Högskolan Dalarnas logga och länk till högskolans webbplats

This article re-examines the relationship between democracy and semi-presidential regimes. While numerous scholars have traced the effects of semi-presidential regimes on democracy, few have addressed the risk of reverse causality, namely, that democracy influences the establishment of semi-presidential regimes. This article uses statistical analyses to test whether the level of democracy in a country affects its choice of semi-presidential regime subtype: a premier-presidential or a president-parliamentary. Including all semi-presidential regimes from 1919 until 2015 and controlling for other conditions such as colonial legacy, the level of development and regime diffusion, our results confirm the hypothesis. The higher the level of democracy - the higher the probability of a premier-presidential regime. Our results underline that democracy is a highly influential cause of the type of semi-presidential regime chosen, a conclusion that places a question mark on the self-evident use of the semi-presidential subtypes as an independent variable.

In this article, we introduce a new dataset—the Comparative Semi-Presidential Database (CSPD)—covering classifications of semi-presidential regimes. In contrast to other databases, the CSPD offers several classifications based on different definitions of semi-presidential regimes along with subtypes of semi-presidential regimes. We use definitions developed by Elgie (in: Elgie (ed) Semi-presidentialism in Europe, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999), Cheibub et al. (Public Choice 143:67–101, 2010), Shugart (French Politics 3(3):323–351, 2005) and Shugart and Carey (Presidents and assemblies: constitutional design and electoral dynamics, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992). Additionally, we present a modified definition of semi-presidential regimes based on the conceptual discussion in the field. The database covers all independent states from 1900 to 2021. Using empirical analyses, we compare the classifications, the importance of conceptualisation and presenting our measurement for semi-presidential regimes.

This study maps the general lines of semi-presidential research with regard to theory, topics and methods. It identifies research gaps and provides recommendations for future studies. The review includes a general screening of 327 publications covering the period 1970–2015, and a close reading of sixty-five selected publications. The findings suggest that the inconsistent use of regime type definitions has limited the possibilities for generalizations. The study tracks the influence of some seminal articles, as well as the recent trend of focusing on the role and powers of the president. The article calls for more studies beyond Europe, and suggests that the field would benefit from including Historical and Normative Institutionalism. Finally, it suggests the need for studies on public administration that are relevant to the functioning of semi-presidential government.

One of the crucial constitutional choices made in a democratizing or recently independent state is the structure of executive-legislative relations that forms into a parliamentary, presidential, or semi-presidential regime. Even so, only a few studies have sought the reasons for the establishment and least of all is known when it comes to the most recent of them: the semi-presidential one. The thesis aims to increase our knowledge on why and how semi-presidential regimes establish. This aim is approached through the use of three theoretical perspectives, including diffusion from abroad, the legacies incorporated in the domestic context, and the elites strategic bargaining expected by the perspective of transitional bargaining. Through its nested mixed methods approach, including two large-N and one single-case study, this thesis finds that semi-presidential establishment stem from all three perspectives: It is influenced by diffusion from international state networks, by legacies of post-communism and post-colonialism, as well as by the preferences of elite actors who attempt to act in a strategic manner. Semi-presidential establishment is thus a complex process and the application of the theoretical perspectives seem to depend on the level of uncertainty in the domestic context.

Through its findings, this thesis increases our knowledge on why and how semi-presidential regimes are established. In addition, they contribute to the field of diffusion, semi-presidentialism, but also to the larger field of institutional studies. Future studies should test the application of the conclusions on parliamentary and presidential regimes and on all semi-presidential regimes part of the post-colonial context.