Strategies of legitimation in Central Asia: regime durability in Turkmenistan

Polese, Abel; Beacháin, Donnacha Ó; Horák, Slavomír

doi:10.1080/13569775.2017.1331391

Cited by 29 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, after the 2006 death of the founding president, Saparmurat Niyazov, Gurbanguly Berdymuhamedov attained the presidency. The former dominant role of a personality cult was replaced by a focus on the political system as a whole (Polese et al 2017). Radchenko (2017) argues that this meant that although just as authoritarian, the system became less outlandish.…”

Section: Political Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Labor-Management Relations in Autocratic Regimes

Cooke

Wood

2022

Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter examines contemporary labor-management relations in autocratic regimes, drawing on two sets of countries, namely transitional peripheral economies in Central Asia (Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan) and hierarchical market economies in Latin America (Colombia and Honduras), for analysis. We discuss the political economy, work, and labor relations of these countries, highlighting the role of the state, business, and international non-government organizations. We also take into account the impact of large-scale (often in millions) migration of workers both internally within the country and cross-border. It is important to note that, just as there are different types of democratic systems, there are also different types of autocratic regimes with distinct political, economic, and social policy orientations, and this directly impacts the nature of labor relations. Under Latin American right-wing authoritarianism, a primary focus is on supporting a relatively small property-owning elite, and any countervailing worker power is seen as a direct attack on the latter. Even if workers have employment rights under the law, this zero-sum game view frequently results in extra-legal attacks on worker activists and their representatives, making union organization an extremely dangerous business.In contrast, the Central Asian autocracies, business elites are tied up within extended clan networks. Especially within Uzbekistan, a much closer emphasis has been placed on the provision of a critical mass of jobs as a means of buying political stability. Unions have been afforded a place in the system both for historical reasons and as proof of an ability to create a critical mass of decent work; at the same time, there is little room for union autonomy.

show abstract

Section: Political Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Labor-Management Relations in Autocratic Regimes

Cooke

Wood

2022

Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference between regimes is that they institutionalize the strategies of repression, co-optation and legitimation in varying degrees. There is a nascent strand of literature which illustrates that claims to legitimacy are crucial aspects of autocratic survival (Dukalskis 2017; Dukalskis and Gerschewski 2017; Kailitz and Wurster 2017; Maerz 2018; Omelicheva 2016; Polese et al 2017; von Soest and Grauvogel 2017a). Furthermore, Carsten Q. Schneider and Seraphine F. Maerz (2017) analyse how the interplay of repression, co-optation and legitimation affects the survival of electoral regimes.…”

Section: Repression Co-optation and Legitimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Many Faces of Authoritarian Persistence: A Set-Theory Perspective on the Survival Strategies of Authoritarian Regimes

Maerz

2018

Gov. & oppos.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how authoritarian regimes combine various strategies of repression, co-optation and legitimation to remain in power. The contribution of the article is two-fold. First, I conceptualize the hexagon of authoritarian persistence as a framework to explain how authoritarian regimes manage to survive. The hexagon is based on Gerschewski’s (2013) three pillars of stability but proposes some crucial modifications. In contrast to the model of the three pillars, the hexagon can grasp the causal complexity of autocratic survival because it is rooted in set theory and accounts for asymmetric causal relations, conjunctural causation and equifinality. Based on this, it illuminates how authoritarian regimes use multiple, mutually non-exclusive survival strategies. The second contribution is an empirical exploration which applies the hexagon and provides a case-oriented analysis of 62 persistent and non-persistent authoritarian regimes (1991–2010). By using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, the findings of this assessment illustrate five configurations of the hexagon – called hegemonic, performance-dependent, rigid, overcompensating and adaptive authoritarianism – as those combinations of strategies which facilitate authoritarian survival.

show abstract

“…In Turkmenistan (PEI Index 34), for instance, all opposition candidates are appointed by the government of President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow himself, so that the decisive victory in 2017 at 98% of the popular vote is unsurprising. Elections in this subregion seem to serve primarily to legitimate and perpetuate authoritarian political regimes (Polese, Ó Beacháin, & Horák, ). The second cluster in Southeast Asia encompasses Cambodia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, and Viet Nam.…”

Section: Trends Of Electoral Integrity In Asiamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Integrity of Elections in Asia: Policy Lessons from Expert Evaluations

Grömping¹

2018

Asian Politics and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an evolving debate about how to strengthen elections in Asia, amidst widespread concerns about electoral malpractice in the region. While contests in some countries match or surpass international standards of electoral integrity, there are deep‐seated problems of violence and conflict, corruption and clientelism, or vote rigging and fraud in others. This review of policy practice draws on the Perceptions of Electoral Integrity expert survey (PEI Release 6.0) to map the state of electoral integrity in Asia and to draw lessons for public policy. The empirics rely on the assessment of 535 experts who evaluated 47 elections in 27 countries in South, Southeast, Northeast, and Central Asia between July 2012 and December 2017. The review identifies three cross‐cutting challenges for electoral integrity in Asia. Policymakers and other stakeholders should (i) curb incumbent advantage enshrined in electoral laws regulating candidate registration and voting district boundaries; (ii) introduce regulation of political finance in order to reduce the influence of money in elections; and (iii) increase the transparency of the electoral process by encouraging nonpartisan domestic election monitoring and advocacy.

show abstract

Strategies of legitimation in Central Asia: regime durability in Turkmenistan

Cited by 29 publications

References 74 publications

Labor-Management Relations in Autocratic Regimes

Labor-Management Relations in Autocratic Regimes

The Many Faces of Authoritarian Persistence: A Set-Theory Perspective on the Survival Strategies of Authoritarian Regimes

The Integrity of Elections in Asia: Policy Lessons from Expert Evaluations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About