Regime

In Liberal democracy
politic Electoral democracy
s, a Electoral autocracy
regim Closed autocracy
e (also Geographic areas without data[1]
"régime") is the form of government or the
set of rules, cultural or social norms, etc.,
that regulate the operation of a
government or institution and its
interactions with society. The two broad
categories of regimes that appear in most
literature are democratic and autocratic.[2]
However, autocratic regimes can be
broken down into a subset of many
different types (dictatorial, totalitarian,
absolutist, monarchic, oligarchic, etc.). The
key similarity between all regimes are the
presence of rulers, and either formal or
informal institutions.[1][2]

According to Yale professor Juan José

Linz there a three main types of political
regimes today: democracies, totalitarian
regimes and, sitting between these two,
authoritarian regimes (with hybrid
regimes).[3][4]
Usage

World citizens living under different political regimes, as

defined by Polity IV.[5]

While the word régime originates as a

synonym for any type of government,
modern usage has given it a negative
connotation, implying an authoritarian
government or dictatorship. Webster's
definition states that the word régime
refers simply to a form of government,[6]
while Oxford English Dictionary defines
regime as "a government, especially an
authoritarian one".[7]

Contemporary academic usage of the

term "regime" is broader than popular and
journalistic usage, meaning "an
intermediate stratum between the
government (which makes day-to-day
decisions and is easy to alter) and the
state (which is a complex bureaucracy
tasked with a range of coercive
functions)."[8] In global studies and
international relations, the concept of
regime is also used to name international
regulatory agencies (see International
regime), which lie outside of the control of
national governments. Some authors thus
distinguish analytically between
institutions and regimes while recognizing
that they are bound up with each other:

Institutions as we describe them

are publicly enacted, relatively-
enduring bodies of practice,
procedures and norms, ranging
from formalized legal entities
such as the WTO to more
informal but legally-buttressed
and abiding sets of practices and
regimes such as the liberal
capitalist market. The key
 phrases here are 'publicly
enacted' and 'relatively
enduring'. The phrase 'publicly
enacted' in this sense implies
active projection, legal sanction,
and often as not, some kind of
opposition.[9]

Regimes can thus be defined as sets of

protocols and norms embedded either in
institutions or institutionalized practices –
formal such as states or informal such as
the "liberal trade regime" – that are
publicly enacted and relatively enduring.[9]
Urban regimes
Other regime theorists argue that there are
also more localized urban regimes that are
categorized by interests, institutions, and
ideas in a city.[10] Urban regimes are
defined as the relations between local
state and polity elites with particular
institution forms and policy goals.[11]

Urban regime theorist Jill Clark argues that

these regime types are categorized by
economic actors and policy-making within
a community. The six urban regime types
are: entrepreneurial, caretaker, player,
progressive, stewardship, and the demand-
side.[10]

Measuring regime
There are two primary ways in which
regimes are measured: continuous
measures of democracy (e.g. Freedom
House (FH), Polity, and the Varieties of
Democracy (V-Dem)) and binary measures
of democracy (e.g. Regimes of the
World).[12] A continuous measure of
democracy creates categorical
classifications based on gradations of
democracy and autocracy[12] though
previously, primarily focused on the
differentiation of democracies and
autocracies.[13] A binary measure of
democracy classifies a country as either a
democracy or not.[14]

While some argue that unless a

government is “x” or generates “x”, then
such an institution is not worthy of being
declared a democracy,[15] academics
establish that there is no single set of
practices that embody democracy, but
rather a matrix of various outcomes and
combinations.[16] According to Stanford
political science professor Philippe C.
Schmitter and associate professor Terry
Lynn Karl, such matrices take into
consideration factors such as consensus,
participation, access, responsiveness,
majority rule, parliamentary sovereignty,
party government, pluralism, federalism,
presidentialism, and checks and
balances.[16]

V-Dem Institute, an independent research

institute that aims to conceptualize and
measure democracy, serves as one of the
world’s most well-known continuous
measures of democracy. V-Dem formally
describes their data utilizing a notation
that contains ratings of numerous
indicators.[17] Such indicators include
access to justice, electoral corruption, and
freedom from government sponsored
violence.[17] V-Dem then relies on country
experts who supply subjective ratings of
said latent or concealed regime indicators
over any given period of time.[17]

See also
Ancien Régime Look up
regime or
Carbon audit regime regimen in
Wiktionary,
Exchange rate regime
the free
International regime dictionary.

Legal practice
Regime change
Regime theory

Citations

1 Herre Bastian (December 2 2021) "The

1. Herre, Bastian (December 2, 2021). "The
'Regimes of the World' data: how do
researchers measure democracy?" (https://
ourworldindata.org/regimes-of-the-world-da
ta) . Our World in Data. Retrieved March 14,
2023.
2. Karl, Terry; Schmitter, Phillippe (Summer
1991). "What Democracy Is...and Is Not" (ht
tps://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article
s/what-democracy-is-and-is-not/) . Journal
of Democracy. no. 3: 76–78. Retrieved
March 3, 2023.
3. Juan José Linz (2000). Totalitarian and
Authoritarian Regimes (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=8cYk_ABfMJIC&pg=PA14
3) . Lynne Rienner Publisher. p. 143.
ISBN 978-1-55587-890-0.
OCLC 1172052725 (https://www.worldcat.o
rg/oclc/1172052725) .
4. Jonathan Michie, ed. (3 February 2014).
Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=ip_IAgAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA95) . Routledge. p. 95.
ISBN 978-1-135-93226-8.
5. "World citizens living under different
political regimes" (https://ourworldindata.or
g/grapher/world-pop-by-political-regime) .
Our World in Data. Retrieved 5 March 2020.
6. Regime (http://www.merriam-webster.com/
dictionary/regime) as defined in the
Merriam–Webster website
7. Regime (http://oxforddictionaries.com/defi
nition/regime?q=regime) as defined in the
Oxford English Dictionary
8. Ufheil-Somers, Amanda (December 2,
2014). "The Breakdown of the GCC
Initiative" (https://merip.org/2014/12/the-br
eakdown-of-the-gcc-initiative/) . MERIP.
9. James, Paul; Palen, Ronen (2007).
Globalization and Economy, Vol. 3: Global
Economic Regimes and Institutions (http
s://www.academia.edu/4251331) . London:
Sage Publications. p. xiv.
10. Clark, Jill (2001). "Six Urban Regime Types:
The Effects of State Laws and Citizen
Participation on the Development of
Alternative Regimes". Public Administration
Quarterly. 25 (1): 25. JSTOR 40861827 (htt
ps://www.jstor.org/stable/40861827) .
S2CID 152728694 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:152728694) .
11. Rhomberg, Chris (1995). " "Collective Actors
and Urban Regimes: Class Formation and
the 1946 Oakland General Strike" ". Theory
and Society. 24 (4): 567–594.
doi:10.1007/BF00993523 (https://doi.org/1
0.1007%2FBF00993523) .
S2CID 144406981 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:144406981) .
12. Elkins, Zachary. 2000. "Gradations of
Democracy? Empirical Tests of Alternative
Conceptualizations. American Journal of
Political Science. 44(2): 293-300.
13. Lauth, H., & Schlenkrich, O. (2018). Making
Trade-Offs Visible: Theoretical and
Methodological Considerations about the
Relationship between Dimensions and
Institutions of Democracy and Empirical
Findings. Politics and Governance, 6(1), 78-
91. doi:10.17645/pag.v6i1.1200
14. Herre, B. (2021). “The ‘Regimes of the
World’ data: how do researchers measure
democracy?”, Our World in Data
15. Przeworski, A. (1999). “Minimalist
Conception of Democracy: A Defense”, In I.
Shapiro, & C. Hacker-Cordon (Eds.),
Democracy’s Value Cambridge University
Press. 12-17.
16. Karl, Terry, and Philippe Schmitter. “What
Democracy Is…and Is Not”. Journal of
Democracy 2, no. 3 (January 1970): 75-88.
17. Pemstein, D., Marquardt, K.L., Tzelgov, E.,
Wang, Y., Medzihorsky, J., Krusell, F., von
Romer, J. (2023). “The V-Dem
Measurement Model: Latent Variable
Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-
Temporal Expert-Coded Data”, The Varieties
of Democracy Institute. Series 2023:21. 1-
32.
Sources

James, Paul; Palen, Ronen (2007).

Globalization and Economy, Vol. 3: Global
Economic Regimes and Institutions (http
s://www.academia.edu/4251331) .
London: Sage Publications.
O'Neill, Patrick, Essentials of
Comparative Government

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Regime&oldid=1186677599"

This page was last edited on 24 November 2023,

at 20:12 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.