Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Fernando Díaz Alpuente
(African Studies Center of Barcelona)
Rubén Sánchez Medero (Carlos III University of Madrid)
Gema Sánchez Medero (Universidad Complutense de Madrid)
Send message to Convenors
- Location:
- C1.04
- Start time:
- 29 June, 2013 at
Time zone: Europe/Lisbon
- Session slots:
- 2
Short Abstract:
This panel aims to study African political systems and their different categories or aspects from comparative and analytical perspectives, well sub-Saharan area compared cases, either through the comparison of sub-Saharan cases with other outside the region.
Long Abstract:
In the political development process of African states several factors have got involved and have conditioned their political systems. Among them we cannot ignore the exogenous factors relevance, as an intervening variable in the process. The presences of various colonial actors or international agencies have influenced, greater or lesser extent, institutional and political construction of political systems in the area. Often importing Western formulas, which, at least apparently, have a difficult fit in the African realities. It is for this reason that these states have undergone, at the process of its construction, to friction between these external factors and also endogenous, which describe the reality of each country and needed to participate in the process of the political system construction. This imperfect relationship between factors has led to the establishment and development of specific political systems in the sub-Saharan region.
The political system's classical studies, their typologies and features, have overlooked in the sub-Saharan African's cases. Perhaps because of the African state interpretations focus on neopatrimonialism, the hybrid structures, the weakness of the African state and the conception of the African state as non-African entity. A common analytical effort in the social sciences derives the discussion on issues such as good governance or African states' dependence on global political system.
This panel aims to study African political systems and their different categories or aspects from comparative and analytical perspectives, well sub-Saharan area compared cases, either through the comparison of sub-Saharan cases with other outside the region.
Accepted papers:
Session 1José Ferreira (Catholic University of Pernambuco)
Paper short abstract:
The paper analyzes both theoretically and empirically the association between economic growth and the construction of more stable institutions, considering African and South American Countries.Finally,it will be discussed whether more stable institutions improve economic growth or not.
Paper long abstract:
This paper tries to analyze both theoretically and empirically the association between economic development and the construction of more stable institutions, considering African and South American Countries. In this sense, it will be observed the main political rules of some countries of our sample: political systems (presidentialism, parliamentarism), political forms of representation (proportional, majoritarian) and political party systems (multipartism, single party, and two parties). Finally, on the other direction of causality, it will be discussed whether more stable institutions - in its many levels - improve economic growth or not. In order to do this analysis it will be developed an econometric model taken into account the importance of some political variables like the number of the veto players and others already mentioned for the economic growth process of the countries chosen.
Edalina Sanches (University of Lisbon)
Paper short abstract:
What factors explain and underline the processes of Party system institutionalization in contemporary sub-Saharan Africa? Institutional and contextual explanations will be discussed employing multi-method research strategies.
Paper long abstract:
Post-1974 party systems have been labelled as fluid, instable or weakly institutionalized due to their higher levels of electoral volatility, fragile links with civil society, thin organizational resources inter alia. Although this has been one of the most important political questions since the beginning of the Third Wave of democratization there is still little evidence on why these patterns emerge. Using an original pooled time-series cross-section dataset of 19 cases from Sub-Saharan Africa (election period ranges from 1966-2011) and building upon a new measure of institutionalization this paper proceeds as follows. It starts by measuring the level of party system institutionalization and then it seeks to explain its variation across countries and time. For this purpose a set of institutional (regime type, length of democratic regime, electoral system, authoritarian legacy), and contextual (economic performance, foreign aid, ethnic fragmentation, armed conflict) explanatory variables will be used. Finally the results will be discussed in two case studies - Mozambique and Zambia - where fieldwork was conducted.
Vladimir Shubin (Institute for African Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences)
Paper short abstract:
The paper will examine the influence of the Socialist International on the formation of the political systems in Sub-Saharan Africa after the re-introduction of multi-party democracy in most of African countries from comparative perspectives.
Paper long abstract:
The paper will be devoted to important but insufficiently researched issue of activities of the Socialist International in Africa and its relations with political parties on the continent. Its importance is underlined by the fact that the 24th Congress of Socialist International took place last September in Cape Town.
Its aim is to do comparative studies in several directions and to try to find answers to the following questions:
-To what extend do the Socialist International's ideology and political practice influence political forces in Sub-Saharan Africa?
- What is the difference between political systems of the countries where the SI African members are in power and the others?
- Why are African political parties joining Socialist International, as full members or as observers?
- To what extent does this membership promote human rights, democracy and economic development?
- How influential is Socialist International in Africa in comparison with other international political formations such as International Democratic Union and Liberal International?
- Is the policy of SI European member parties towards Africa common?
The paper will be based on the study of documents and publications as well as on field studies, primarily in Southern African countries.
Jose Garcia-Rojas (Universidad de La Laguna)
Paper short abstract:
Only a few countries have federal experiences conducted in Africa. Among them, Nigeria is the only one maintained in its Constitution federalism since its independence. These institutional arrangements are slowly extended to other countries from the mid 90s.
Paper long abstract:
Federalism is one of the most common solutions are offered to solve the problems in divided societies. Only a few countries have federal experiences conducted in Africa. Among them, Nigeria is the only one maintained in its Constitution federalism since its independence. These institutional arrangements are slowly extended to other countries from the mid 90s. Ethiopia and the Union of the Comoros. Ethiopia and the Union of Comoros introduced federalism in their constitutions as a way to end secessionist trends that had led these countries to situations of state collapse. Nigeria and Ethiopia are deeply divided societies religiously and ethnically. However, Comoros is a homogeneous society in ethnic and religious terms, but strongly divided for reasons of being an archipelagic State. In all three cases offer different institutional arrangements, ranging from the creation of ethnically homogeneous member states, as in Nigeria, to the rotation between the different member states of the presidency, as in Comoros, or opening the institutional channels for possible independence of any of the member states, such as Ethiopia. Nevertheless, none of these three African federal experiences seems to solve successfully all the problems of their divided societies on its configuration as nation states, not seem to put an end to the centrifugal tendencies of certain parts of their territories. Either way, his remarkable institutional differences, these countries seem to have channeled, with varying success, some of the problems that prevented them from living without the constant threat of rupture of the State.
Emmanuel Joseph Chukwuma Duru (University of Calabar, Nigeria)
Paper short abstract:
Despite Nigeria's practice of a Federal and Presidential system of government, legislative practice in Nigeria differs from what obtains in similar federal systems like the United States and Brazil. This calls for a comparative analysis in order to establish some uniformity.
Paper long abstract:
The primary responsibility of the legislature in all democracies is to make laws for the good governance of their societies. The stages through which law-making passes to be promulgated are referred to as legislative process. In this process, there exists an interface between the political and administrative structures of the legislature. How this interface impacts on the legislative processes remains debatable. Using three federal systems; Brazil, Nigeria and the United Sates as case studies, this paper seeks to draw a comparative analysis of the legislative process of these systems. In this comparison, the similarities and differences inherent in the legislative procedures of the selected states will be highlighted and from the findings of this comparative analysis, some policy lessons will be drawn for Nigeria which will include, among others, the need for a constitutional amendment in Nigeria to restructure the unwieldy size of its legislature and to develop political systems that are indigenous to its historical and social development.