Measuring Democracy: A Bridge between Scholarship and Politics

Notes

145 Notes ........................................................................................................................... Chapter 1: Bringing Knowledge to Bear on Politics 1. For an overview of U.S. promotion of democracy during the twentieth century, see Smith (1994). On U.S. democracy promotion, especially during the Reagan and subsequent administrations, see Carothers (1991, 2000, 2007); Cox, Ikenberry, and Inoguchi (2000); Robinson (1996); Rieffer and Kristan (2005); and Smith (2007). 2. Beyond the NDI and IRI, the NED has two other ‘‘affiliated institutes’’: the Center for Independent Private Enterprise (CIPE) and the Free Trade Union Institute (later reorganized as the American Center for International Labor Solidarity), linked with business and labor interests, respectively. The CIPE was founded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the American Center for International Labor Solidarity was formed by the American Federation of Labor–Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). 3. The field of democracy promotion in the United States also includes many NGOs, with various sorts of links with parties and the government, such as the Carter Center, created in 1982; IFES–Democracy at Large (formerly the International Foundation for Election Systems), launched in 1987; the Eurasia Foundation, started in 1992; and the Open Society Institute, formed in 1993. These organizations entered an arena long occupied by Freedom House, founded in a different era in 1941. On the origins and constitution of democracy promotion as a field in the United States, see Guilhot (2005); on the organizations that are active in democracy promotion in the United States, see Melia (2005). 4. On the post-Iraq debate about U.S. democracy promotion, as seen from the perspective of some of its advocates, see Carothers (2006); Gershman and Allen (2006); Windsor (2006); and Fukuyama and McFaul (2007). 5. On the development of European democracy promotion, relative to U.S. democracy promotion, see Campbell and Carroll (2005); on democracy promotion programs within European countries, see Youngs (2006); and on EU democracy promotion, see Youngs (2002) and Vachudova (2005). 146 NOTES TO PAGES 4 – 20 6. On International IDEA and its activities, see International IDEA (2005). 7. On democracy promotion in the Americas, see Farer (1996) and Legler, Lean, and Boniface (2007). 8. On the role of the UN in promoting democracy, see Newman and Rich (2004). 9. See the Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation and Code of Conduct for International Election Observers, an agreement spearheaded by the Carter Center, the NDI, and the United Nations Electoral Assistance Division, and signed by twenty-one organizations on October 24, 2005 (Carter Center et al. 2005). 10. Such early-warning systems have been used to predict humanitarian crises (Davies and Gurr 1998) and only recently have been discussed in the context of democracy promotion. One organization that has developed an early-warning system for use in its work on democracy is the OAS. 11. Transparency International has been releasing its CPI on an annual basis since 1995 and has never made its underlying data publicly available. The World Bank first published its CCI in 1996 and only a decade later began to make public most, though not all, of the index’s underlying data. 12. The World Bank has conducted CPIAs since 1977 and disclosed its data for most countries for the first time in 2006. 13. On the link between democracy and corruption, see Sung (2004); on the link between democracy and human rights, see Davenport and Armstrong (2004); and, on the link between democracy and both economic growth and poverty reduction, see Przeworski et al. (2000) and Ross (2006). 14. Gerth and Mills (1946: 77–156). Chapter 2: Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy 1. Bollen (1980, 1986, 1991, 1993); Bollen and Paxton (2000); and Foweraker and Krznaric (2000). See also Gleditsch and Ward (1997) and Coppedge (1999) and, more recently, Coppedge (2005); Hadenius and Teorell (2005); and Skaaning (2006b). 2. For discussions of alternative democracy indices and correlations among aggregate data, see Alvarez et al. (1996: 18–21); Arat (1991: 22–23, 28); Bollen (1980: 381); Coppedge (1997: 180); Coppedge and Reinicke (1991: 51–52); Gasiorowski (1996: 477–78); Hadenius (1992: 41, 43, 71, 159–63); Jaggers and Gurr (1995: 473– 76); and Vanhanen (1993: 317–19; 1997: 31–40). 3. For brief but useful discussions of some earlier indices that have fallen into disuse, see Bollen (1980: 373–75, 379–84) and Arat (1991: 28). 4. Two other indices omit this attribute. Though Freedom House’s definition of political rights refers to ‘‘the right of all adults to vote,’’ it does not include this aspect...