IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i2p120-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Authoritarian Norms in a Changing International System

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Ambrosio

    (Department of Criminal Justice and Political Science, North Dakota State University, USA)

Abstract

The normative structure of the international system is changing, driven by the logics of effectiveness and appropriateness. Whereas the balance between democracy and autocracy had clearly favored the former, this appears to no longer be the case. Not only are authoritarian methods spreading because they have been found to be successful, but democracy’s very legitimacy has been eroded from self-doubt and as a consequence of rising and increasingly confident authoritarian great powers. This commentary provides an overview of these trends.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Ambrosio, 2018. "Authoritarian Norms in a Changing International System," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 120-123.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:120-123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1474
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simmons, Beth A. & Dobbin, Frank & Garrett, Geoffrey, 2006. "Introduction: The International Diffusion of Liberalism," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 781-810, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Natasha Ezrow, 2018. "Authoritarianism in the 21st Century," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 83-86.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Askarov, Zohid & Doucouliagos, Hristos, 2015. "Spatial aid spillovers during transition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PA), pages 79-95.
    2. Sara Margarida Diogo & Teresa Carvalho, 2022. "Brothers in Arms? How Neoliberalism Connects North and South Higher Education: Finland and Portugal in Perspective," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Tanja A. Börzel & Thomas Risse, 2009. "Diffusing (Inter-) Regionalism - The EU as a Model of Regional Integration," KFG Working Papers p0007, Free University Berlin.
    4. Doris A. Oberdabernig & Stefan Humer & Jesus Crespo Cuaresma, 2018. "Democracy, Geography and Model Uncertainty," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 65(2), pages 154-185, May.
    5. Sophie Perrin & Thomas Bernauer, 2010. "International regime formation revisited: Explaining ratification behaviour with respect to long-range transboundary air pollution agreements in Europe," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 405-426, September.
    6. Schneider, Sophie Therese, 2018. "North-South trade agreements and the quality of institutions: Panel data evidence," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 27-2018, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    7. Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "Transnational public-private governance initiatives in world politics: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-174, January.
    8. Peter T. Leeson & Andrea M. Dean, 2009. "The Democratic Domino Theory: An Empirical Investigation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 533-551, July.
    9. Rachel Weber & Sara O’Neill-Kohl, 2013. "The Historical Roots of Tax Increment Financing, or How Real Estate Consultants Kept Urban Renewal Alive," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 27(3), pages 193-207, August.
    10. Jin Mun Jeong & Dursun Peksen, 2019. "Domestic Institutional Constraints, Veto Players, and Sanction Effectiveness," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 194-217, January.
    11. Felix Strebel & Thomas Widmer, 2012. "Visibility and facticity in policy diffusion: going beyond the prevailing binarity," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(4), pages 385-398, December.
    12. Paul Novosad & Eric Werker, 2019. "Who runs the international system? Nationality and leadership in the United Nations Secretariat," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-33, March.
    13. Paola Perez-Aleman, 2011. "Collective Learning in Global Diffusion: Spreading Quality Standards in a Developing Country Cluster," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 173-189, February.
    14. Idean Salehyan, 2008. "The Externalities of Civil Strife: Refugees as a Source of International Conflict," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 787-801, October.
    15. Jorge Chica‐Olmo & Marina Checa‐Olivas, 2021. "Spatial impact of factors influencing the achievement of the Europa2020 employment targets," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(3), pages 633-649, June.
    16. Daniel Berliner, 2013. "Follow your Neighbor? Regional Emulation and the Design of Transparency Policies," KFG Working Papers p0055, Free University Berlin.
    17. Gunitsky, Seva, 2014. "From Shocks to Waves: Hegemonic Transitions and Democratization in the Twentieth Century," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(3), pages 561-597, July.
    18. Verdier, Thierry & Silve, Arthur, 2023. "The Dynastic Transmission of Power, Exit Options and the Coevolution of Rent-seeking Elites," CEPR Discussion Papers 18165, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. José Joaquín Brunner, 2018. "Sobre las contradicciones culturales del liberalismo y sus malestares," Estudios Públicos, Centro de Estudios Públicos, vol. 0(150), pages 161-233.
    20. Kemmerling, Achim, 2006. "Diffusion und Interaktion in der Arbeitsmarktpolitik? Positive und negative Ansteckungseffekte am Beispiel zweier Reformdiskussionen," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment SP I 2006-119, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:120-123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.