Why do democratising nations make the constitutional choices they do? Conceiving democratic transition as a critical juncture, we propose a theory of constitutional choice. We place the degree of uncertainty at the centre of our theorising efforts to explain the relationship between constitutional bargains among competing political groups and the type of executive–legislative relations adopted during democratisation. We posit that parliamentarism is more likely to be adopted under high-uncertainty conditions, while presidentialism is more likely under low-uncertainty conditions. Identifying four factors that affect the level of uncertainty in the transition process, we examine how the choices of executive–legislative relations are made under strong influences of historical and geographic factors.
AlexanderGerard (2002) Institutionalized uncertainty, the rule of law, and the sources of democratic stability. Comparative Political Studies35(10): 1145–1170.
2.
BradyDavidMoJongryn (1992) Electoral systems and institutional choice: A case study of the 1988 Korean elections. Comparative Political Studies24(4): 405–429.
CheibubJosé Antonio (2007) Presidentialism, Parliamentarism and Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5.
CheibubJosé AntonioGandhiJennifer (2004) Classifying Political Regimes: A Six-Fold Measure of Democracies and Dictatorships. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
DiamondLarry (2002) Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy13(2): 21–35.
7.
ElgieRobert (2004) Semi-presidentialism: Concepts, consequences and contesting explanations. Political Studies Review2(3): 314–330.
8.
FearonJames D.LaitinDavid D. (2003) Ethnicity, insurgency and civil war. American Political Science Review97(1): 75–90.
9.
FryeTimothy (1997) A politics of institutional choice – Post-communist presidencies. Comparative Political Studies30(5): 523–552.
10.
GeddesBarbara (1996) Initiation of new democratic institutions in Eastern Europe and Latin America. In: LijphartArendWaismanCarlos H. (eds) Institutional Design in New Democracies: Eastern Europe and Latin America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 15–41.
11.
GeddesBarbara (1999) What do we know about democratization after twenty years?Annual Review of Political Science2: 115–144.
12.
GerringJohnThackerStrom C.MorenoCarola (2005) Centripetal democratic governance: A theory and global inquiry. American Political Science Review99(4): 567–581.
13.
GerringJohnThackerStrom C.MorenoCarola (2009) Are parliamentary systems better?Comparative Political Studies42(3): 327–359.
14.
GleditschKristian SkredeWardMichael D. (2006) Diffusion and the international context of democratization. International Organization60(4): 911–933.
15.
HadeniusAxelTeorellJan (2007) Pathways from authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy18(1): 143–156.
16.
HallPeter A.TaylorRosemary C.R. (1996) Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies44(4): 936–957.
17.
HorowitzDonald L. (1990) Comparing democratic systems. Journal of Democracy1(4): 73–79.
18.
HorowitzDonald L. (2002) Constitutional design: Proposals versus processes. In: ReynoldsAndrew (ed.) The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–36.
19.
HuntingtonSamuel P. (1991) The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
20.
KatznelsonIraWeingastBarry R. (2005) Interactions between historical and rational choice institutionalism. In: KatznelsonIraWeingastBarry R. (eds) Preferences and Situations: Points of Intersection Between Historical and Rational Choice Institutionalism. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 1–26.
21.
KirschkeLinda (2007) Semipresidentialism and the perils of power sharing. Comparative Political Studies40(11): 1372–1394.
22.
KnightJack (1992) Institutions and Social Conflict. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
23.
LevitskyStevenWayLucan (2002) The rise of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy13(2): 51–65.
24.
LijphartArend (1992) Democratization and constitutional choices in Czecho-Slovakia, Hungary and Poland 1989–91. Journal of Theoretical Politics4(2): 207–223.
25.
LijphartArend (1999) Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26.
LinzJuan J. (1990) The perils of presidentialism. Journal of Democracy1(1): 51–69.
27.
LinzJuan J.ValenzuelaArturo (1994) The Failure of Presidential Democracy: Comparative Perspectives. Volume 1. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
28.
LuongPauline Jones (2000) After the break-up: Institutional design in transitional states. Comparative Political Studies33(5): 563–592.
29.
McFaulMichael (1999) Institutional design, uncertainty and path dependency during transitions: Cases from Russia. Constitutional Political Economy10(1): 27–52.
30.
MagaloniBeatrizKricheliRuth (2010) Political order and one-party rule. Annual Review of Political Science13: 123–143.
31.
MahoneyJames (2001) The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
32.
MainwaringScott (1993) Presidentialism, multipartism and democracy: The difficult combination. Comparative Political Studies26(2): 198–228.
33.
MainwaringScottShugartMatthew Soberg (1997) Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34.
MullerDennis C. (2001) The importance of uncertainty in a two-stage theory of constitutions. Public Choice108(3/4): 223–258.
35.
NorthDouglas (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36.
O’DonnellGuillermoSchmitterPhilippe C. (1986) Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
37.
PerssonTorstenTabelliniGuido (2003) The Economic Effects of Constitutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38.
PiersonPaul (2004) Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39.
PowerTimothy J.GasiorowskiMark J. (1997) Institutional design and democratic consolidation in the Third World. Comparative Political Studies30(2): 123–155.
40.
PrzeworskiAdam (1991) Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
41.
PrzeworskiAdamAlvarezMichael E.CheibubJosé Antonio. (2000) Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
42.
RoperSteven D. (2002) Are all semipresidential regimes the same? A comparison of premier-presidential regimes. Comparative Politics34(3): 253–272.
43.
SchedlerAndreas (2002) The menu of manipulation. Journal of Democracy13(2): 36–50.
44.
SchleiterPetra (2003) Mixed constitutions and political instability: Russia 1991–1993. Democratization10(1): 1–26.
45.
ShugartMatthew Soberg (1998) The inverse relationship between party strength and executive strength: A theory of politicians’ constitutional choices. British Journal of Political Science28(1): 1–29.
46.
ShugartMatthew SobergCareyJohn M. (1992) Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
47.
StepanAlfredSkachCindy (1994) Presidentialism and parliamentarism in comparative perspective. In: LinzJuan J.ValenzuelaArturo (eds) The Failure of Presidential Democracy. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 119–136.
48.
ThelenKathleen (1999) Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science2: 369–404.
49.
WeingastBarry R. (1997) The political foundations of democracy and the rule of law. American Political Science Review91(2): 245–263.
50.
WeingastBarry R. (2002) Rational-choice institutionalism. In: KatznelsonIraMilnerHelen V. (eds) Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York, NY: W.W. Norton, pp. 660–692.
51.
WiatrJerzy J. (1996) Executive–legislative relations in crisis: Poland’s experience, 1989–1993. In: LijphartArendWaismanCarlos H. (eds) Institutional Design in New Democracies: Eastern Europe and Latin America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 103–115.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
