Competitive Authoritarian

A hybrid regime is a mixed type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one (or vice versa). Hybrid regimes are categorized as combine autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections. Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states. Although these regimes experience civil unrest they maybe relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time. There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.

The term ''hybrid regime'' arises from a polymorphic view of political regimes that opposes the dichotomy of autocracy or democracy. Modern scholarly analysis of hybrid regimes focuses attention on the decorative nature of democratic institutions (elections do not lead to a change of power, different media broadcast government point of view and the opposition in parliament votes the same way as the ruling party, among others), from which it is concluded that democratic backsliding, a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of hybrid regimes. Some scholars also contend that hybrid regimes may imitate a full dictatorship.

History

The third wave of democratization has led to the emergence of hybrid regimes that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian. Neither the concept of illiberal democracy, nor the concept of electoral authoritarianism fully describes these hybrid regimes.Matthijs Bogaards. 2009. «How to Classify Hybrid Regimes? Defective Democracy and Electoral Authoritarianism.» Democratization, 16 (2): 399—423.;

Since the end of the Cold War, such regimes have become the most common among undemocratic.Andreas Schedler. ed., 2006. Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner; At the end of the process of transformation of authoritarian regimes, limited elections appear in one way or another when liberalization occurs. Liberal democracy has always been assumed while in practice this process basically froze "halfway".YONATAN L. MORS
Review: THE ERA OF ELECTORAL AUTHORITARIANISM
World Politics; Vol. 64, No. 1 (January 2012), pp. 161—198 (38 pages)

In relation to regimes that were previously called "transitional" in the 1980s, the term ''hybrid regime'' began to be used and was strengthened because according to Thomas Carothers the majority of "transitional countries" are neither completely dictatorial nor aspiring to democracy and by and large they can not be called transitional. They are located in the politically stable gray zone, changes in which may not take place for decades". Thus, he stated that hybrid regimes must be considered without the assumption that they will ultimately become democracies. These hybrid regimes were called semi-authoritarianism or electoral authoritarianism.

One of the first to use the concept of "hybrid regime" was the sociologist Elemér Hankiss when analyzing the Goulash Communism of János Kádár's Hungary.

Definition

Scholars vary on the definition of hybrid regimes based on their primary academic discipline.

According to professor Matthijs Bogaards hybrid types are

Pippa Norris defined hybrid regimes as:

Professor Henry E. Hale defined hybrid regimes as;

Leonardo Morlino defined hybrid regimes as;

Professor Jeffrey C. Isaac defined hybrid regimes as:

The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance defined hybrid regimes as;

Indicators

According to Guillermo O'Donnell, Philippe C. Schmitter, Larry Diamond and Thomas Carothers, signs of a hybrid regime include:
# The presence of external attributes of democracy (elections, multi-party system, legal opposition).
# Low degree of representation of the interests of citizens in the process of political decision-making (incapacity of associations of citizens, for example trade unions, or that they are in state control).
# Low level of political participation.
# The declarative nature of political rights and freedoms (formally there is in fact difficult implementation).
# Low level of trust in political institutions by citizens.

Democratic backsliding

Democratisation

Measurement

There are various democratic freedom indices produced by non-governmental organizations that publish assessments of the worlds political systems, according to their own definitions.

Democracy Index

According to the Democracy Index