000			01589nam a22001457a 4500
999			_c523622 _d523622
008			230914b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aLauth, H.J., Schlenkrich, O. and Lemm, L. _943704
245			_aDifferent types of deficient democracies: Reassessing the relevance of diminished subtypes
260			_aInternational Politic al Science Review
300			_a44(2), Mar, 2023: p.212-229
520			_aTypologies are widely applied tools in democracy research. There are two prominent ways of constructing subtypes of democracies: whereas the classical approach adds traits successively to gain regular subtypes, the radial approach subtracts traits from the concept to obtain diminished subtypes. Conceptually, we argue that radial types have distinct advantages over the classical approach. Diminished subtypes can deal with complex concepts with multiple interrelated dimensions without a clear hierarchy and can account for the gradual nature of political phenomena. We derive three diminished subtypes of democracy: illiberal, inegalitarian and unaccountable democracies. The empirical analysis draws on a customized version of the new Varieties of Democracy dataset. Contrary to the dominating criticism of the radial delusion by the classical approach, an elaborate cluster analysis with a strong focus on validation and robustness checks can identify empirically the deductively proposed diminished subtypes of democracies which could not be demonstrated so far. – Reproduced
773			_aInternational Politic al Science Review
906			_aDEMOCRACY
942			_cAR