Despite initial scepticism about their very existence, hybrid regimes have increasingly attracted scholarly attention. The rapid development of the debate, however, is in striking contrast with its often inconclusive results. The goals of this article are to identify the causes of this impasse and to seek a solution for it. In particular, the article focuses on a crucial point of contention: how to define hybrid regimes. The analysis shows why divergences on this issue hamper dialogue among researchers, as well as the accumulation of knowledge. We suggest shifting attention from regimes to institutions and propose a “consensus-sensitive” indicator to establish which regimes can be defined as hybrid regardless of disagreement on their conceptualisation. The new measure is used to replicate the contrasting results of two recent studies. The conclusion is that by going beyond conceptual barriers, we can successfully shed light on the “grey zone”.

Hybrid what? : Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes / A. Cassani. - In: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW. - ISSN 0192-5121. - 35:5(2014 Nov), pp. 542-558. [10.1177/0192512113495756]

Hybrid what? : Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes

A. Cassani
2014

Abstract

Despite initial scepticism about their very existence, hybrid regimes have increasingly attracted scholarly attention. The rapid development of the debate, however, is in striking contrast with its often inconclusive results. The goals of this article are to identify the causes of this impasse and to seek a solution for it. In particular, the article focuses on a crucial point of contention: how to define hybrid regimes. The analysis shows why divergences on this issue hamper dialogue among researchers, as well as the accumulation of knowledge. We suggest shifting attention from regimes to institutions and propose a “consensus-sensitive” indicator to establish which regimes can be defined as hybrid regardless of disagreement on their conceptualisation. The new measure is used to replicate the contrasting results of two recent studies. The conclusion is that by going beyond conceptual barriers, we can successfully shed light on the “grey zone”.
No
English
accumulation of knowledge; conceptualisation; democratisation; hybrid regimes; regime survival
Settore SPS/04 - Scienza Politica
Articolo
Esperti anonimi
Pubblicazione scientifica
   The economic, social and political consequences of democratic reforms. A quantitative and qualitative comparative analysis
   COD
   EUROPEAN COMMISSION
   FP7
   262873

   Le conseguenze politiche, economiche e sociali della democratizzazione: un'analisi quantitativa e comparata
   MINISTERO DELL'ISTRUZIONE E DEL MERITO
   2006149177_001
nov-2014
Sage
35
5
542
558
17
Pubblicato
Periodico con rilevanza internazionale
Aderisco
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Hybrid what? : Partial consensus and persistent divergences in the analysis of hybrid regimes / A. Cassani. - In: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW. - ISSN 0192-5121. - 35:5(2014 Nov), pp. 542-558. [10.1177/0192512113495756]
reserved
Prodotti della ricerca::01 - Articolo su periodico
1
262
Article (author)
no
A. Cassani
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Cassani - IPSR 2014.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 541.63 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
541.63 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/231544
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 38
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 35
social impact