Editorial: Non-Western democracies–theories, conceptual analyses, case studies

For more than a decade, the former optimism regarding the global spread of liberal democracy has been over. After having observed the third wave of democratization in the 1990ies (Huntington), today we are witnessing a third wave of autocratization (Diamond 2015;Lührmann & Lindberg 2019;Boese & Hellmeier 2022). And although this wave of autocratization overlaps with new democratization processes and neglects differences and grades within the concept of autocracy (Tomini 2021), the overall outcome for the past fifteen years is clearly negative: According to calculations by the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute, in 2010, approximately half of the world's population lived in electoral or closed autocracies, and the other half in electoral democracies or liberal democracies; by 2024, however, about 5.8 billion, which means more than 70 percent of the global population, lived in closed autocracies or electoral autocracies, while fewer than 30 percent, or approximately 2.3 billion people, lived in electoral or liberal democracies. And one just under one in ten people actually lived in a full democracy (V-Dem 2025). Countries that were once democratic or semi-democratic and have undergone a creeping shift towards a new (competitive or populist) form of autocracy (Levitsky & Way 2020;Schäfer & Zürn 2023) in this context include Hungary, Ecuador, Turkey, Georgia, India, Indonesia and -at least to a certain extent -the United States. Furthermore, countries such as Belarus, Gabon, Lebanon and Niger have had to cope with a transition from electoral autocracies to closed autocracies.It is therefore quite clear that the theory and practice of democracy are currently in the midst of a significant crisis (Przeworski 2019). Against this backdrop, there is little to suggest that the third 'wave' of autocratization will subside in the foreseeable future and be replaced by a possible fourth wave of democratization. At the moment, on the contrary, it seems more likely that the balance of power worldwide will continue to shift in favor of autocracy and at the expense of democracy. This is at least what a number of recent studies suggest; they speak of either 'democratic backsliding' (Bermeo 2016;Haggard & Kaufman 2021;Knutsen et al. 2024), an erosion of democracy (Gerschewski 2021;Kneuer 2021), or a decay in democratic standards (Daly 2019) -a phenomenon that is not confined to the non-Western world but is also increasingly affecting the long-established democracies of the Western Hemisphere. Consequently, there is sometimes no longer even talk of a crisis of democracy, but rather of the possibly imminent end of democracy itself (Levitsky & Ziblatt 2018, Runciman 2018) -an end that goes hand in hand with the rise of new of new forms of pseudodemocratic tyranny (Snyder 2017) and points to a global cultural backlash (Norris & Inglehart 2019).The current debate on democratic backsliding is clearly having an impact for the established discourse on Non-Western democracies (e.g. Dallmayr 2001Dallmayr , 2013Dallmayr and 2017;;Chou & Beausoleil 2015;Schubert & Weiß 2016;Gagnon et al. 2021;Gagnon & Beausoleil 2023). In Western societies, there is a growing fear that liberal democracies based on the Western model could be replaced by new types of autocracy that merely pay lip service to genuine democratic institutions and values. In contrast, in non-Western societies (at least in part), there is an increasing self-confidence in invoking hybrid forms between democracy and autocracy, or even outright dictatorship, as a legitimate alternative to the liberal Western system, which has come under pressure.The third wave of autocratization therefore raises, amongst other things, the question of whether the theoretical and political discourse on non-Western democracies is ultimately nothing more than a veiled and codified way of speaking about limited, flawed sub-forms of democracy, thereby glossing over their shortcomings. On the other hand, the idea and legitimacy of non-Western democracies must not be dismissed solely because there is a realistic danger that non-Western conceptions of democracy may conceal new forms of despotism (Keane 2020) and dilute the analytical concept of democracy. After all, a conceivable misuse of the concept of non-Western democracies does not preclude the possibility that genuine or even unique democratic qualities and practices may exist in Asian, African, Arab or Latin American societies, which should be recognized and analyzed through the application of the concept of non-Western democracy. Moreover, it is obvious that the West does not possess any exclusive interpretative authority over the concept of democracy.Apart from that, the normative claim of the concept of (Western) democracy as such has now been called into question. Since poststructuralist, postcolonial and cultural studies have discredited the legitimacy of 'universal' values as a whole, both the concept of democracy and the worldwide promotion of 'democratic' institutions and virtues have come under suspicion of being merely part of Western hegemonic strategies. Contrary to the premises of classical modernization theory (Lerner 1958;Lipset 1959;Rostow 1960), international and global democratization processes are therefore generally no longer assessed today as a simple assimilation to patterns of democracy originated in the Western world. Instead, they are regarded as the authentic emergence of indigenous forms of democracy, arising from the autonomous implementation of diverse democratic ideas. Accordingly, the terminology of non-Western democracies -which remains quite widespread in the scientific discourse -apparently point's to an emancipation of the root concept from Western connotations and, furthermore, to the existence of a categorical dichotomy between Western and non-Western understandings of democracy.Against the backdrop of these introductory remarks, this special issue aims to link different fields of political science to shed more light on the various concepts, qualities and practices as well as the chances and risks of non-Western democracies. This objective involves combining applicationoriented theoretical considerations on the one hand with theory-driven comparative analyses and case studies on the other, thereby highlighting both the differences and similarities between Western and non-Western democratic regimes. Proceeding from this, the issue focuses on four major areas of research on non-Western democracies (including their relationship to Western 3) Problem-solving capacities of Non-Western democracies: Given their distinctive characteristics, peculiarities and culture-specific adaptations, non-Western democracies may be better (or worse) equipped to tackle pressing contemporary issues such as social polarization, the implementation of digital communication tools, the promotion of sustainability, the containment of rapidly spreading diseases, or the integration of a growing number of immigrants. This special issue therefore focuses specifically on the problemsolving capabilities of non-Western regimes and explains why they are better (or worse) placed to tackle relevant challenges. The extent to which the distinctive features of non-Western regimes identified in this context might be transferable to Western democracies, plays at least a marginal role. 4) Incorporating non-Western concepts and practices of democracy into political science discourse: Despite legitimate doubts regarding the generalizability of Western concepts and values, the contemporary discourse on democracy continues to focus heavily on models, surveys, and established methods of measuring democracy (e.g. V-Dem, BTI, Freedom House; Vanhanen-Index) from the Western world (cf. Berg-Schlosser 2025). For this reason, this special issue aims to present and discuss theoretical concepts and empirical perspectives from both Western and non-Western scholars in general, thereby ensuring a well-balanced representation. In some cases, the articles presented in this issue are also based on a collaboration between scholars from the West and the non-West (e.g. Schäfer et al. 2025).In sum, the special issue concerning "Non-Western Democracies -Theories, Conceptual Analyses, Case Studies" includes one theoretical hypothesis (Osterberg-Kaufmann 2024), one conceptual analysis (Hidalgo 2025), six original research articles (Schäfer et al. 2025, Berg-Schlosser 2025, Wang et al. 2025, Mkhize & Nel-Sanders 2025, Dau SAL 2025, Beidollahhani 2026), and one brief research report (Chin & Rector 2025). Accordingly, the issue contributes to the growing academic and political debate on the explanatory power and legitimacy of Non-Western theories and practices of democracy. Hence, it aims to deepen the understanding of the theoretical and empirical complexity of non-Western democracies, to integrate non-Western ideas into relevant discussions, and to sharpen the analytical distinction between non-Western and Western democracies. Consequently, it contributes to the understanding of current democratic developments as such, without overlooking the fact that, in non-Western contexts, the concept of democracy is often used to whitewash hybrid or even openly authoritarian systems.The first article by Norma Osterberg-Kaufmann, Toralf Stark, and Christoph Mohamad-Klotzbach introduces an innovative concept of democracy in order to transcend the limitations of universalist, liberal-proceduralist perspectives. To this end, the fundamental principle of political self-efficacy is The article by Saskia Schäfer, Mutmainna Syam and Lian Gogali, drawing on conceptual gaps in empirical democracy research, argues for a comprehensive understanding of democracy that combines perspectives from post-development studies, ecofeminism and democratic economic planning. Indonesia's electoral democracy is then reconstructed as an example that has traditionally been co-opted by local elites for their own interests. As a democratic alternative to this, inclusive collective decision-making processes are highlighted, in which women from rural areas play a key role.Dirk Berg-Schlosser argues against an overly sweeping or alarmist interpretation of current democratic backsliding processes. His case-based regional analysis examines recent findings from the international long-term research project Transformation Research Initiative (TRI) at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa, linking them with data from the Sweden-based "Varieties of Democracy" (V-Dem) project at the macro level and data from the "World Values Surveys" (WVS) at the micro level. This enables him to present a number of selected case studies in a different light.Han Wang and his colleagues at the Taizhou Institute of Administration have conducted a configuration analysis based on John Dryzek's theory of deliberation and practical experience with deliberative institutions in China. Using 30 case studies, they assess the factors influencing a political system's capacity for deliberation and its potential for improvement. In this regard, the authors compare the type of deliberation conducted solely by the government with the type of consultative co-determination conducted jointly by the government and society. Success in this regard depends not least on the maturity of a certain political system.Nkosingiphile Mkhize and Danielle Nel-Sanders analyze corruption risk as a structural driver of state fragility. Using South Africa as a case study and conducting a thematic content analysis, the authors identify four main areas in which corruption takes on a systemic dimension and is consequently not only responsible for institutional weakening and bureaucratic dysfunction, economic stagnation and development failure, and the erosion of public trust and legitimacy, but also creates a self-reinforcing dynamic. The fight against corruption thus proves to be a fundamental prerequisite for the consolidation and resilience of democracies in non-Western contexts.Santino Ayuel Longar Dau reconstructs South Sudan's ongoing road to democracy. On the basis of qualitative and quantitative analyses, the author is highly sceptical about the country's readiness for the democratic elections planned for 2026. Instead, with regard to the lack of economic, institutional and political-cultural prerequisites, as well as to the state's continued fragility, the author argues that, at best, South Sudan can currently only achieve illiberal democratic structures.John J. Chin and Staten Rector present a brief research report on democracy in Taiwan. As a democratic David standing in the shadow of an autocratic Goliath, Taiwan's deepening of democracy and its successful resistance to China provide a useful case study for how to counter the growing global tide of authoritarianism today.Finally, Arash Beidollahhani reframes the "Woman, Life, Freedom" Movement (WLFM) in Iran.Originally sparked in 2022 by resistance to the compulsory hijab, the WLFM has evolved in recent years into a broad civil society rebellion that has challenged theocratic rule and authoritarian governance in Iran. As a transformative force in Iranian society, the movement unites various ethnic, religious and cultural groups (including the Kurds), advocates for liberal women's rights and thus opposes the authoritarianism of political Islam since the 1979 Revolution. By empowering previously under-represented population groups in Iran, the WLF movement has the potential to bring about profound socio-political changes across the entire Middle East region.The editors want to thank all contributors to the volume, the reviewers for their expertise and their very helpful comments and, finally, Frontiers in Political Science for the opportunity to have worked with us to conceive, organise and produce this special issue.OH: Writing -original draft, Writing -review & editing. CK: Writing -original draft, Writing -review & editing.