The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dictators and Democrats: Masses, Elites, and Regime Change
Abstract
From the 1980s through the first decade of the twenty-first century, the spread of democracy across the developing and postcommunist worlds transformed the global political landscape. What drove these changes and what determined whether the emerging democracies would stabilize or revert to authoritarian rule? This book takes a comprehensive look at the transitions to and from democracy in recent decades. Deploying both statistical and qualitative analysis, the book engages with theories of democratic change and advocates approaches that emphasize political and institutional factors. While inequality has been a prominent explanation for democratic transitions, the book argues that its role has been limited, and elites as well as masses can drive regime change. Examining seventy-eight cases of democratic transition and twenty-five cases of reversion to autocracy since 1980, the book shows how differences in authoritarian regimes and organizational capabilities shape popular protest and elite initiatives in transitions to democracy, and how institutional weaknesses cause some democracies to fail. The determinants of democracy lie in the strength of existing institutions and the public's capacity to engage in collective action. There are multiple routes to democracy, but those growing out of mass mobilization may provide more checks on incumbents than those emerging from intra-elite bargains. Moving beyond well-known beliefs regarding regime changes, this book explores the condit…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Former authoritarian elites' power extends beyond the authoritarian regime's lifespan; autocrats may capture state resources at democratic transition and use them clientelistically to stay in power.
“Autocrats may be well positioned to capture state resources at the time of democratic transition, which they can then use in a clientelistic fashion to stay in power (Brun and Diamond 2014; Haggard and Kaufmann 2016; Albertus and Menaldo 2014).”
From Accountability by Numbers: A New Global Transitional Justice Dataset (1946–2016) (2020) · cites this paper as Haggard and Kaufmann 2016
Haggard and Kaufman's claim that the same mobilization mechanism was present in cases as disparate as Argentina and Bolivia, Congo and Niger, and Poland is only possible if the mechanism is theorized at such a high level of abstraction that it tells us nothing about what is really going on in the cases.
“In Haggard and Kaufman's work (2016: 110), they suggest that the same mobilization mechanism was present in cases as disparate as Argentina and Bolivia, Congo and Niger, and Poland; a claim only possible if the mechanism is theorized at such a high level of abstraction that it tells us nothing about what is really going on in the cases.”
From Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward (2020) · cites this paper as Haggard and Kaufman 2016
Haggard and Kaufman (2016) consider the presence and operation of a relatively spare causal mechanism: distributive grievances, mass mobilization, and the overthrow or departure of incumbents because of such mobilization.
“Haggard and Kaufman (2016) consider the presence and operation of a relatively spare causal mechanism: distributive grievances, mass mobilization, and the overthrow or departure of incumbents because of such mobilization.”
From Large-N Qualitative Analysis (LNQA): Causal Generalization in Case Study and Multimethod Research (2023) · cites this paper as Haggard and Kaufman (2016)
Haggard and Kaufman's (2016) study of transitions to democratic rule considers two (overlapping) populations of 73 and 79 cases depending on the dataset from which they were drawn.
“Haggard and Kaufman ' s (2016) study of transitions to democratic rule considers two (overlapping) populations of 73 and 79 cases depending on the dataset from which they were drawn.”
From Large-N Qualitative Analysis (LNQA): Causal Generalization in Case Study and Multimethod Research (2023) · cites this paper as Haggard and Kaufman (2016)
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World
Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. (2021) · doi:10.1017/9781108957809 · Cited by 464
Self-citationParties, Civil Society, and the Deterrence of Democratic Defection
Bernhard, M., Hicken, A., Reenock, C., & Lindberg, S. I. (2020) · Studies in Comparative International Development · doi:10.1007/s12116-019-09295-0 · Cited by 105
Accountability by Numbers: A New Global Transitional Justice Dataset (1946–2016)
Bates, G., Cinar, I., & Nalepa, M. (2020) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592719000756 · Cited by 49
Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward
Beach, D. (2020) · Government and Opposition · doi:10.1017/gov.2018.53 · Cited by 43
Large-N Qualitative Analysis (LNQA): Causal Generalization in Case Study and Multimethod Research
Goertz, G., & Haggard, S. (2023) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592723002037 · Cited by 22
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. R.
- Venue
- Princeton University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Princeton University Press
- Published
- 2016-09-06
- OpenAlex
- W2792658251
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 1.15
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Princeton University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Keywords
- democratic transition, democratization, democratic backsliding, authoritarian regimes, regime change, inequality, elites, popular protest, collective action, institutional weakness, mass mobilization, post-communist transition, developing countries
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
