탈냉전 시기 권위주의 체제의 정당성 추구 전략 분석
An Analysis of Legitimation Strategies in Post-Cold War Authoritarian Regimes
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 탈냉전 시기 권위주의 체제의 이질성에 주목하여 이들의 체제 생존과 안정을 위한 정당성 추구 전략을 분석했다. 체제 정당성 전문가 설문조사(RLES) 결과를 사용한 군집분석을 통해 1991년부터 2010년까지 97개 권위주의 체제를 ‘절차-성과’ 기반 정당성 중심 집단(군집 1, 35개 체제), 모든 정당성 추구 전략을 적극적으로 사용하고 있는 집단(군집 2, 46개 체제), 그리고 정체성 기반 정당성 중심 집단(군집 3, 16개 체제)의 세 집단으로 분류하였다. 군집별 이질성을 고려할 때 군집에 따라 통계분석 및 사례연구 등 연구 방법도 달라져야 한다는 함의를 얻을 수 있다. 또한, 개별 정당성 추구 전략에 관한 가설 검증을 위해 민주주의 다양성 프로젝트(V-Dem Project)에서 제공하는 선거 민주주의 지수와 평등 민주주의 지수를 핵심 설명변수로 설정한 회귀분석을 시행하였고, 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 첫째, 권위주의 체제는 선거와 같은 민주적 제도의 도입이나 시행에서의 질적 향상보다는 대안적 방법(정체성 기반, 성과 기반)을 통해 정당성을 강화하려 하며, 설령 절차 기반 정당성을 활용하는 권위주의 체제라고 하더라도 선거 민주주의 수준을 계속해서 높이려 하지는 않는다. 둘째, 선거 민주주의 수준이 상대적으로 높은 권위주의 체제일수록 국제적 간여 기반의 정당성 전략 선택 가능성은 작다는 것이다. 이로부터 국제적 간여에 더 적극적인 권위주의 체제는 선거와 같은 민주적 제도가 아닌 다른 형태의 제도 혹은 이념 모형에 근거해 정당성을 강화하려 한다는 추론이 가능하다. 셋째, 권위주의 통치자는 선거 등 민주적 제도와 절차를 계속 개선하기보다는 평등을 강조하는 방향으로 정당성 추구 전략을 선회할 수 있다. 위의 결과를 종합하면, 절차 기반 정당성 전략이 민주주의 수준의 지속적 향상으로 이어지는 것은 아니므로 선거와 같은 절차 기반 정당성 전략을 활용하는 것이 그 체제의 민주화 가능성까지 높이는 것은 아니라는 함의를 도출할 수 있다.
Abstract
This study examines the legitimation strategies by paying attention to authoritarian regimes’ heterogeneity during the post-Cold War period. Conducting a cluster analysis of 97 autocracies (1991~2010) included in an expert survey (RLES), it categorizes the autocracies into three clusters: the ‘procedure/ performance’-based legitimation group (n=35), the group with pursuing all legitimation strategies (n=46), and the identity-based legitimation group (n=16). The cluster analysis implies that research methods (e.g., cross-national analysis, case study) for authoritarian legitimation should differ for each cluster. To test several hypotheses about legitimation strategies, it also conducts a regression analysis using the electoral and the egalitarian democracy indices as key explanatory variables provided by the Varieties of Democracy Diversity Project. The results are as follows. First, authoritarian regimes prefer alternative strategies (identity-based or performance-based) to the procedure-based legitimation strategy. Even if they are employing the procedure-based legitimation strategy, they will not improve the level of electoral democracy persistently. Second, the higher the level of electoral democracy is, the less likely it is to choose an international engagement-based legitimation strategy. An authoritarian regime that is more active in international engagement will export an alternative ideological model instead of improving democratic institutions such as elections. Third, authoritarian rulers can seek the ideology-based strategy emphasizing egalitarian values rather than improve democratic institutions and procedures. These findings imply that a successful procedure-based legitimation strategy does not necessarily lead to continuous improvement in democracy nor increase the likelihood of democratic transition.
참고문헌 (47)
- Boix, Carles, "The Foundation of limited authoritarian government: institutions, commitment and power-sharing in dictatorships", Journal of Politics, 75(2), pp.300~316 (2013)
- Brownlee, Jason, "Authoritarianism in an age of democratization" (2007), Cambridge University Press
- Burnell, Peter, "Autocratic opening to democracy: why legitimacy matters", Third World Qurterly, 27(4), pp.545~562 (2006)
- From liberation movement to government: past legacies and the challenge of transition in Africa, "Clapham, Christopher", Brenthurst Foundation, ~, pp.Discussion Paper 8 (2012), 2012
- Cooley, Alexander, "Authoritarianism goes global: countering democratic norms", Journal of Democracy, 26(3), pp.49~63 (2015)
- Dahl, Robert A., "Democracy and its critics" (1989), Yale University Press
- Dimitrov, M. K., "Popular autocrats", Journal of Democracy, 20(1), pp.78~81 (2009)
- Doyle, Michael W., "Liberalism and World Politics", American Political Science Review, 80(4), pp.1151~1169 (1986)
- Easton, David, "A systems analysis of political life" (1965), John Wiley
- Fagen, Richard R., "Charismatic authority and the leadership of Fidel Castro", Western Political Quarterly, 18(2), pp.275~284 (1965)
- "Freedom in the world 2020" (2020)[URL]
- Gandhi, Jennifer, "Authoritarian institutions and the survival of autocrats", Comparative Political Studies, 40(11), pp.1279~1301 (2007)
- Geddes, Barbara, "What do we know about democratization after twenty years?", Annual Review of Political Science, 2, pp.115~144 (1999)
- Geddes, Barbara, "Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics" (2003), University of Michigan Press
- Geddes, Barbara, "The Structure of Autocratic Rule", Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Political Science Association (2013)
- Geddes, Barbara, "Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set", Perspective on Politics, 14, pp.313~331 (2014)
- Geddes, Barbara, "How dictatorship works : power, personalization, and collapse" (2018), Cambridge University Press
- Gerschewski, Johannes, "The three pillars of stability: legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes", Democratization, 21(1), pp.13~38 (2013)
- Gershenson, Dmitry, "Cooptation and repression in the Soviet Union", Economics and Politics, 13(1), pp.31~47 (2001)
- Herb, Michael, "All in the family: Absolutism, revolution, and democracy in the Middle Eastern monarchies" (1999), SUNY Press
- Isaacs, Rico, "‘Papa’-Nursultan Nazarbayev and the discourse of charismatic leadership and nation-building in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan", Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 10(3), pp.435~452 (2010)
- Jackson, Robert H., "Why Africa’s weak states persist:the empirical and the juridical in statehood", World Politics, 35(1), pp.1~24 (1982)
- Kailitz, Steffen, "Classifying political regimes revisited: legitimation and durability", Democratization, 20(1), pp.39~60 (2013)
- Kaufman, Leonard, "Finding Groups in Data: an introduction to cluster analysis" (1990), John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
- Kendall-Talyor, Andrea, "Mimicking democracy to prolong autocracies", Washington Quarterly, 37, pp.71~84 (2015)
- Krastev, Ivan, "The paradoxes of new authoritarianism", Journal of Democracy, 22(2), pp.5~16 (2011)
- Levitsky, Steven, "Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War" (2010), Cambridge University Press
- Levitsky, Steven, "The durability of revolutionary regimes", Journal of Democracy, 24(3), pp.5~17 (2013)
- Linz, Juan. J., "Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes" (2000), Lynne Rienner Publishers
- Lipset, Seymour M., "Some social requisites of democracy : Economic development and political legitimacy", American Political Science Review, 53(1), pp.69~105 (1959)
- Autocracies of the World, 1950~2012 (Version 1.0), "Magaloni, Beatriz", Stanford University, ~ (2013)
- Mansfield, Edward D., "Democratization and the danger of war", International Security, 20(1), pp.5~38 (1995)
- Nelson, Daniel N., "Charisma, control, and coercion: the dilemma of communist leadership", Comparative Politics, 17(1), pp.1~15 (1984)
- Przeworski, Adam, "Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950~1990" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Radnitz, Scott, "Oil in the family: managing presidential successions in Azerbaijan", Democratization, 19(1), pp.60~77 (2012)
- Razi, G. Hossein, "Legitimacy, religion, and nationalism in the middle east", American Political Science Review, 84(1), pp.69~91 (1990)
- Roessler, Philip G., "Democratization by elections: A new mode of transition" (2009), Johns Hopkins University Press
- Russett, Bruce, "Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World" (1993), Princeton University Press
- Schatz, Edward, "Access by accident: legitimacy claims and democracy promotion in authoritarian Central Asia", International Political Science Review, 27(3), pp.263~284 (2006)
- Svolik, Milan, "Power sharing and leadership dynamics in authoritarian regimes", American Journal of Political Science, 53(2), pp.477~494 (2009)
- von Soest, Christian, "Identity, procedures and performance: how authoritarian regimes legitimize their rule", Contemporary Politics, 23(3), pp.287~305 (2017)
- Wahman, Michael, "Authoritarian Regime Types Revisited: Updated Data in Comparative Perspective", Contemporary Politics, 19, pp.19~34 (2013)
- Wintrobe, Ronald, "The Political Economy of Dictatorship" (1998), Cambridge University Press
- Wintrobe, Ronald, "Political economy of theocracy" (2009), Palgrave Macmillan
- "WJP Rule of Law Index" (2020)[URL]
- Wright, Joseph, "The Classification of Autocracies: A Principal Components Approach", APSA-Comparative Politics Newsletter, 24, pp.5~7 (2014)
- Wright, Joseph, "Measuring what you can’t See: the latent characteristics that structure autocratic rule", ~ (2014)