Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Dilemas de la estabilidad democrática en América Latina

Bibliographic Data

ID6177327
AuthorsAlma Adiart (Emory University, corresponding author)
Year2009
Volume24
Publication date2009-11-10
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAMÉRICA LATINA HOY (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1130-2887 • E-ISSN: 2340-4396
PublisherEdiciones Universidad de Salamanca (PUBLISHER • ES)
DOI10.14201/alh.2620
OpenAlexW2112959535
LanguageES
References cited20

En el presente artículo se reexamina el trabajo elaborado por Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Evelyne Huber Stephens y John Stephens (1992) que se refiere al análisis de los procesos de democratización y al desarrollo teórico correspondiente a los casos de América Latina a través de la utilización del Análisis Cualitativo Comparativo (Qualitative Comparative Analysis, QCA) como técnica para la elaboración de revisiones teóricas. La utilización del análisis cualitativo comparativo para los casos estudiados por Rueschemeyer, Stephens y Stephens define la identificación de condiciones estructurales —rutas históricas generales— que favorecieron la presencia de democracias estables en América Latina durante dos períodos (democracia inicial y segunda oleada democratizadora). En el caso de las democracias iniciales, se identificaron dos rutas históricas. Una se define por la presencia de sectores exportadores no mineros y de partidos clientelistas. La segunda está compuesta por una configuración sectorial similar a la de la primera ruta con la presencia de instituciones de competencia político-electoral, principalmente de la dite. En el caso de la segunda oleada democratizadora, se definen tres configuraciones que incluyen la combinación de dos de los siguientes factores considerados: 1) la ausencia de un proceso de industrialización previo al proceso de redemocratización; 2) la presencia de mecanismos fuertes de competencia electoral y, 3) el antecedente de la presencia de democracias estables durante el período inicial.ABSTRACT: This paper re-examines Rueschemeyer, Stephens, and Stephens's (1992) comparative historical analysis of democratization and theory building for their Latin American cases by using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as a technique for theoretical revisions. Use of qualitative comparative analysis for the cases analyzed by Rueschemeyer, Stephens, and Stephens (1992) sharpens the identification of structural conditions —indeed, general historical paths— favoring stable democracy in Latin America during two different periods (initial democratization and second-wave of democratization). For early democratization two paths are identified. One is defined by non-mining export sectors with clientelistic parties. The other is constituted by the same sectoral configuration aided by institutions of elite contestation. Por latter waves, three configurations are defined by the combination of two of the following three factors: 1) the absence of industrialization preceding democratization processes; 2) the presence of strong mechanisms of elite electoral contestation; and 3) a history of previously stable democracies

Art · Humanities · Political science · Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research

  • Capitalist development and democracy

    Dietrich Rueschemeyer•Capitalist development and…

  • Emerging Agendas and Recurrent Strategies in Historical Sociology

    Open Access•T Skocpol•Vision and Method in Historical…•1984

  • The New authoritarianism in Latin America

    David Collier•The New authoritarianism in Latin…•1979

  • Shaping the Political Arena

    Ruth Berins Collier, Donald Collier et al.•Shaping the Political Arena•2015

  • State and Alliances in Argentina, 1956-1976

    Open Access•Guillermo O ́donnell, Guillermo O´DONNELL•Iberoamericana – Nordic Journal…•1978

  • National Political Development

    P Cutright•Comparative Government•1969

  • Capitalism and Social Democracy

    Adam Przeworski•Labour / Le Travail•1987

  • The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism

    A Hicks, Joyce Stephens et al.•Contemporary Sociology A Journal…•1984

  • National Political Development

    Phillips Cutright•American Sociological Review•1963

  • Political Democracy and the Size Distribution of Income

    K A Bollen, Robert W Jackman•American Sociological Review•1985

  • Democracy, Economic Development, and Income Inequality

    Edward N Muller•American Sociological Review•1988

  • World System Position, Dependency, and Democracy

    K A Bollen, Kenneth Bollen•American Sociological Review•1983

  • Will More Countries Become Democratic

    Open Access•Samuel P Huntington•Political Science Quarterly•1984

  • The Impact of Economic Development on Democracy

    Open Access•E Huber, Dietrich Rueschemeyer et al.•The Journal of Economic…•1993

  • The Renaissance of Political Culture

    Open Access•Ronald Inglehart•American Political Science Review•1988

  • Some Social Requisites of Democracy

    Open Access•Seymour Martin Lipset•American Political Science Review•1959

  • Political Regime Change

    Open Access•Herbert Kitschelt•American Political Science Review•1992

  • Civic Culture and Democracy

    Open Access•Edward N Muller, M A Seligson•American Political Science Review•1994

  • Capitalist Development and Democracy in South America

    Open Access•Evelyne Huber Stephens•Politics & Society•1989

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae