NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the service of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with the general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
The work that provided the basis for this volume was supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 90-64155
International Standard Book Number 0-309-04441-3
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Ave, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
S-307
Printed in the United States of America
WORKSHOP SPEAKERS
CHARLES TILLY (Workshop Cochair),
New School for Social Research
SIDNEY VERBA (Workshop Cochair),
Harvard University
ROBERT BIANCHI,
University of Chicago
MICHAEL BRATTON,
Michigan State University
MICHAEL CLOUGH,
Council on Foreign Relations, New York, N.Y.
LOUIS GOODMAN,
American University
SELIG HARRISON,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, D.C.
TERRY L. KARL,
Stanford University
CAROL LANCASTER,
Georgetown University
JANE MANSBRIDGE,
Northwestern University
MICHAEL MEZEY,
De Paul University
JOHN NORTON MOORE,
University of Virginia
DANIEL NELSON,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, D.C.
JOAN NELSON,
Overseas Development Council, Washington, D.C.
ERIC NORDLINGER,
Brown University
PEARL ROBINSON,
Tufts University
PHILIPPE SCHMITTER,
Stanford University
SIDNEY WEINTRAUB,
University of Texas
GARY WYNIA,
Carleton College
COMMISSION ON BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES AND EDUCATION
ROBERT MCC. ADAMS (Chair),
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
ANN L. BROWN,
University of California, Berkeley
DAVID K. COHEN,
Michigan State University
PHILIP E. CONVERSE,
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, Calif.
ARTHUR S. GOLDBERGER,
University of Wisconsin
ROBERT M. HAUSER,
University of Wisconsin
JOSEPH B. KADANE,
Carnegie Mellon University
EDWARD O. LAUMANN,
University of Chicago
ALVIN M. LIBERMAN,
Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Conn.
STEWART MACAULAY,
University of Wisconsin Law School
DANIEL MCFADDEN,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
DAVID MECHANIC,
Rutgers University
WILLIAM A. MORRILL,
Mathtech, Inc., Princeton, N.J.
FRANKLIN D. RAINES,
Lazard Freres, New York, N.Y.
W. RICHARD SCOTT,
Stanford University
JEROME E. SINGER,
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
JOHN A. SWETS,
BBN Laboratories Incorporated, Cambridge, Mass.
RICHARD F. THOMPSON,
University of Southern California
DAVID A. WISE,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.
Contents
Preface
The recent movements toward democracy in many areas of the world have brought the United States a growing number of requests for assistance from governments that are undergoing transitions to new, more open forms of society. Finding the appropriate U.S. role requires addressing complex and sometimes controversial questions: Can we identify the major elements that characterize effective democratic societies? Can we identify the critical steps necessary to support the transition to such societies? What are the major threats to achieving and maintaining democratic societies? What can the U.S. government, and particularly A.I.D., do to help countries move toward a more enduring type of democracy?
The intellectual and policy challenges posed by these questions formed the core of a workshop, “The Transition to Democracy,” held by the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (CBASSE) of the National Research Council with the sponsorship of the Agency for International Development. A.I.D. is in the midst of rethinking its basic strategies, exploring how its programs can most effectively foster and support the development of democratic political and economic processes and institutions. This workshop was an important part of the process of developing new “democratic initiatives.”
Antonio Gayoso, Agency Director of the Human Resources Directorate of A.I.D.'s Bureau of Science and Technology, conceived the workshop and brought the idea to CBASSE. CBASSE invited some 20 experts who represent a variety of fields--including political science, sociology, economics, and legal studies--as well as people actively involved in programs to foster democracy in various parts of the world, for a 2-1/2 day meeting in October 1990. The workshop was organized around a series of plenary sessions and small group discussions. The plenary sessions provided the opportunity to discuss general issues in the transition to democracy. The small groups permitted participants to explore these
concepts through discussions of specific institutions, processes, and problems central to transitions, and also to examine how well these ideas applied to particular regions and countries.
These proceedings include the introductory remarks from A.I.D. officials, edited transcripts of each of the plenary talks, summaries of the plenary discussions, and summaries of the reports of each of the working sessions. Neither CBASSE nor A.I.D. expected consensus among the speakers and participants, nor did they set out to discover a model of a “democracy” that would work in the same way in every society. These issues are the subject of intense, continuing debate and redefinition. Nonetheless, we believe that the workshop identified important areas of agreement and illuminated the major issues and arguments that should be part of any attempt to understand democracy and to develop policies to promote it.
The commission wishes to express its gratitude to staff members Jo Husbands and Joseph Masteika for developing the workshop and for producing these proceedings and to Mary Thomas who worked with them in planning and organizing the meeting. Maryellen Fisher helped prepare the proceedings, Elaine McGarraugh edited and produccd the final manuscript, and Eugenia Grohman provided editorial supervision and good advice. On the A.I.D. side, Robert McClusky devoted time and tremendous intellectual energy to the design and development of the workshop, while John O'Donnell, Eric Chetwynd, and Gerry Britan contributed throughout to its successful evolution. Without their efforts, the meeting would neither have occurred nor succeeded.
Special thanks are due to cochairs Charles Tilly and Sidney Verba, whose wise counsel throughout the planning process and stellar leadership at the workshop helped foster the candid and cordial tone of the discussions and draw out the key issues. Finally, the workshop participants deserve special thanks for coming to Washington on relatively short notice to give talks and lead working sessions that we believe provided genuine insights and built important bridges between scholars and practitioners who share a common concern for finding ways to nurture and support the new movements toward democracy around the world.
Robert MCC. Adams, Chair
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
