000			02986cam a22003734a 4500
001			16089164
005			20141217131926.0
008			100209s2010 xxuak frb f001 0 eng d
010			_a2010005438
020			_a9780521882521 (hardback)
020			_a0521882524 (hardback)
020			_a9780521709156 (pbk.)
020			_a0521709156 (pbk.)
040			_aDLC _cDLC _dBTCTA _dCDX _dYDXCP _dIAY _dVVC _dSTF _dDLC _dDLC _dEG-ScBUE
082	0	0	_a321.9 _222 _bLEV
100	1		_aLevitsky, Steven _936957
245	1	0	_aCompetitive authoritarianism : _bhybrid regimes after the Cold War / _cSteven Levitsky, Lucan A. Way.
260			_aNew York, United States : _bCambridge University Press, _c2010.
300			_axviii, 517 p. : _bforms, tables ; _c24 cm.
490	0		_aProblems of international politics
500			_aIncludes appendixes.
500			_aIndex : p. 493-517.
504			_aBibliography : p. 381-491.
505	0		_aIntroduction and theory. Introduction ; Explaining competitive authoritarian regime trajectories : international linkage and the organizational power of incumbents-High linkage and democratization : Eastern Europe and the Americas. Linkage, leverage, and democratization in Eastern Europe ; Linkage, leverage, and democratization in the Americas-The dynamics of competitive authoritarianism in low-linkage regions: the former Soviet Union, Africa, and Asia. The evolution of post-Soviet competitive authoritarianism ; Africa : transitions without democratization ; Diverging outcomes in Asia ; Conclusion.
520			_a"Competitive authoritarian regimes-in which autocrats submit to meaningful multiparty elections but engage in serious democratic abuse - proliferated in the post-Cold War era. Based on a detailed study of 35 cases in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and post-communist Eurasia, this book explores the fate of competitive authoritarian regimes between 1990 and 2008. It finds that where social, economic, and technocratic ties to the West were extensive, as in Eastern Europe and the Americas, the external cost of abuse led incumbents to cede power rather than crack down, which led to democratization. Where ties to the West were limited, external democratizing pressure was weaker and countries rarely democratized. In these cases, regime outcomes hinged on the character of state and ruling party organizations. Where incumbents possessed developed and cohesive coercive party structures, they could thwart opposition challenges, and competitive authoritarian regimes survived; where incumbents lacked such organizational tools, regimes were unstable but rarely democratized"-
650		0	_aAuthoritarianism _xCase studies _936958
650		0	_aDemocratization _xCase studies _936959
650		0	_aPolitical development _vCase studies _936960
650		0	_aPolitical stability _vCase studies _936961
653			_bBUSBOL _cDecember2014
655			_vreading book _934232
700	1		_aWay, Lucan, _d1968- _936962
942			_2ddc _k321.9 LEV
999			_c18792 _d18764