2015Arab Studies QuarterlyOpen access

Exclusionary and Non-Consensual Transitions Versus Inclusive and Consensual Democratizations: The Cases of Egypt and Tunisia

Inmaculada Szmolka

Open full text 12 citations

Abstract

The article analyzes the democratic transitions in Tunisia and Egypt, after the so-called “Arab Spring.” The working hypothesis is that the model of transition influences the result of democratization processes. The article is organized in three sections. The first one puts forward a theoretical and methodological framework, which includes a definition and classification of political regimes, a typology of the processes of political change and suggests models of democratic transition. Second, the models of transition in Tunisia and Egypt are compared in terms of four analytical dimensions: leadership of the transition, competition and interaction between political actors, consensus over the transition process, and the popular mobilization and the participation of the civil society. The third section assesses the outcomes of the research and concludes that the exclusion of political forces and the intervention of non-accountable actors can determine the result of democratic transitions (Egypt). In contrast, the agreements between political actors and the concessions of a predominant party can bring about a successful transition, even in a polarized scenario (Tunisia).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The article analyzes the democratic transitions in Tunisia and Egypt, after the so-called “Arab Spring.” The working hypothesis is that the model of transition influences the result of democratization processes. The article is organized in three sections. The first one puts forward a theoretical and methodological framework, which includes a definition and classification of political regimes, a typology of the processes of political change and suggests models of democratic transition. Second, the models of transition in Tunisia and Egypt are compared in terms of four analytical dimensions: leadership of the transition, competition and interaction between political actors, consensus over the transition process, and the popular mobilization and the participation of the civil society. The third section assesses the outcomes of the research and concludes that the exclusion of political forces and the intervention of non-accountable actors can determine the result of democratic transitions (Egypt). In contrast, the agreements between political actors and the concessions of a predominant party can bring about a successful transition, even in a polarized scenario (Tunisia).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The article analyzes the democratic transitions in Tunisia and Egypt, after the so-called “Arab Spring.” The working hypothesis is that the model of transition influences the result of democratization processes. The article is organized in three sections. The first one puts forward a theoretical and methodological framework, which includes a definition and classification of political regimes, a typology of the processes of political change and suggests models of democratic transition. Second, the models of transition in Tunisia and Egypt are compared in terms of four analytical dimensions: leadership of the transition, competition and interaction between political actors, consensus over the transition process, and the popular mobilization and the participation of the civil society. The third section assesses the outcomes of the research and concludes that the exclusion of political forces and the intervention of non-accountable actors can determine the result of democratic transitions (Egypt). In contrast, the agreements between political actors and the concessions of a predominant party can bring about a successful transition, even in a polarized scenario (Tunisia).

Key concepts: Democratization, Politics, Democracy, Transition (genetics), Typology, Civil society, Political economy, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Exclusionary and Non-Consensual Transitions Versus Inclusive and Consensual Democratizations: The Cases of Egypt and Tunisia — Research Paper | ScholarLens