Litenhetens odemokratier : en karttläggning och beskrivning

Authors

• Dag Anckar

Abstract

Research on democratic government suggests that small states are more likely to be democratic than large states. However, smallness does not always transform into democratic conduct, and this study is about a shrinking group of non-democratic microstates, democracy status being determined on the basis of Freedom House ratings. cases of recent non-democratization like Fiji and Solomon Islands notwithstanding, the on-going democratization of the globe is visible also in the microstate universe: whereas there were 20 small non-democracies in 1986, they numbered to 14 in 1996 and 2006. a core group of small-sized non-democratic government is formed by 10 microstates which are classified as non-democracies at each of these three measure points. an examination of this group reveals, first, that the bulk of the states are “large” microstates, the size factor, then, operating against the democracy blessings usually inherent in small size; second, that the colonial background of the group members has not invited efforts at democratization, and, third, that matters of heritage and tradition have in several cases formed obstacles to democratic breakthrough.