Popular in Social Sciences

Books

City Time: On Being Sentenced to Rikers Island

Independent Scholar David A. Campbell

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Economics

Gender and Economics

University of California Santa Barbara Shelly Lundberg

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

Banks and Policy Organisations

Greening the financial sector

European Investment Bank Matteo Ferrazzi

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Culture and Society

Carceral Entrapments: Views from the Prison/Street Interface in India

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Mahuya Bandyopadhya

Democratic commitment in the Middle East: a conjoint analysis

View more insights in Social Sciences - Political Science

View more figures from Chapman University

View the page of Hannah Ridge

Read the Study

Hannah M. Ridge uses a conjoint analysis to show that citizens support democratic institutions, as well as favoring an effective welfare state and a state religion.

Image courtesy of interviewee. January 11, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video discusses public attitudes toward democracy in the Middle East, emphasizing a significant and robust public support for democratic governance. Despite concerns that this support may be superficial or contingent upon economic performance, findings indicate that citizens genuinely desire democracy, alongside thoughts on economic stability and effective governance.

The author conducted research using data from the Arab Barometer and their own surveys, revealing that while support for democratic institutions is present, populations are also tolerant of various regime types if those can deliver desired societal outcomes. The findings suggest that the drive for democracy exists in conjunction with the need for economic security and functioning public services.

The research argues for a broader understanding of democratization—one that goes beyond merely establishing electoral systems. It highlights the necessity of developing systems that function well and are responsive to public needs. Overall, the conclusion emphasizes that citizens in the Middle East desire democracy and representative government but also stress the importance of economic stability and addressing immediate societal needs.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.035 --> 00:01.245
What we've actually seen is

00:01.245 --> 00:04.525
what looks like very robust support in certain ways

00:04.825 --> 00:05.965
for democracy or

00:05.965 --> 00:07.925
what we call democracy and political science.

00:07.985 --> 00:10.565
In the Middle East, we had this great concern

00:10.585 --> 00:14.245
for a long time that the support was somehow hypothetical

00:14.245 --> 00:16.205
or hypocritical because there wasn't seeing a lot

00:16.205 --> 00:19.285
of democratization after events like the Arab Spring.

00:19.785 --> 00:21.805
And what we actually find in practice is

00:21.805 --> 00:23.965
that there is public support for democracy,

00:24.545 --> 00:26.285
but it's not public support only

00:26.385 --> 00:27.885
for democratic institutions.

00:28.185 --> 00:29.845
We know there's other things that people want

00:29.905 --> 00:32.485
and we know there's other regime types people would tolerate

00:33.025 --> 00:34.405
if they thought that it could get them the kind

00:34.405 --> 00:35.805
of society that they deserve.

00:36.465 --> 00:39.725
And so we also know that all public support

00:39.745 --> 00:42.405
for democracy is about pushing back against the things

00:42.405 --> 00:44.965
that are making it harder to democratize in these countries.

00:45.305 --> 00:47.725
And these are phenomenon we specifically associate

00:47.725 --> 00:49.405
with the Middle East, but they're not just

00:49.405 --> 00:50.645
Middle Eastern concerns.

00:50.935 --> 00:53.285
We've seen a lot of interest in publics

00:53.285 --> 00:55.525
around the world in support, for instance,

00:55.745 --> 00:57.085
in illiberal regimes

00:57.085 --> 00:59.165
or more authoritarian regimes if we think

00:59.165 --> 01:01.165
that they can deliver economic security.

01:01.785 --> 01:03.685
And so it's not just a situation

01:03.685 --> 01:05.245
where the Middle East doesn't have democracy

01:05.465 --> 01:07.205
and it's unique in that phenomenon.

01:07.595 --> 01:10.605
It's a situation where we see people all over the world

01:10.625 --> 01:12.805
who wanna see themselves represented in government

01:12.805 --> 01:14.405
and they wanna know their governments, hear them,

01:15.225 --> 01:17.565
but that different regions have different circumstances

01:17.635 --> 01:18.845
that have made that more

01:18.845 --> 01:20.765
or less viable for them historically.

01:21.325 --> 01:23.725
I originally drew in developing this project,

01:23.735 --> 01:25.325
which is an offshoot of a book project

01:25.395 --> 01:28.245
that I've just had come out in September looking at a lot

01:28.245 --> 01:30.325
of data from the Arab Barometer Data Set,

01:30.325 --> 01:32.405
which asks citizens in the Middle East a lot

01:32.405 --> 01:34.925
of questions they have about, democracy.

01:35.345 --> 01:36.925
That's how they translate it into English,

01:36.925 --> 01:39.245
but they're really asking about the word deia.

01:39.545 --> 01:41.205
And so I started wondering what it means

01:41.225 --> 01:44.045
to ask people about a deia system of government.

01:44.385 --> 01:47.045
And I worked from that into developing my own surveys

01:47.045 --> 01:48.845
that I did using U Gov's Middle East panel

01:49.305 --> 01:52.485
to ask them about their attitudes towards multiple regime

01:52.485 --> 01:55.805
types and compared that with what we saw for support for

01:56.465 --> 01:58.485
tia, as well as support for a system

01:58.485 --> 02:00.965
where multiple political parties compete in elections,

02:01.095 --> 02:02.205
which is what we really think

02:02.205 --> 02:04.445
of when we talk about democracy and political science.

02:04.905 --> 02:07.245
And I found that while there is majority support in many

02:07.245 --> 02:10.045
cases for this selected government, it's not as high

02:10.045 --> 02:11.325
as support for Democrat.

02:11.555 --> 02:14.965
Because what Democrat really is, it's a system of government

02:14.965 --> 02:15.965
that works for the people.

02:16.395 --> 02:19.005
It's about representing what the people want

02:19.005 --> 02:20.485
and what the people need from their government.

02:20.585 --> 02:23.045
So if we think of democracy, less about the elections

02:23.045 --> 02:25.685
and more about a system that is by the people of the people

02:25.705 --> 02:29.485
and for the people, then Democrat is really a government

02:29.485 --> 02:33.125
that's for the people, even if it doesn't necessarily mean

02:33.125 --> 02:35.165
that every leader in every institution is

02:35.545 --> 02:37.125
by the people at any given moment.

02:37.425 --> 02:38.965
So when we look at the findings,

02:38.965 --> 02:41.845
particularly in the conjoin experiment, what we're seeing is

02:41.845 --> 02:43.245
that as much as we were afraid, right,

02:43.245 --> 02:45.125
that people were only telling us they liked democracy,

02:45.275 --> 02:47.645
that they only liked democracy in terms

02:47.845 --> 02:49.765
of elected government when it was convenient,

02:50.155 --> 02:51.685
what we actually see is no matter

02:51.705 --> 02:53.205
how I described things like the role

02:53.205 --> 02:54.365
of Islam in the society,

02:54.425 --> 02:57.285
or how I described it in terms of the economic deliverables,

02:57.665 --> 02:58.725
we were seeing this

02:58.725 --> 03:01.645
Interested in elected government in the public.

03:02.025 --> 03:04.925
And in fact that interest in elected government wasn't

03:04.925 --> 03:07.805
conditional on their delivering any sort of economic return,

03:07.895 --> 03:10.125
which is what we'd always sort of feared was happening, was

03:10.125 --> 03:11.805
that democracy was only good as long

03:11.805 --> 03:13.005
as it produced a strong economy.

03:13.505 --> 03:14.925
In fact, we see that that interest

03:14.945 --> 03:16.165
in government is still there.

03:16.635 --> 03:18.725
However, what it also means is that almost

03:18.725 --> 03:21.285
as powerful a drive, not quite as powerful as democracy,

03:21.545 --> 03:24.405
but almost is this idea of a society

03:24.405 --> 03:27.125
with a functioning economy, particularly a situation

03:27.125 --> 03:28.605
where people have jobs and food.

03:29.305 --> 03:30.525
And so I wouldn't say

03:30.525 --> 03:33.045
that these are contingent demands, but that they're demands.

03:33.045 --> 03:35.485
We have to think about when we think about what it means

03:35.745 --> 03:38.925
to create a viable and enduring democracy anywhere.

03:39.505 --> 03:41.525
So we focus so much in political science

03:41.545 --> 03:44.725
and really in public policy on ideas like democratization.

03:45.345 --> 03:47.365
But I'm starting to think of this more in terms of

03:47.365 --> 03:49.805
what I'm calling democratization, which is the

03:49.805 --> 03:51.725
how we're gonna create whole states that work,

03:51.865 --> 03:55.645
not just electoral institutions that work once or twice,

03:56.105 --> 03:57.565
but falter when there's a problem.

03:58.105 --> 03:59.725
How do we make enduring regimes?

03:59.745 --> 04:01.885
And that's not just an institutional question,

04:01.905 --> 04:03.925
and it's not just a public opinion question,

04:04.395 --> 04:05.965
it's an outcomes question as well.

04:06.305 --> 04:07.845
My broader research really is on

04:07.845 --> 04:09.005
public opinion on democracy.

04:09.265 --> 04:11.965
So I look at either in countries that have democracies

04:12.545 --> 04:15.205
on when they're satisfied with the democracy that they have,

04:15.585 --> 04:18.445
and in situations where people don't have a democracy, under

04:18.445 --> 04:20.085
what conditions do those people want

04:20.085 --> 04:21.365
democracy for their country?

04:21.465 --> 04:23.405
Or when do they look to other regime types?

04:23.985 --> 04:27.485
And so the book draws on a lot of data from the Arab world.

04:27.715 --> 04:29.045
It's called defining democracy,

04:29.095 --> 04:31.005
democratic commitment in the Arab world.

04:32.225 --> 04:34.725
And again, I find that there is strong interest in

04:34.725 --> 04:36.005
democratic institutions.

04:36.515 --> 04:39.205
It's just that that's facing off with a tolerance

04:39.225 --> 04:41.205
for many other potential regime types.

04:41.825 --> 04:43.925
So it's not that there's only one path forward,

04:44.865 --> 04:46.125
and that's true around the world.

04:46.225 --> 04:47.925
No country has only one path forward.

04:48.555 --> 04:51.445
It's just that what these alternative paths look like is

04:51.445 --> 04:53.205
something that's very context dependent.

04:54.055 --> 04:55.635
Uh, the key takeaway is

04:55.665 --> 04:57.955
that people in the Middle East are telling us

04:57.955 --> 05:00.035
that they want democracy for their countries.

05:00.375 --> 05:03.155
And that even in a situation like a Conduent experiment

05:03.155 --> 05:05.555
where they're given a full avenue to secretly tell me

05:05.555 --> 05:08.115
that they were lying, right, that they don't have any way

05:08.225 --> 05:10.555
that I can check on them being honest and a conduit.

05:10.555 --> 05:12.515
And they have every way to cover over that preference.

05:12.695 --> 05:14.955
And they could have revealed secret authoritarianism.

05:14.985 --> 05:17.555
They don't. They keep revealing a democratic interest.

05:18.185 --> 05:20.555
It's just that it's not only interest in democracy

05:20.695 --> 05:22.555
to the exclusion of all other concerns,

05:23.155 --> 05:26.275
economic concerns are still vital considerations

05:26.335 --> 05:27.275
for people in this region.

00:00 - What we've actually seen is what looks like very robust support in certain ways for democracy or what we call democracy and political science. In the Middle East, we had this great concern for a long time that the support was somehow hypothetical

00:14 - or hypocritical because there wasn't seeing a lot of democratization after events like the Arab Spring. And what we actually find in practice is that there is public support for democracy, but it's not public support only for democratic institutions. We know there's other things that people want and we know there's other regime types people would tolerate if they thought that it could get them the kind of society that they deserve.

00:36 - And so we also know that all public support for democracy is about pushing back against the things that are making it harder to democratize in these countries. And these are phenomenon we specifically associate with the Middle East, but they're not just Middle Eastern concerns. We've seen a lot of interest in publics around the world in support, for instance, in illiberal regimes or more authoritarian regimes if we think

00:59 - that they can deliver economic security. And so it's not just a situation where the Middle East doesn't have democracy and it's unique in that phenomenon. It's a situation where we see people all over the world who wanna see themselves represented in government and they wanna know their governments, hear them, but that different regions have different circumstances that have made that more or less viable for them historically.

01:21 - I originally drew in developing this project, which is an offshoot of a book project that I've just had come out in September looking at a lot of data from the Arab Barometer Data Set, which asks citizens in the Middle East a lot of questions they have about, democracy. That's how they translate it into English, but they're really asking about the word deia. And so I started wondering what it means to ask people about a deia system of government.

01:44 - And I worked from that into developing my own surveys that I did using U Gov's Middle East panel to ask them about their attitudes towards multiple regime types and compared that with what we saw for support for tia, as well as support for a system where multiple political parties compete in elections, which is what we really think of when we talk about democracy and political science. And I found that while there is majority support in many cases for this selected government, it's not as high

02:10 - as support for Democrat. Because what Democrat really is, it's a system of government that works for the people. It's about representing what the people want and what the people need from their government. So if we think of democracy, less about the elections and more about a system that is by the people of the people and for the people, then Democrat is really a government that's for the people, even if it doesn't necessarily mean that every leader in every institution is

02:35 - by the people at any given moment. So when we look at the findings, particularly in the conjoin experiment, what we're seeing is that as much as we were afraid, right, that people were only telling us they liked democracy, that they only liked democracy in terms of elected government when it was convenient, what we actually see is no matter how I described things like the role of Islam in the society,

02:54 - or how I described it in terms of the economic deliverables, we were seeing this Interested in elected government in the public. And in fact that interest in elected government wasn't conditional on their delivering any sort of economic return, which is what we'd always sort of feared was happening, was that democracy was only good as long as it produced a strong economy. In fact, we see that that interest in government is still there.

03:16 - However, what it also means is that almost as powerful a drive, not quite as powerful as democracy, but almost is this idea of a society with a functioning economy, particularly a situation where people have jobs and food. And so I wouldn't say that these are contingent demands, but that they're demands. We have to think about when we think about what it means to create a viable and enduring democracy anywhere. So we focus so much in political science

03:41 - and really in public policy on ideas like democratization. But I'm starting to think of this more in terms of what I'm calling democratization, which is the how we're gonna create whole states that work, not just electoral institutions that work once or twice, but falter when there's a problem. How do we make enduring regimes? And that's not just an institutional question, and it's not just a public opinion question, it's an outcomes question as well.

04:06 - My broader research really is on public opinion on democracy. So I look at either in countries that have democracies on when they're satisfied with the democracy that they have, and in situations where people don't have a democracy, under what conditions do those people want democracy for their country? Or when do they look to other regime types? And so the book draws on a lot of data from the Arab world. It's called defining democracy,

04:29 - democratic commitment in the Arab world. And again, I find that there is strong interest in democratic institutions. It's just that that's facing off with a tolerance for many other potential regime types. So it's not that there's only one path forward, and that's true around the world. No country has only one path forward. It's just that what these alternative paths look like is something that's very context dependent.

04:54 - the key takeaway is that people in the Middle East are telling us that they want democracy for their countries. And that even in a situation like a Conduent experiment where they're given a full avenue to secretly tell me that they were lying, right, that they don't have any way that I can check on them being honest and a conduit. And they have every way to cover over that preference. And they could have revealed secret authoritarianism. They don't. They keep revealing a democratic interest.

05:18 - It's just that it's not only interest in democracy to the exclusion of all other concerns, economic concerns are still vital considerations for people in this region.

Faculti AI can make mistakes