The principal components of electoral regimes: separating autocracies from pseudo-democracies

A critical issue for society today is the emergence and decline of democracy worldwide. It is unclear, however, how democratic features, such as elections and civil liberties, influence this change. Democracy indices, which are the standard tool to study this question, are based on the <i>a priori</i> assumption that improvement in any individual feature strengthens democracy overall. We show that this assumption does not always hold. We use the V-Dem dataset for a quantitative study of electoral regimes worldwide during the twentieth century. We find a so-far overlooked trade-off between election capability and civil liberties. In particular, we identify a threshold in the democratization process at which the correlation between election capability and civil liberties flips from negative to positive. Below this threshold, we can thus clearly separate two kinds of non-democratic regimes: autocracies that govern through tightly controlled elections and regimes in which citizens are free but under less certainty-a distinction that existing democracy indices cannot make.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Royal Society Open Science
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240262
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Political Conflict and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.26
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The principal components of electoral regimes: separating autocracies from pseudo-democracies

Samuel Bien, Karoline Wiesner, Matthew C. Wilson
2 citations
Royal Society Open Science
Political Conflict and Governance
2.26
article

The principal components of electoral regimes: separating autocracies from pseudo-democracies

Samuel Bien, Karoline Wiesner, Matthew C. Wilson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

A critical issue for society today is the emergence and decline of democracy worldwide. It is unclear, however, how democratic features, such as elections and civil liberties, influence this change. Democracy indices, which are the standard tool to study this question, are based on the <i>a priori</i> assumption that improvement in any individual feature strengthens democracy overall. We show that this assumption does not always hold. We use the V-Dem dataset for a quantitative study of electoral regimes worldwide during the twentieth century. We find a so-far overlooked trade-off between election capability and civil liberties. In particular, we identify a threshold in the democratization process at which the correlation between election capability and civil liberties flips from negative to positive. Below this threshold, we can thus clearly separate two kinds of non-democratic regimes: autocracies that govern through tightly controlled elections and regimes in which citizens are free but under less certainty-a distinction that existing democracy indices cannot make.

Royal Society Open ScienceVol. 11(10)
University of South Carolina (US), University of Potsdam (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Political Conflict and Governance
2.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.