John Gerring, Boston University
John Gerring (PhD, University of California, Berkeley, 1993) is Professor of Political Science at Boston University, where he teaches courses on methodology and comparative politics. His books include Party Ideologies in America, 1828–1996 (Cambridge University Press, 1998), Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework (Cambridge University Press, 2001), Case Study Research: Principles and Practices (Cambridge University Press, 2007), Concepts and Method: Giovanni Sartori and his Legacy (Routledge, 2009), Social Science Methodology: Tasks, Strategies, and Criteria (Cambridge University Press, 2011), Global Justice: A Prioritarian Manifesto (in process), and Democracy and Development: A Historical Perspective (in process). He served as a fellow of the School of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton, NJ), as a member of The National Academy of Sciences' Committee on the Evaluation of USAID Programs to Support the Development of Democracy, as President of the American Political Science Association's Organized Section on Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, and is the current recipient of a grant from the National Science Foundation to collect historical data related to colonialism and long-term development.
Strom C. Thacker
CAS Associate Dean of the Faculty, Social Sciences
Professor of International Relations and Political Science.
Expertise:Human Development, International Relations, Latin America, Political EconomyEducation:
BA, Pomona College
MA, PhD, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Strom Thacker’s research and teaching focus broadly on questions of political economy, governance and development, with a regional focus on Mexico and Latin America. His books include Big Business, the State, and Free Trade: Constructing Coalitions in Mexico (Cambridge University Press, 2000), A Centripetal Theory of Democratic Governance (with John Gerring, Cambridge University Press, 2008), and Democracy and Development: A Historical Perspective (with John Gerring, in process). He is also working on a project on the politics of human development. He has published articles in the American Political Science Review, the British Journal of Political Science, Business and Politics, Comparative Political Studies, Global Public Health, International Organization, the Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, the Journal of Politics, Social Science & Medicine, and World Politics. He also has an ongoing interest in the politics of foreign aid and lending, and the International Monetary Fund.
发表于2024-11-22
A Centripetal Theory of Democratic Governance 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书
图书标签: 政治学 英文原版 政治科学 政治 英文版 社会科学 社会学 研究方法
This book outlines the importance of political institutions in achieving good governance within a democratic polity and sets forth an argument to explore what sorts of institutions do the job best. By focusing on 'centripetal institutions', which maximize both representation and authority by bringing political energy and actors toward the centre of a polity, the authors set forth a relatively novel theory of democratic governance, applicable to all political settings in which multi-party competition obtains. Basing their theory on national-level political institutions, the authors argue that there are three types of political institutions that are fundamental in securing a centripetal style of democratic governance: unitary (rather than federal) sovereignty, a parliamentary (rather than presidential) executive, and a closed-list PR electoral system (rather than a single-member district or preferential-vote system).
意图接续宏观政体论理论传统、系统与归因视角及大规模跨国比较(萨托利、利普哈特、普特南等)的方法论,不过留下了诸多问题。整本书中两作者似乎都没有认真搞清楚几个基本问题对于理论的意义:政治vs行政的二分(基本假定政治集权自然保证行政随政治而动),囊括性体制的存在是否一定意味着实际决策中政治/行政权力的集中(附录中对否决节点理论的讨论仍有所不足),囊括性体制本身作为民主结果而不是原因、终端而非起点的问题(整个因果关系是否倒置了),善治的道德意义与可测量标准(基本还是偏向于采用发展理论中通用的标准而缺少理论和伦理的讨论)等等。另外方法论也有可讨论之处:累积指数的计算办法有些奇怪,似乎只是简单相加且假定了持续的贬损权重,而缺少动态考虑;测量中继续迷信找P值而因果讨论不足;民主门槛是否仍过低等。
评分意图接续宏观政体论理论传统、系统与归因视角及大规模跨国比较(萨托利、利普哈特、普特南等)的方法论,不过留下了诸多问题。整本书中两作者似乎都没有认真搞清楚几个基本问题对于理论的意义:政治vs行政的二分(基本假定政治集权自然保证行政随政治而动),囊括性体制的存在是否一定意味着实际决策中政治/行政权力的集中(附录中对否决节点理论的讨论仍有所不足),囊括性体制本身作为民主结果而不是原因、终端而非起点的问题(整个因果关系是否倒置了),善治的道德意义与可测量标准(基本还是偏向于采用发展理论中通用的标准而缺少理论和伦理的讨论)等等。另外方法论也有可讨论之处:累积指数的计算办法有些奇怪,似乎只是简单相加且假定了持续的贬损权重,而缺少动态考虑;测量中继续迷信找P值而因果讨论不足;民主门槛是否仍过低等。
评分意图接续宏观政体论理论传统、系统与归因视角及大规模跨国比较(萨托利、利普哈特、普特南等)的方法论,不过留下了诸多问题。整本书中两作者似乎都没有认真搞清楚几个基本问题对于理论的意义:政治vs行政的二分(基本假定政治集权自然保证行政随政治而动),囊括性体制的存在是否一定意味着实际决策中政治/行政权力的集中(附录中对否决节点理论的讨论仍有所不足),囊括性体制本身作为民主结果而不是原因、终端而非起点的问题(整个因果关系是否倒置了),善治的道德意义与可测量标准(基本还是偏向于采用发展理论中通用的标准而缺少理论和伦理的讨论)等等。另外方法论也有可讨论之处:累积指数的计算办法有些奇怪,似乎只是简单相加且假定了持续的贬损权重,而缺少动态考虑;测量中继续迷信找P值而因果讨论不足;民主门槛是否仍过低等。
评分意图接续宏观政体论理论传统、系统与归因视角及大规模跨国比较(萨托利、利普哈特、普特南等)的方法论,不过留下了诸多问题。整本书中两作者似乎都没有认真搞清楚几个基本问题对于理论的意义:政治vs行政的二分(基本假定政治集权自然保证行政随政治而动),囊括性体制的存在是否一定意味着实际决策中政治/行政权力的集中(附录中对否决节点理论的讨论仍有所不足),囊括性体制本身作为民主结果而不是原因、终端而非起点的问题(整个因果关系是否倒置了),善治的道德意义与可测量标准(基本还是偏向于采用发展理论中通用的标准而缺少理论和伦理的讨论)等等。另外方法论也有可讨论之处:累积指数的计算办法有些奇怪,似乎只是简单相加且假定了持续的贬损权重,而缺少动态考虑;测量中继续迷信找P值而因果讨论不足;民主门槛是否仍过低等。
评分意图接续宏观政体论理论传统、系统与归因视角及大规模跨国比较(萨托利、利普哈特、普特南等)的方法论,不过留下了诸多问题。整本书中两作者似乎都没有认真搞清楚几个基本问题对于理论的意义:政治vs行政的二分(基本假定政治集权自然保证行政随政治而动),囊括性体制的存在是否一定意味着实际决策中政治/行政权力的集中(附录中对否决节点理论的讨论仍有所不足),囊括性体制本身作为民主结果而不是原因、终端而非起点的问题(整个因果关系是否倒置了),善治的道德意义与可测量标准(基本还是偏向于采用发展理论中通用的标准而缺少理论和伦理的讨论)等等。另外方法论也有可讨论之处:累积指数的计算办法有些奇怪,似乎只是简单相加且假定了持续的贬损权重,而缺少动态考虑;测量中继续迷信找P值而因果讨论不足;民主门槛是否仍过低等。
A Centripetal Theory of Democratic Governance 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书