注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

N·格里高利·曼昆的博客

恒甫学社的学术性分支博客

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我
曼昆  

曼昆

网易考拉推荐

巴罗谈民主的决定因素(4):民主数据的说明  

2009-05-12 13:15:43|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

 

三、民主数据的说明

Freedom House applied the concept of electoralrights on a subjective basis to classify countries annually into sevencategories; group one is the highest level of rights and group seven is thelowest. The classification was made by Gastil and his associates and followerson the basis of an array of published and unpublished information about eachcountry. The original ranking from one to seven was converted here to a scalefrom zero to one, where zero corresponds to the fewest rights (Gastil's rankseven) and one to the most rights (Gastil's rank one). The scale from zero toone corresponds to the system used by Bollen.

Free House(自由之家)在主观分析的基础上,使用了“选举权”的概念,发布了年度数据,将各个国家分为七个类别:第一类是最高权利层,第七类是最低类。Gastil及其助手,以及其他的追随者们,根据各国公布的和未公布的信息所组成的集合,做了这样的分类。原初的这个1-7的排序,在这里,转化为从0-1的级别范围。其中,0对应着最低的权利(Gastil的第七类),1对应着最多的权利(Gastil的第一类)。这个0-1的级别,对应着Bollen所使用的体系。

 

To fix ideas on the meaning of the zero to onescale, note first that the United States and most other OECD countries inrecent years received the value 1.0, thereby being designated as fullrepresentative democracies. Dictatorships that received the value 0.0 in 1995 included Indonesia, Iraq,Syria, Zaire, and several other countries in Africa. Places that were rated at0.5-halfway between dictatorship and democracy-included Colombia, DominicanRepublic, Ghana, Guatemala, Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Senegal, andSri Lanka.

要想知道0-1级别的含义,首先注意到美国和大多数其他的OECD国家,最近年来的得分值为1.0,并用此来表示为“最富代表性的民主”。“独裁统治”的得分值为1995年时的0.0值国家,它们包括:印度尼西亚、伊拉克、叙利亚、扎伊尔和非洲的其他几个国家。得分值为0.5的地区(即正好处于独裁与民主之间的中值国家),包括:哥伦比亚、多米尼亚共和国、加纳、危地马拉、马来西亚、墨西哥、尼加拉瓜、巴拉圭、圣地加尔和斯里兰卡。

 

The solid line in figure 1 shows the time path ofthe unweighted average of the electoral rights index for the countries that Iam considering for the years 1960, 1965, and 1972-95. The number of countriescovered rises from 99 in1960 to 109 in 1965 and 138from 1972 to 1995.2 The figure showsthat the mean of the index peaked at 0.66 in 1960, fell to a low point of 0.44 in 1975, and rose subsequently to 0.59 in 1995. Figure 1 also demonstratesthat the main source of the decline in electoral rights after 1960 was theexperience in sub-Saharan Africa. The dottedline shows that the average of the indicator in sub- Saharan Africa peaked at 0.58 in 1960 (26 countries) and then(for 43 countries) fell to low points of 0.19 in 1977 and 0.18 in 1989 before rising to 0.40 in 1995.

 

1中的实线,表示的是“未加选举权指数”权重的均值,我所考虑的国家是196019651972-95间的国家。国家数量,从1960年的99个,上升到1965年时的109个,再上升到1972-1995年间的138个国家。这个图说明了:指数均值,在1960年时达到最高0.66,下降至1975年时的0.44最低点,后来,又上升至1995年时的0.59。图1同时还说明了1960年后的选举权下降的主要原因是:撒哈拉以南非洲国家的实践。“虚线”表示了撒哈拉以南非洲国家的指标均值,在1960年时达到了最高0.58(含26个国家),然后,下降至1977年时的最低点0.19(含43个国家)和1989年时的0.18最低点,最后,上升至1995年时的0.40

 

This pattern emerges because many of the Africancountries began with ostensibly democratic institutions when they becameindependent in the early 1960s, but most evolved into one-party dictatorshipsby the early 1970s. (See Bollen [1990] for further discussion.) Thedemocratization in Africa since 1989 has beensubstantial; whether it will be sustained is not yet known.

这个变化模式,之所以会发生,是因为许多非洲国家,在1960年代初纷纷独立之后,实现了表面的民主体制,但是,大部分国家,在1970年代初时,还实施着一党独裁(见Bollen[1990]的更深讨论。)自1989年后,非洲的民主化,是很显著的,这种变化,是否能保持下去,目前还是个未知数。

 

 

 2The Gastil data cover more than 138 countries, but my sample is morelimited to reflect the availability of other data.

Gastel的数据,不止138个国家,但是,我的样本,却进行了更多的限定,以使之反映其他数据的可得性。

  评论这张
 
阅读(171)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017