Comparative Politics II. Democratic Regimes. Then and Now

1. Comparative PoliticsII. Democratic Regimes. Then and Now Luca Verzichelli / Alessandro Chiaramonte Comparative PoliticalInstitutions Academicyear 2016-2017

2. Classifyingdemocraticgovernments: an old puzzle • Recente importantdevelopments in the field of empirical comparative politics • Aggregate measures of democracy and democratic performance (Polity, Freedom House, V-Dem …) • Historicalanalysesof democraticvs non democraticexperiences (Linz, Brooker …) • From transitionalstudies to area studies of democracy (Arabsprings, Fukuyama ….)

3. Three main branches of comparative government (Schmitter) We can look at the democratic/non democratichistory of a regime. We can look at the monocratic/collegial nature of the executive We can look at the nature of the relationshipbetweenindividualactors (leaders, representatives, unitary parties …) Thisclassificationrecalls the threeinstitutionalism, applying the classification to the study of contemporarydemocraticgovernment • Classic (historical/sociological) institutionalism (Weber, Aron, Almond …) • Legalconstitutionalism (Bagehot, Duverger, Friedrich, von Beyme) • Rationalinstitutionalism (Olson, Downs, Buchanan, Riker…)

4. Long term dynamics of world regimes 1) World regimes before the late 18th century; traditional monarchies and a few republics;  2) The ‘invention’ of the presidential system in the United States in 1787 after the failure of the 1776 ‘confederal’ system;  3) Success of American presidentialism, spread of the idea in Latin America and its failure (1820s onwards);  4) Development of parliamentarism in Europe under monarchical rule from the early 19th century to 1914. First exception: France (parliamentary republic in 1875, the first ever);  5) Difficulties experienced by parliamentary government in Europe from 1918 to 1945;  6) Spread of presidentialism in Africa from the 1960s and its major problems: instability and military rule;  7) The emergence of another political system, communism in 1918, its growth and its decline: spread of presidentialism to replace communism in the ex- Soviet Union;  8) Presidentialism is thus the majority ‘model’ across the world, typically in new countries, but with many different forms, most of which are vastly different from the original American model, the main alternative being parliamentarism (both monarchical and republican), which tends to characterise European (and Commonwealth) countries;  9) American presidential model has been successful in America, but almost exclusively in America: does it deserve the criticisms it has received (Linz, Riggs)? If parliamentarism is praised, why has it not spread markedly beyond European (and Commonwealth) countries (except to a limited extent in Asia)?

5. Parliamentary democracy as a system of government • Paradox: parliamentary government as “prime ministerial” government. Fusion between parliamentary majority and executive. Relative weakness of legislatures as autonomous institutions • Long history of focus on the executive-legislative relationships. Traditional distinction based on the separation of powers vs. fused power systems • Then: Congressionalvs. Parliamentary government (Wilson 1885): a warning against the transformation of a too centralised federal system and too strong committee-based congress

6. New classification of democratic regimesCheibub, J. (2007), Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, and Democracy. CUP. 1. Executive responsible to an elective chamber? NO YES PRESIDENTIAL democracy 2. Is the president elected autonomously from the rest of the Executive? YES NO PARLIAMENTARY democracy 2. Is the cabinet responsible to the President? YES NO MIXED democracy PARLIAMENTARY democracy

7. Increasing importance of mixed democracy(Cheibub 2007) • New mixed democracies (semi-presidential systems) in Central-Eastern Europe, and Africa • Classic presidentialisms above all in Latin-America

8. Varieties of parliamentarisms (A. Siaroff, Varieties of Parliamentarianism in the Advanced Industrial Democracies, International Political Science Review 2003; 24; 445) • Cabinet dominance • Polarized systems with central role for a fragmented parliament • Cooperative policy making diffusion with a working parliament

9. Difficult agreement on what is semi-presidentialismP. Schleiter & E. Morgan-Jones: Review Article. Citizens, Presidents and Assemblies:The Study of Semi-Presidentialism beyond Duverger and Linz (BJPS 2009) • Duverger defined semi-presidentialism as a new political system model. What does it mean? • Linz: the constitutional format shares many of the ‘perils of presidentialism’, • Recent research has questioned the conceptual status of semi-presidentialism as a distinct regime type, and whether it has any distinct effects on politics. • New possible conceptual tools to clarify the research agenda in the form of principal–agent theoretical work of democratic constitutions.

10. Conceptualization, Measurement, and Aggregation of data on democratic regimes(Munck and Verkuilen 2002)