Jour. of Musashi Sociological Society, -, ,*+ῌ,*1, ,**+ ῑῲ΅ῪΌ`̱ῒ ῏QQQ῾Q̲῾Qῐ῍ -, ,*+ῌ,*1, ,**+ ,*+ ΐResearch Note Political Conflicts and Democratization QQQQ̯QQῼ Nobuyoshi KURITA* ̳ Q Q * ῍ῌ : QQQQ̮QQῼ̯ῠ῝ῚQ̲̳ ῠ῍ QQQ̲῾̯̮̮̯῍ QQ̮ῧ QQ̲Q̯Ῐ̰̯̮ῧ῍ ̮̯ῧΊῙῥ῍ QQ̯̳Q̮̯Ῐ̰̯ῗ̯̮῞῝ῌ ῗ ̯Q̰ῢῤ̮῍ Q̳ ̱῎̱̯ῠ῍ QQQ̲̰ΎῷῬ῎̱ῌ̱῎ῳ̱̱̯Ῑ ̯QQ̯Ῡ῭Όῶ̱Q῾ΎῸ῎̯ Polity II ̯̰̰῎ῸQ῾ΎῸ῎̯ World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators, third edition ̰Q̮῍ QQQQ QQ̯ -* Q ̯̮ῖῩQQQQ̯ Q̯῟̮̯῍ ῴ̲Q̰Q̯῞῝ῌ ̯̳ ̲῍ ῑQ Q̯QQQQ´Qῒ ̯ ῑQQQQ̯̳̰ῩῺ Q´Qῒ ῠ῍ ̲QῘ ̰῝ῥ̯̯῍ Q Q̮ῦῡQQ̯QQῼΰ̯Q̲ῠ῍ Q ̯ῦ῞̯Qῧ̮ Ῡῗ̯̮Q̮Ῠ῍ ῗ̯Qῧ̮̯̳Ώ̯῟̮̯῍ Ῐῧ̯Ῡ̳Q̮QQ̯Ῡῗ̯ ̮QQῙ῝ῌ Although the studies on consequences of political conflicts have a great significance in political sociology, not a large number of scholars have been engaged in them. Because of following two obstacles, it is di$cult to survey the outcomes of political conflicts for political sociologists. Firstly, the outcomes of political conflicts as independent variable seem not to be agreeable to the general frames among the etiological analysis as a dominant model in political conflict theories (Gurr +32*). Secondly, there is no adequate data-set which enable us to inquire the relationship between political conflicts and the outcomes. * QQQ῾Q̲῾Q Q ῎ῑῐ̮ῒΐ῏ ῌῖ̮̮̮̮̮̮ῗ῍ ,*, Of course, there are some valuable papers which analyze the outcomes of political conflicts in the recent two decades. Theses studies are classified into following three groups. The first is the analysis of relationship between protest groups and concrete outcomes (Gamson +31/ ; Kowalewski and Schumaker +32+ ; Schumaker +31/, +312, +32*). The second is the aggregate data analysis in each polity (Berkowitz +31. ; Colby +31/ ; Hahn +31* ; Isaac and Kelly +32+ ; Welch +31/). And, the last is the trend or time-series analysis (Shin +32- ; Snyder and Kelly +310). Also, recently new studies appear in a area where scholars inquire interactional process between conflicts and outcomes (Hoover and Kowalewski +33, ; Kowalewski and Hoover +33. ; Lichbach +321). However, these studies are inadequate for the generalization of theoretical hypotheses concerning dynamic process between conflicts and outcomes. For a proper generalization, the scholars need time-series cross polity data-sets. In order to satisfy a previous methodological requirement, in this research note, following two data-sets are used, Polity II by Ted Robert Gurr, Keith Jaggers, and Will H. Moore, and World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators, third edition, by Charles Lewis Taylor and David A. Jodice. The Polity II contains the variables concerning political system and systemic change in time-series on cross polity. The World Handbook includes the variables concerning protest and riot in time-series on cross polity. A joint or link of both data-sets enable us to analyze the causal relationship between political conflicts and systemic change as outcomes of political conflicts in the context of cross polity and of time-series. In this research note, following a set of, three main and one sub hypotheses are prepared for analysis. The first is a protest’s positive e#ect hypothesis on riot, the second is a protest’s positive e#ect hypothesis on democratization, and, the third is a riot’s negative e#ect hypothesis on demoratization. The previous Political Conflicts and Democratization (KURITA) ,*- three are main hypotheses and following one is a sub hypothesis. The fourth is a system continuity hypothesis. These hypothese constitute a model of political conflict e#ect on democratization (see Figure *). Also, there are four sets of variables, autocracy, democratization, protest, and riot as explaining or explained variables, and one set of variables, institutional change as controlling variables in this model (see Apendix +). The variables which are used here are divided into following four terms, each six years, +3/.ῌ+3/3, +30*ῌ+30/, +300ῌ+31+, +31,ῌ+311, for the sake of analyzing in time-series. However, only the variables on democratization are divided into each twelve years overlappingly, +3.2ῌ+3/3, +3/.ῌ+30/, +30*ῌ +31+, +300ῌ+311, in order to prevent the undesirable random error from cutting the range of each term shortly. The findings from path analysis on overlapping three time phase, +3.2ῌ +30/, +3/.ῌ+31+, +30*ῌ+311, support a model of political conflict e#ect on democratization partially. The protest’s positive e#ect hypothesis on riot, and the system continuity hypothesis are always confirmed. But the protest’s positive e#ect hypothesis on democratization, and the riot’s negative e#ect hypothesis on demoratization are inconsistent with the model(see Figure +). These findings teach us that there are the sustainable process of political system and natural development of protest into riot, and unstable conflict e#ect on political system. Perhaps it may depend on the trend of democrarization in each age (see Figure , and -). ῌ῏ῒῐ : ,*** ῑ 3 ῎ ,1 ῐ῍ References Berkowitz, William R. (+31.) “Socioeconomic Indicator Changes in Ghetto Riot Tracts.” Urban A#airs Quarterly +* : 03ῌ3.. Colby, David(+31/) “The E#ects of Riots on Public Policy.” International Journal of ῎ῑῐ̮ῒΐ῏ ῌῖ̮̮̮̮̮̮ῗ῍ ,*. Group Tensions / : +/0ῌ+0,. Gamson, William A. (+31/) The Strategy of Social Protest. Homewood : The Dorsey Press. Gurr, Ted Robert (+32*) “On the Outcomes of Violent Conflict.” Pp. ,-2ῌ,3. Handbook of Political Conflict, edited by Ted Robert Gurr. New York : The Free Press. Gurr, Ted Robert, Keith Jaggers, and Will H. Moore (+323) Polity II Codebook. Boulder : Center for Comparative Politics, University of Colorado. Gurr, Ted Robert, Keith Jaggers, and Will H. Moore (+33+) “The Transformation of the Western State.” Pp. 03ῌ+*. On Measuring Democracy, edited by Alex Inkeles. New Brunswick : Transaction Publishers. Hahn, Harlan (+31*) “Civic Responses to Riots.” Public Opinion Quarterly -. : +*+ῌ +*1. Hoover, Dean and David Kowalewski (+33,) “Dynamic Models of Dissent and Repression.” Journal of Conflict Resolution -0 : +/*ῌ+2,. Isaac, Larry and William R. Kelly (+32+) “Racial Insurgency, the State, and Welfare Expansion.” American Journal of Sociology 20 : +-.2ῌ+-20. Kowalewski, David and Dean Hoover (+33.) “Dissent and Repression in the WorldSystem.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology -/ : +0+ῌ+21. Kowalewski, David and Paul Schumaker (+32+) “Protest Outcomes in the Soviet Union.” Sociological Quarterly ,, : /1ῌ02. Lichbach, Mark Irving (+321) “Deterrence of Escalation?” Journal of Conflict Resolution -+ : ,00ῌ,31. Shin, Myungsoon (+32-) “Political Protest and Government Decision Making.” American Behavioral Scientist ,0 : -3/ῌ.+0. Schumaker, Paul D. (+31/) “Policy Responsiveness to Protest-Group Demands.” Journal of Politics -1 : .22ῌ/,+. Schumaker, Paul D. (+312) “The Scope of Political Conflict and the E#ectiveness of Constraints in Contemporary Urban Protest.” Sociological Quartely +3 : +02ῌ+2.. Schumaker, Paul D. (+32*) “The E#ectiveness of Militant Tactics in Contemporary Urban Protest.” Journal of Voluntary Action Research 3 : +-+ῌ+.2. Snyder, David and William R. Kelly (+310) “Industrial Violence in Italy, +212ῌ+3*-.” American Journal of Sociology 2, : +-+ῌ+0,. Taylor, Charles Lewis and David A. Jodice (+32-) World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators, third edition, volume ,. New Haven : Yale University Press. Welch, Susan (+31/) “The Impact of Urban Riots on Urban Expenditures.” American Journal of Political Science +3 : 1.+ῌ10*. Political Conflicts and Democratization (KURITA) ,*/ Appendix + definition of variables autocracy : average of +* points scale on autocracy during each six years (Gurr, Jaggers and Moore +323). democratization : di#erence between average of the previous autocratic score of preceding six years and one of following six years during each twelve years. institutional change : average of a number of polity change during each six years (Gurr, Jaggers and Moore +323). protest : a number of protest events during each six years (Taylor and Jodice +32-). riot : a number of riot events during each six years (Taylor and Jodice +32-). Figure * A Model of Political Conflict E#ect on Democratization ,*0 ῎ῑῐ̮ῒΐ῏ ῌῖ̮̮̮̮̮̮ῗ῍ Figure + Path Diagram for Conflict E#ects Political Conflicts and Democratization (KURITA) Figure , Trend of Autocracy and Democracy +3.2ῌ+311 Figure - Trend of Autocracy and Democracy +2**ῌ+320 ,*1
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
