Keywords
topology of policymaking
policy field
political systems
policy diffusion
politics
How to Cite
Abstract
The objective scope of the analysis performed in the text encompasses selected aspects of policy in its topological dimension. The space of policy is understood as both a theoretical construct (a policy field) and relations between the characteristics of political actors and their special kind of geographical co-existence. The following have been recognised as essential characteristics of policymaking: (1) electoral process and pluralism, (2) functioning of government, (3) political participation, (4) political culture and (5) civil liberties. These features can become an object of analysis in the assessment of democratic and authoritarian tendencies in selected countries. The text uses two statistical methods of multidimensional comparative analysis (Ward’s method and k-means method), apart from which use has been made of basic descriptive statistics and a comparative analysis of the values of the parameters of political characteristics. A selection of 40 European countries (EU-28 and 12 other countries) have been subjected to a statistical analysis according to the 2018 data. The main goal of the analysis is to connect facts and characteristics attributed to policy with a specific geographical area. In order to elaborate the objective scope of the research problem, the following research questions have been presented in the text: (1) Which of the characteristics of policy will determine the division of state entities according to a special type of clusters?, (2) Will political characteristics determine the division of particular state entities according to a special type of geographical division? The addressed research questions have been related to the hypotheses subjected to verification in the text.
References
Analiza skupień (2019), https://www.statsoft.pl/textbook/stathome_stat.html?http%3A%2F%2Fwww.statsoft.pl%2Ftextbook%2Fstcluan.html, 24.08.2019.
Almond G. A., Verba S. (1963), The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Ambrosio T. (2010), Constructing a Framework of Authoritarian Diffusion: Concepts, Dynamics, and Future Research, “International Studies Perspectives”, vol. 11, issue 4.
Antoszewski A. (1998), Współczesne teorie demokracji, in: Studia z teorii polityki, vol. II, eds. A. W. Jabłoński, L. Sobkowiak, UWr, Wrocław.
Antoszewski A. (1999), Reżim polityczny, in: Studia z teorii polityki, vol. I, eds. A. W. Jabłoński, L. Sobkowiak, UWr, Wrocław.
Bank A., Weyland K. (eds.) (2018), Authoritarian Diffusion and Cooperation: Interests vs. Ideology, Routledge, London.
Bennett C. J. (1991), What is policy convergence and what causes it?, “British Journal of Political Science”, vol. 21, no. 2.
von Beyme K. (1992), Die politischen Theorien der Gegenwart: Eine Einführung, Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen.
Brinks D., Coppedge M. (2006), Diffusion Is No Illusion, “Comparative Political Studies”, vol. 39, no. 4.
Democracy Index 2018: Me too? Political participation, protest and democracy (2019), The Economist Intelligence Unit, Londin–New York.
Formisano R. P. (2001), The Concept of Political Culture, “The Journal of Interdisciplinary History”, vol. 31, no. 3.
Gel’man V., Lankina T. (2008), Authoritarian versus democratic diffusions: Explaining institutional choices in Russia’s local government, “Post-Soviet Affairs”, vol. 24, no. 1.
Gleditsch K. S., Ward M. D. (2006), Diffusion and the International Context of Democratization, “International Organization”, vol. 60, issue 4.
Górniak J. (1998), Analiza czynnikowa analiza głównych składowych, „ASK”, no. 7.
Hall C. S., Lindzey G. (2002), Teorie osobowości, PWN, Warszawa.
Held D. (2010), Modele demokracji, UJ, Kraków.
Hobman E. V., Walker I. (2015), Stasis and change: social psychological insights into social-ecological resilience, “Ecology and Society”, vol. 20, no. 1.
Jabłoński A. W. (1998), Kultura polityczna i jej przemiany, in: Studia z teorii polityki, vol. II, eds. A. W. Jabłoński, L. Sobkowiak, UWr, Wrocław.
Kaufman L., Rousseeuw P. J. (2005), Finding Groups in Data An Introduction to Cluster Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey.
Kopstein J. S., Reilly D. A. (2000), Geographic diffusion and the transformation of the postcommunist world, “World Politics”, vol. 53, no. 1.
Lahire B. (2015),The limits of the field: elements for a theory of the social differentiation of activities, in: Bourdieu’s Theory of Social Fields. Concepts and Applications, eds. M. Hilgers, E. Mangez, Routledge, New York.
Lankina T., Libman A., Obydenkova A. (2016), Authoritarian and Democratic Diffusion in Post-Communist Regions, “Comparative Political Studies”, vol. 49, no. 12.
Lewin K. (1935), Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers, McGraw-Hill Pub., New York–London.
Lewin K. (1936), Principles Of Topological Psychology, McGraw-Hill Pub., New York–London.
Lewin K. (1944), Dynamics of group action, “Educational Leadership”, vol. 1, no. 4.
Lewin K. (1947), Group Decision and Social Change, in: Readings in Social Psychology, eds. E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, E. L. Hartley, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.
Lewin K. (1948), Resolving Social Conflicts: selected papers on group dynamics, Harper & Brothers, New York.
Lewin K. (1951), Field Theory in Social Science: selected theoretical papers, Harper & Brothers, New York.
Lewin K., Lippitt R., White R. K. (1939), Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created “social climates”, “Journal of Social Psychology”, vol. 10, no. 2.
Lipset S. M. (1959), Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy, “American Political Science Review”, vol. 53, no. 1.
Lipset S. M. (1960), Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics, Doubleday & Comp., New York.
Lipset S. M. (1994), The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited, “American Sociological Review”, vol. 59, no. 1.
Lipset S. M., Seong K. R., Torres J. C. (1993), A comparative analysis of the social requisites of democracy, “International Social Science Journal”, no. 136.
Martin J. L. (2009), Co to jest teoria pola?, in: Nowe perspektywy teorii socjologicznej, eds. A. Manterys, J. Mucha, Nomos, Kraków.
Mey H. (1972), Field-theory: a study of its application in the social sciences, Routledge, Kegan Paul Ltd., London.
Mirkin B. (2005), Clustering for Data Mining A Data Recovery Approach, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton–London–New York–Singapore.
Most B. A., Starr H. (1990), Theoretical and logical issues in the study of international diffusion, “Journal of Theoretical Politics”, vol. 2, issue 4.
Olar R.-G. (2019), Do they know something we don’t? Diffusion of repression in authoritarian regimes, “Journal of Peace Research”, vol. 56, issue 5.
O’Loughlin J., Ward M. D., Lofdahl C. L., Cohen J. S., Brown D. S., Reilly D., Gleditsch K. S., Shin M. (1998), The Diffusion of Democracy, 1946–1994, “Annals of the Association of American Geographers”, vol. 88, no. 4.
Przeworski A., Alvarez M., Cheibub J. A., Limongi F. (1996), What makes democracies endure?, “Journal of Democracy”, vol. 7, no. 1.
Przeworski A., Limongi F. (1993), Political Regimes and Economic Growth, “Journal of Economic Perspectives”, vol. 7, no. 3.
Przeworski A., Limongi F. (1997), Modernization: Theories and Facts, “World Politics”, vol. 49, no. 2.
Roszko-Wójtowicz E. (2014), Analiza skupień w ocenie warunków pracy w krajach Unii Europejskiej, „Wiadomości Statystyczne”, nr 11.
Shipan C. R., Volden C. (2008), The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion, “American Journal of Political Science”, vol. 52, no. 4.
Schumpeter J. A. (1994), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Routledge, London–New York.
Shapiro I. (2006), Stan teorii demokracji, PWN, Warszawa.
Sokołowski A. (2002), Metody stosowane w data mining, https://media.statsoft.pl/_old_dnn/downloads/metody_stosowane_w_data_mining.pdf, 24.08.2019.
Stanisz A. (2007), Przystępny kurs statystyki z zastosowaniem STSTISTICA PL na przykładach z medycyny, vol. 3: Analizy wielowymiarowe, StatSoft, Kraków.
Weyland K. (2005), Theories of Policy Diffusion: Lessons from Latin American Pension Reform, “World Politics”, vol. 57, issue 2.