scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Alfred Stepan

Other affiliations: University of New Hampshire
Bio: Alfred Stepan is an academic researcher from Columbia University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Democracy & Politics. The author has an hindex of 32, co-authored 77 publications receiving 8753 citations. Previous affiliations of Alfred Stepan include University of New Hampshire.


Papers
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1996
TL;DR: In this paper, a comparative analysis of the process of democratization looks at Southern Europe, South America and post-communist Europe, and the authors reconceptualize the major types of modern non-democratic regimes and the consequences of each type for the paths available to democratic transition and consolidation.
Abstract: This comparative analysis of the process of democratization looks at Southern Europe, South America and post-communist Europe. The authors reconceptualize the major types of modern nondemocratic regimes, and the consequences of each type for the paths available to democratic transition and consolidation. An effective state is seen as necessary for effective citizenship, and the text offers criteria and evidence for politicians and scholars alike to distinguish between democratic consolidation and pseudo-democratization. Interviews are included with participants in most of the 14 countries studied.

2,573 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In a modern polity, free and authoritative elections cannot be held, winners cannot exercise the monopoly of legitimate force, and citizens cannot effectively have their rights protected by a rule of law unless a state exists.
Abstract: It is necessary to begin by saying a few words about three minimal conditions that must obtain before there can be any possibility of speaking of democratic consolidation. First, in a modern polity, free and authoritative elections cannot be held, winners cannot exercise the monopoly of legitimate force, and citizens cannot effectively have their rights protected by a rule of law unless a state exists. In some parts of the world, conflicts about the authority and domain of the polis and the identities and loyalties of the demos are so intense that no state exists. No state, no democracy.

784 citations

Book
01 Dec 1978
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the institutional structure of democratic regimes and the failure of presidential democracy in Latin America due to the breakdown of Democratic regimes, and discuss the challenges of democratic transition and consolidation.
Abstract: New Democracies, which Democracies ?LOSS OF LEGITIMACY AND THE BREAKDOWN OF DEMOCRATIC REGIMES : THE CASE OF THE FOURTH REPUBLICPolitics, Society, And Democracy Latin AmericaChallenges of Democracy in the 21st CenturyThe Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, EuropeNon-Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesCrafting State-NationsThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesHow Democracies DieThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesMass Mobilization and the Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesRegression of Democracy?Crisis and Breakdown of NonDemocratic RegimesLoss of legitimacy and the breakdown of democratic regimesProblems Confronting Contemporary DemocraciesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesWie konsolidiert ist die Demokratie Polens nach dem Konzept von Linz und Stepan?The Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe Breakdown of Democratic RegimesThe breakdown of democratic regimes. 4. ChileEuropeDemocracies in DangerChile; The breakdown of democratic regimesProblems of Democratic Transition and ConsolidationWhy is Economic Policy Different in New Democracies?Radicals, Reformers, and ReactionariesConsolidating the Third Wave DemocraciesWhen Democracies CollapseCrisis, Breakdown & ReequilibrationDer Zerfall der DemokratieThe Failure of Presidential DemocracyReaction papers for course “The institutional structure of democratic regimes”

689 citations

Book
01 Mar 1988
TL;DR: The role of the military in the process of transition has been under-theorized and under-researched in the Southern Cone of the Americas as mentioned in this paper, and a new look at themes raised in his earlier work on the state, the breakdown of democracy, and the military.
Abstract: The last four years have seen a remarkable resurgence of democracy in the Southern Cone of the Americas. Military regimes have been replaced in Argentina (1983), Uruguay (1985), and Brazil (1985). Despite great interest in these new democracies, the role of the military in the process of transition has been under-theorized and under-researched. Alfred Stepan, one of the best-known analysts of the military in politics, examines some of the reasons for this neglect and takes a new look at themes raised in his earlier work on the state, the breakdown of democracy, and the military. The reader of this book will gain a fresh understanding of new democracies and democratic movements throughout the world and their attempts to understand and control the military. An earlier version of this book has been a controversial best seller in Brazil. To examine the Brazilian case, the author uses a variety of new archival material and interviews, with comparative data from Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, and Spain. Brazilian military leaders had consolidated their hold on governmental power by strengthening the military-crafted intelligence services, but they eventually found these same intelligence systems to be a formidable threat. Professor Stepan explains how redemocratization occurred as the military reached into the civil sector for allies in its struggle against the growing influence of the intelligence community. He also explores dissension within the military and the continuing conflicts between the military and the civilian government.

625 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper found that parliamentarianism is a more supportive constitutional framework due to the following theoretically predictable and empirically observable tendencies: its greater propensity for governments to have majorities to implement their programs, its ability to rule in a multiparty setting, its lower propensity for executives to rule at the edge of the constitution and its greater facility in removing a chief executive if he or she does so, and its lower susceptibility to a military coup.
Abstract: A fundamental political-institutional question that has only recently received serious scholarly attention concerns the impact of different constitutional frameworks on democratic consolidation. Little systematic cross-regional evidence has been brought to bear on this question. This article reports the findings of the analysis of numerous different sources of data, all of which point in the direction of a much stronger correlation between democratic consolidation and the constitutional framework of pure parliamentarianism than between consolidation and pure presidentialism. The systematic analysis of these data leads the authors to conclude that parliamentarianism is a more supportive constitutional framework due to the following theoretically predictable and empirically observable tendencies: its greater propensity for governments to have majorities to implement their programs, its greater ability to rule in a multiparty setting, its lower propensity for executives to rule at the edge of the constitution and its greater facility in removing a chief executive if he or she does so, its lower susceptibility to a military coup, and its greater tendency to provide long party-government careers, which add loyalty and experience to political society. In contrast, the analytically separable propensities of presidentialism also form a highly interactive system, but they work to impede democratic consolidation by reducing politicians' degrees of freedom.

569 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a new institutionalism emphasizes the relative autonomy of political institutions, the possibilities for inefficiency in history, and the importance of symbolic action to an understanding of politics.
Abstract: Contemporary theories of politics tend to portray politics as a reflection of society, political phenomena as the aggregate consequences of individual behavior, action as the result of choices based on calculated self-interest, history as efficient in reaching unique and appropriate outcomes, and decision making and the allocation of resources as the central foci of political life. Some recent theoretical thought in political science, however, blends elements of these theoretical styles into an older concern with institutions. This new institutionalism emphasizes the relative autonomy of political institutions, possibilities for inefficiency in history, and the importance of symbolic action to an understanding of politics. Such ideas have a reasonable empirical basis, but they are not characterized by powerful theoretical forms. Some directions for theoretical research may, however, be identified in institutionalist conceptions of political order.

3,248 citations

Book
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: The authors presented a model of social change that predicts how the value systems play a crucial role in the emergence and flourishing of democratic institutions, and that modernisation brings coherent cultural changes that are conducive to democratisation.
Abstract: This book demonstrates that people's basic values and beliefs are changing, in ways that affect their political, sexual, economic, and religious behaviour. These changes are roughly predictable: to a large extent, they can be interpreted on the basis of a revised version of modernisation theory presented here. Drawing on a massive body of evidence from societies containing 85 percent of the world's population, the authors demonstrate that modernisation is a process of human development, in which economic development gives rise to cultural changes that make individual autonomy, gender equality, and democracy increasingly likely. The authors present a model of social change that predicts how the value systems play a crucial role in the emergence and flourishing of democratic institutions - and that modernisation brings coherent cultural changes that are conducive to democratisation.

3,016 citations

Book
01 Jan 2002
TL;DR: In this paper, Veto players analysis of European Union Institutions is presented, focusing on the role of individual veto players and collective players in the analysis of the institutions of the European Union.
Abstract: List of Figures ix List of Tables xi Preface and Acknowledgments xiii Introduction 1 PART I: VETO PLAYERS THEORY 17 One: Individual Veto Players 19 Two: Collective Veto Players 38 PART II: VETO PLAYERS AND INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS 65 Three: Regimes: Nondemocratic, Presidential, and Parliamentary 67 Four: Governments and Parliaments 91 Five: Referendums 116 Six: Federalism, Bicameralism, and Qualified Majorities 136 PART III: POLICY EFFECTS OF VETO PLAYERS 161 Seven: Legislation 165 Eight: Macroeconomic Policies 187 PART IV: SYSTEMIC EFFECTS OF VETO PLAYERS 207 Nine: Government Stability 209 Ten: Judiciary and Bureaucracies 222 Eleven: Veto Players Analysis of European Union Institutions 248 Conclusion 283 Bibliography 291 Index 309

2,983 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 1986
TL;DR: The New York Review ofBooks as mentioned in this paper is now over twenty years old and it has attracted controversy since its inception, but it is the controversies that attract the interest of the reader and to which the history, especially an admittedly impressionistic survey, must give some attention.
Abstract: It comes as something ofa surprise to reflect that the New York Review ofBooks is now over twenty years old. Even people of my generation (that is, old enough to remember the revolutionary 196os but not young enough to have taken a very exciting part in them) think of the paper as eternally youthful. In fact, it has gone through years of relatively quiet life, yet, as always in a competitive journalistic market, it is the controversies that attract the interest of the reader and to which the history (especially an admittedly impressionistic survey that tries to include something of the intellectual context in which a journal has operated) must give some attention. Not all the attacks which the New York Review has attracted, both early in its career and more recently, are worth more than a brief summary. What do we now make, for example, of Richard Kostelanetz's forthright accusation that 'The New York Review was from its origins destined to publicize Random House's (and especially [Jason] Epstein's) books and writers'?1 Well, simply that, even if the statistics bear out the charge (and Kostelanetz provides some suggestive evidence to support it, at least with respect to some early issues), there is nothing surprising in a market economy about a publisher trying to push his books through the pages of a journal edited by his friends. True, the New York Review has not had room to review more than around fifteen books in each issue and there could be a bias in the selection of

2,430 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors address the strengths and weaknesses of the main available measures of political regime and extend the dichotomous regime classification first introduced in Alvarez et al. (Stud. Comp. Int. Dev. 31(2):3-36, 1996).
Abstract: We address the strengths and weaknesses of the main available measures of political regime and extend the dichotomous regime classification first introduced in Alvarez et al. (Stud. Comp. Int. Dev. 31(2):3–36, 1996). This extension focuses on how incumbents are removed from office. We argue that differences across regime measures must be taken seriously and that they should be evaluated in terms of whether they (1) serve to address important research questions, (2) can be interpreted meaningfully, and (3) are reproducible. We argue that existing measures of democracy are not interchangeable and that the choice of measure should be guided by its theoretical and empirical underpinnings. We show that the choice of regime measure matters by replicating studies published in leading journals.

1,922 citations