Fostering support for non-democratic rule? Controlled political liberalization and popular support for non-democratic regimes

When the Cold War ended, many non-democratic regimes across the globe embarked on a course of controlled political liberalization, hoping to stabilize their autocratic rule by mitigating popular demands for democratization and increasing regime legitimacy. But does this strategy actually work? This article uses multi-level analyses to examine how the degree of political liberalization affects regime support in non-democratic political systems and to ascertain which mechanisms underlie this effect. Drawing on aggregate measures of political liberalization and comparative survey data from four regional survey projects and 31 non-democracies, the study's results indicate that the degree of liberalization has no decisively positive effect on regime support, suggesting controlled political liberalization might not be an effective legitimizing strategy after all.Nach Ende des Kalten Krieges haben viele nicht-demokratische Regime weltweit einen Kurs der begrenzten politischen Öffnung eingeschlagen, um öffentliche Forderungen nach Demokratisierung zu entschärfen und auf diese Weise die Legitimität ihrer autokratischen Herrschaft zu erhöhen. Doch ist diese Strategie tatsächlich effektiv? Der Beitrag verwendet Mehrebenenanalysen, um zu untersuchen wie der Grad an politischer Öffnung die Regimerunterstützung in nicht-demokratischen politischen Systemen beeinflusst. Auf Basis von Aggregatmaßen zur politischen Öffnung und Individualdaten aus vier regionalen Umfrageprojekten und 31 Autokratien kann kein klarer positiver Effekt des Grads der politischen Öffnung auf die Regimeunterstützung nachgewiesen werden, was eine begrenzte politische Öffnung als wenig effektive Legitimationsstrategie erscheinen lässt

Actors, decision-making, and institutions in quantitative system modelling

Increasing realism in quantitative system modelling with respect to the representation of actors, decision-making, and institutions is critical to better understand the transition towards a low-carbon sustainable society. Yet, studies using quantitative system models, which have become a key analytical tool to support sustainability and decarbonization policies, focus on outcomes, therefore overlooking the dynamics of the drivers of change. We explore opportunities that arise from a deeper engagement of quantitative systems modelling with social science. We argue that several opportunities for enriching the realism in model-based scenario analysis can arise through model refinements oriented towards a more detailed approach in terms of actor heterogeneity, as well as through integration across different analytical and disciplinary approaches. Several opportunities that do not require major changes in model structure are ready to be seized. Promising ones include combining different types of models and enriching model-based scenarios with evidence from applied economics and transition studies

A comparative analysis of health policy performance in 43 European countries.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether European countries differ systematically in their pursuit of health policies, and what the determinants of these differences are. In this article, we assess the extent to which European countries vary in the implementation of health policies in 10 different areas, and we exploit these variations to investigate the role of political, economic and social determinants of health policy. DATA AND METHODS: We reviewed policies in the field of tobacco; alcohol; food and nutrition; fertility, pregnancy and childbirth; child health; infectious diseases; hypertension detection and treatment; cancer screening; road safety and air pollution. We developed a set of 27 'process' and 'outcome' indicators, as well as a summary score indicating a country's overall success in implementing effective health policies. In exploratory regression analyses, we related these indicators to six background factors: national income, survival/self-expression values, democracy, government effectiveness, left-party participation in government and ethnic fractionalization. RESULTS: We found striking variations between European countries in process and outcome indicators of health policies. On the whole, Sweden, Norway and Iceland perform best, and Ukraine, Russian Federation and Armenia perform worst. Within Western Europe, some countries, such as Denmark and Belgium, perform significantly worse than their neighbours. Survival/self-expression values and ethnic fractionalization were the main predictors of the health policy performance summary score. National income, survival/self-expression values and government effectiveness were the main predictors of countries' performance in specific areas of health policy. CONCLUSIONS: Although many new preventive interventions have been developed, their implementation appears to have varied enormously among European countries. Substantial health gains can be achieved if all countries would follow best practice, but this probably requires the removal of barriers related to both the 'will' and the 'means' to implement health policies