Rendición de cuentas y legitimidaduna propuesta de tipología de los sistemas políticos autocráticos y democráticos

  1. Soto Sainz, Oliver 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Journal:
Cuadernos de Gobierno y Administración Pública

ISSN: 2341-3808

Year of publication: 2020

Volume: 7

Issue: 1

Pages: 27-39

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/CGAP.68036 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Cuadernos de Gobierno y Administración Pública

Abstract

In this article we intend to introduce the concept of political system as the basis for the development of an empirically useful tool to divide the political systems in categories that allow us to draw conclusions. The concept of system incorporates the framework of objectives, rules and structures in which actors perform in order to respond to the demands (inputs) of the population, incorporating both the regulatory framework, as the interaction of the actors with goals, standards and structures and the feedback process. In this study, we identified within the systemic approach two moments: the system as demands processing (inputs) and the system as producing results (outputs). We focus in this article in the systems as input processing in order to create our typology, based on two basic concepts for Political Science, accountability and legitimacy. Focusing our analysis on how claims are processed we applied three classification criteria: the actual number of actors and groups of articulation of demands beyond which the system is held accountable, the principle of legitimacy and civilian or military nature of the system leadership. Finally in this article we proceed to apply the categories resulting in all countries between 1960 and 2006, concentrating more in the comparative analysis with other large scale classifications.

Bibliographic References

  • Almond, G. (1966). “Political Theory and Political Science”, en American Political Science Review, vol. 60, nº4, pp. 869-879.
  • Almond, G., Powel, G, B. (1981). Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach. Boston: Brown.
  • Badie, B., Birnbaum, P., Braud, P., Hermet, G. (1996). Dictionnaire de la Science Politique et des institutions politiques. Paris : Armand Colin.
  • Bobbio, N., Matteuci, N., Pasquino, G. (2011). Diccionario de política. Siglo XXI. México.
  • Cheibub, J. A., Gandhi, J., Vreeland, J. R. (2009). “Democracy and dictatorship revisited”, en Public Choice, vol. 143, nº 1-2, pp. 67-101.
  • Chevalier, J. (1996). Institutions politiques. Paris : L.G.D.J.
  • Clausewitz, C. V. (2010). De la guerra. Madrid: Tecnos.
  • Duverger, M. (1970). Instituciones políticas y Derecho Constitucional. Barcelona: Ariel.
  • Easton, D. (1953). The political system. An inquiry into the state of Political Science. Nueva York, Alfred A. Knopf.
  • Easton, D. (2006). Esquema para el análisis político. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu editores.
  • Engels, F., Marx, C. (2014). El Manifiesto Comunista. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Freedom House (2016). Freedom in the world. Disponible en https://freedomhouse.org (Consultado, 25/10/2019).
  • The Economists. (2016). Democracy Index 2015. Disponible en http://www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx?campaignid=DemocracyIndex2015 (Consultado, el 25/10/2019).
  • Geddes, B. (1999). “What do we know about democratization after twenty years?”, en Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 2, pp. 115-144.
  • Geddes, B., Wright, J., Frantz, E. (2014). “Autocratic breakdown and regime transitions”, en Perspectives on Politics, vol. 12, nº 2, pp 313-331.
  • Gremy, J. P y Le Moan, M. J. (1977). “Analyse de la démarche de construction de typologies dans les sciences sociales”, en Informatique et Sciences Humaines, nº 35, pp. 3-77.
  • Hadenius, A., y Teorell, J. (2007). “Pathways from authoritarianism”, en Journal of Democracy, vol. 18, nº.1, pp. 143-157.
  • Linz, J. J. (1970). “An authoritarian regime: The case of Spain”, en Allardt, E. and Rokkan, S. (eds.). Mass politics: Studies in political sociology. Nueva York: Free Press.
  • Linz, J. J., y Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Mann, M. (1993). States, war and capitalism. Cambridge: Blackwell.
  • Marshall, M. G. y Jaggers, K. (2007). "POLITY IV PROJECT. Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2007". Disponible en: http://www.systemicpeace.org/. (Consultado, el 10 de junio de 2012).
  • Miguel, J. M. de; y Martínez-Dordella, S. (2014). “Nuevo índice de democracia”, en Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, nº 146, pp. 93-140.
  • Morlino, L. (1988). “Las democracias”, en Pasquino, G. (comp.). Manual de Ciencia Política. Madrid: Alianza Universidad.
  • Morlino, L. (2009). Democracias y democratizaciones. Madrid: CIS.
  • Paniagua, J. L. (1990). “Los regímenes políticos y la organización del Estado”, en Cotarelo, R., y Paniagua, J. L. (comps.). Introducción a la Ciencia Política. Madrid: UNED.
  • Skaaning, J. D. (2006). “Political regimes and their Changes: A conceptual framework”, en Center on Democracy. Development and The Rule of Law Working Papers, nº 55.
  • Vargas, A. (1998). “Notas sobre los conceptos de sistema y régimen político”, en Estudios Políticos, nº 13, pp. 157-180. Medellín.
Data source: Dialnet