
Abstract:
There is an acute need for methods of detecting and investigating fraud in elections, because the consequences of electoral fraud are grave for democratic stability and quality. When the electoral process is compromised by fraud, intimidation, or even violence, elections can become corrosive and destabilizing—sapping support for democratic institutions; inflaming suspicion; and stimulating demand for extra-constitutional means of pursuing political agendas, including violence. Accurate information about irregularities can help separate false accusations from evidence of electoral malfeasance. Accurate information about the scope of irregularities can also provide a better gauge of election quality. Finally, accurate information about the geographic location of malfeasance—the locations where irregularities occurred and how they cluster—can allow election monitors and pro-democracy organizations to focus attention and resources more efficiently and to substantiate their assessments of electoral quality. Election forensics is an emerging field in which scholars use a diverse set of statistical tools—including techniques similar to those developed to detect financial fraud—to analyze numerical electoral data and detect where patterns deviate from those that should occur naturally, following demonstrated mathematical principles. Numbers that humans have manipulated present patterns that are unlikely to occur if produced by a natural process—such as free and fair elections or normal commercial transactions. These deviations suggest either that the numbers were intentionally altered or that other factors—such as a range of normal strategic voting practices—influenced the electoral results. The greater the number of statistical tests that identify patterns that deviate from what is expected to naturally occur, the more likely that the deviation results from fraud rather than legal strategic voting. Through a Research and Innovation Grant funded by USAID’s Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance under the Democracy Fellows and Grants Program, a research team from the University of Michigan, led by Professors Walter Mebane and Allen Hicken, built an innovative online tool, the Election Forensics Toolkit, that allows researchers and practitioners to conduct complex statistical analysis on detailed, localized data produced through the electoral process. The Election Forensics Toolkit presents results in a variety of ways—including detailed country maps showing “hot spots” of potential fraud—that allow practitioners not only to see where electoral fraud may have occurred but also the probability that the disturbances in the election data that the statistical analyses detect are attributable to fraud, rather than to other cultural or political influences, such as gerrymandering or geographic distribution of voting constituencies, among others. The team also produced two publications under the DFG grant: a Guide to Election Forensics and a more detailed Elections Forensics Toolkit DRG Center Working Paper. The Guide provides a more general introduction to election forensics as a field, and the DRG Center Working Paper focuses on presenting in detail the results of applying election forensics to specific elections in Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Kenya, Libya, South Africa, and Uganda
Topic:
Corruption, Politics, Elections, Democracy, Election watch, and USAID
Political Geography:
Uganda, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Kenya, Libya, South Africa, Cambodia, Albania, and Global Focus

38. Struggles from Below: Literature Review on Human Rights Struggles by Domestic Actors

Author:
Erica Chenoweth, Tricia Olsen, Kyleanne Hunter, Pauline Moore, Jonathan Pinckney, and Heidi Reynolds-Stenson
Publication Date:
02-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute of International Education
Abstract:
In 2016, USAID’s Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance launched its Learning Agenda—a set of research questions designed to address the issues that confront staff in USAID field offices working on the intersection of development and democracy, human rights, and governance. This literature review—produced by a multidisciplinary team of graduate students and professors—synthesizes scholarship from diverse research traditions on the following Learning Agenda question: What do we know about the role of citizens, social movements, and other domestic civic actors (as opposed to transnational actors or government officials) in advocating for particular human rights outcomes in their country? And what can we learn from the successes and failures of their activities? Much of the research on this topic has focused on North America and Europe, but do any of these findings have the potential to translate to other country contexts? Are there particular contextual or tactical variables in these country contexts that make it less likely that domestic civic actors can have an impact? Are there some kinds of rights that are easier to fight for than others? Key findings include: Context matters: democratic political systems allow grassroots human rights activists more opportunities and greater likelihood of success; extreme poverty makes grassroots mobilization harder. Rhetorical framing matters a lot, and is tricky: local activists can be more successful by framing their work as a human rights struggle and by positioning that struggle within broader international conceptualizations of human rights, as captured in founding international human rights documents. However, activists must take equal care to translate these concepts into frames that resonate locally and are culturally appropriate. Connections matter: activists are more successful if they build connections with each other—within a particular rights movement and across rights movements, within a country and across countries—and if they build connections to political and economic elites and to a broad constituency base. These vertical, horizontal, and transnational ties can be supported simply by bringing activists together, but also depend on framing, since framing is crucial to how activists see themselves and their peers, how they engage their base, and how they target elites. Organizational structure matters, but there is not an ideal type of organization that consistently is more successful in advocating for improved human rights; rather, organizational type, formality, and complexity depends on the right being fought for, the goals of the rights movement, and contextual factors such as regime type or level of repression. Tactics matter: activists must use tactics that are appropriate to their rights fight and to their context, and often use many different tactics at different times. However, confrontational and disruptive tactics—such as protests or boycotts—are often more effective.
Topic:
Human Rights, Social Movement, Democracy, and USAID
Political Geography:
Global Focus

39. Key Issues and Policy Recommendations Compilation

Author:
Philipp H. Fluri, Oleksiy Melnyk, and Nazli Yildirim Schierkolk
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
This publication provides an overview of the key issues discussed and policy recommenda- tions proposed during the series of conferences for the project “Monitoring Ukraine’s Security Governance Challenges”. The project was implemented jointly by DCAF and the Razumkov Centre with the financial support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. This report compiles key issues and recommendations for all 9 conference and is intended to serve as a reference point for future needs assessments, as well as for further consultations with Ukrainian and international stakeholders. The key issues are categorised thematically, rather than by conference, since certain issues were discussed in several events. Each sub-section concludes with respective policy recommendations.
Topic:
Security, Civil Society, Corruption, International Organization, Governance, Democracy, Media, Legislation, and Institutions
Political Geography:
Geneva, Ukraine, Switzerland, and Global Focus

40. Key Issues and Policy Recommendations, Conference 8

Author:
Philipp H. Fluri, Oleksiy Melnyk, and Nazli Yildirim
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
This publication offers the Key Issues and Policy Recommendations based on the results of the Eighth International Conference “Human Rights and Security Sector Governance: Ukraine’s Reform Challenges”. Since 2014, Ukraine’s security sector has been undergoing reforms. The implementation of state reforms are supported and monitored by Ukrainian civil society and the international community. Whereas certain aspects of reforms have been considered successful, the need for enhanced human rights compliance in the security sector of Ukraine, in particular with respect to ensuring accountability for human rights violations, the protection of the rights of civilians in the Anti-terrorism Operation (ATO), as well as preventing and responding to gender-based violence has been repeatedly pointed out. Conference Eight, following to the previous conferences recommendations, provided a platform to discuss the above mentioned issues.
Topic:
Security, Civil Society, Gender Issues, Human Rights, International Organization, Democracy, Media, Institutions, and Whistle Blowing
Political Geography:
Ukraine and Global Focus