東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do No...

Ong, Limeng .

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia./
作者:	Ong, Limeng .
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
面頁冊數:	62 p.
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International82-04.
標題:	Political science. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28003006
ISBN:	9798672186023

Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia.
Ong, Limeng .

Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 62 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04.

Thesis (M.A.)--Northern Illinois University, 2020.

This item is not available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

Electoral authoritarian regimes have risen in the post-Cold War era. Elections and other nominally democratic institutions such political parties and legislatures not only do not make authoritarian regimes democratize but also help them to resist democratization. However, even if authoritarian regimes adopt electoral institutions, such adoption does not mean that all authoritarian regimes can easily manipulate elections. Indeed, some regimes hang on to power barely with simple majority votes, while others easily receive supermajority electoral support. What account for variation in electoral strength of ruling parties in authoritarian regimes? I attempt to answer this question. There are four main factors theoretically attributed to the electoral strength of authoritarian regimes: regime cohesion, regime capacity, regime's economic legitimacy, and absence of societal mobilization. Using data from Varieties of Democracy and the World Bank, I find that regime cohesion significantly explains electoral strength of the ruling parties in authoritarian regimes, whereas regime capacity and economic legitimacy display no effect. Societal mobilization has mixed effects, with civil society having no significant effect but media independence having significant negative effects. The results are consistent when triangulated with in-depth case studies of electoral authoritarian regimes in Cambodia and Malaysia.

ISBN: 9798672186023Subjects--Topical Terms:

528916
Political science.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Cambodia

Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia.
LDR:02669nmm a2200385 4500 001 2393743
005 20240604073542.5
006 m o d
007 cr#unu||||||||
008 251215s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798672186023
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28003006
035 $a AAI28003006
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Ong, Limeng . $3 3763217
245 1 0 $a Why Some Authoritarian Regimes Do Not Just Win Elections but Win Big: Lessons from Cambodia and Malaysia.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 62 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04.
500 $a Advisor: Un, Kheang;Kuehl, Colin.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--Northern Illinois University, 2020.
506 $a This item is not available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Electoral authoritarian regimes have risen in the post-Cold War era. Elections and other nominally democratic institutions such political parties and legislatures not only do not make authoritarian regimes democratize but also help them to resist democratization. However, even if authoritarian regimes adopt electoral institutions, such adoption does not mean that all authoritarian regimes can easily manipulate elections. Indeed, some regimes hang on to power barely with simple majority votes, while others easily receive supermajority electoral support. What account for variation in electoral strength of ruling parties in authoritarian regimes? I attempt to answer this question. There are four main factors theoretically attributed to the electoral strength of authoritarian regimes: regime cohesion, regime capacity, regime's economic legitimacy, and absence of societal mobilization. Using data from Varieties of Democracy and the World Bank, I find that regime cohesion significantly explains electoral strength of the ruling parties in authoritarian regimes, whereas regime capacity and economic legitimacy display no effect. Societal mobilization has mixed effects, with civil society having no significant effect but media independence having significant negative effects. The results are consistent when triangulated with in-depth case studies of electoral authoritarian regimes in Cambodia and Malaysia.
590 $a School code: 0162.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Southeast Asian studies. $3 3344898
650 4 $a Authoritarianism. $3 583923
650 4 $a Elections. $3 723102
653 $a Cambodia
653 $a Election
653 $a Electoral authoritarianism
653 $a Malaysia
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0222
710 2 $a Northern Illinois University. $b Political Science. $3 1020333
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 82-04.
790 $a 0162
791 $a M.A.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28003006