Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?

Political stability is desired by every state. But is it contingent upon regime types or party systems? Existing studies on political stability suggest that regimes such as authoritarianism, democracy, and dictatorship and their variants have variously influenced political stability. Some have prove...

詳細記述

保存先:
書誌詳細
第一著者: Md. , Moniruzzaman
フォーマット: Conference or Workshop Item
言語:English
English
出版事項: 2014
主題:
オンライン・アクセス:http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/10/FINAL_Program_Schedule_for_AABSS_Conference_2014_Kuala_Lumpur_%281%29.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/13/moniruzzaman.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/
https://www.aabss.org.au/research-papers/regime-types-or-party-systems-what-matters-more-political-instability-developing
タグ: タグ追加
タグなし, このレコードへの初めてのタグを付けませんか!
id my.iium.irep.40251
record_format dspace
spelling my.iium.irep.40251 http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/ Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world? Md. , Moniruzzaman JA Political science (General) Political stability is desired by every state. But is it contingent upon regime types or party systems? Existing studies on political stability suggest that regimes such as authoritarianism, democracy, and dictatorship and their variants have variously influenced political stability. Some have proved to be friendly with political stability in certain countries, while counterproductive for some other. However, the existing literature has exclusively focused on regime types alone neglecting the factor of party systems. This article argues that not only regime types but party systems also influence political stability. Based on data from Asia, Africa and Latin America this article examines the following four assumptions. Firstly, absolute monarchy and absolute authoritarianism together with no or one party system generally maintain political stability. Secondly, constitutional monarchies together with multiparty system generally maintain political stability. Thirdly, presidentialism together with dominant party system generally maintains political stability. And finally, parliamentarianism together with multi-party system is generally negatively related with political stability. 2014-08-25 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/10/FINAL_Program_Schedule_for_AABSS_Conference_2014_Kuala_Lumpur_%281%29.pdf application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/13/moniruzzaman.pdf Md. , Moniruzzaman (2014) Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world? In: The Australian Academy of Business and Social Sciences Conference 2014 (in partnership with The Journal of Developing Areas), 25-26 August 2014, Kuala Lumpur. https://www.aabss.org.au/research-papers/regime-types-or-party-systems-what-matters-more-political-instability-developing
institution Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia
building IIUM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider International Islamic University Malaysia
content_source IIUM Repository (IREP)
url_provider http://irep.iium.edu.my/
language English
English
topic JA Political science (General)
spellingShingle JA Political science (General)
Md. , Moniruzzaman
Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
description Political stability is desired by every state. But is it contingent upon regime types or party systems? Existing studies on political stability suggest that regimes such as authoritarianism, democracy, and dictatorship and their variants have variously influenced political stability. Some have proved to be friendly with political stability in certain countries, while counterproductive for some other. However, the existing literature has exclusively focused on regime types alone neglecting the factor of party systems. This article argues that not only regime types but party systems also influence political stability. Based on data from Asia, Africa and Latin America this article examines the following four assumptions. Firstly, absolute monarchy and absolute authoritarianism together with no or one party system generally maintain political stability. Secondly, constitutional monarchies together with multiparty system generally maintain political stability. Thirdly, presidentialism together with dominant party system generally maintains political stability. And finally, parliamentarianism together with multi-party system is generally negatively related with political stability.
format Conference or Workshop Item
author Md. , Moniruzzaman
author_facet Md. , Moniruzzaman
author_sort Md. , Moniruzzaman
title Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
title_short Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
title_full Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
title_fullStr Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
title_full_unstemmed Regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
title_sort regime types or party systems: what matters more for political instability in the developing world?
publishDate 2014
url http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/10/FINAL_Program_Schedule_for_AABSS_Conference_2014_Kuala_Lumpur_%281%29.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/13/moniruzzaman.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/40251/
https://www.aabss.org.au/research-papers/regime-types-or-party-systems-what-matters-more-political-instability-developing
_version_ 1643616779833966592
score 13.149126