Covid-19 Pandemisi, Siyasi Rejimler ve Liberal Demokrasi

Year 2021, Volume: 17 Issue: Pandemi Özel Sayısı, 3832 - 3868, 30.04.2021

Mehtap Söyler , Mustafa Agah Tekindal

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.885216

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu makale, siyasi rejimler ve liberal demokrasilerin Covid-19 pandemisi ile etkileşimini çeşitli yaklaşımlar ve tekniklerle araştırmıştır. İlk olarak, 2019-2021 arasında Web of Science veri tabanında taranan Covid-19 pandemisi ve siyasi rejimlerle ilgili çalışmalar bibliyometrik analizle incelenmiştir. Araştırma alanına dair kavram haritasında demokrasinin merkezi ve yön verici kavram olduğu; kutuplaşma, toplumsal cinsiyet, demokratik açıktan oluşan üç konu kümesinin farklı ölçüde kendi içinde yoğunlaşmış, gelişmiş olsalar da birbirine yakın derecede merkezileştiği, diğer konularla bağlantı kurduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sankey Diyagramı ABD adresli eserlerin literatürün oluşmasında etkili olduğunu göstermiştir. İkinci olarak makale, bibliyometrik analiz sonucundan yola çıkarak pandemi ve demokrasi etkileşimine odaklanmış, ekonomik gelişmişlik düzeyleri yüksek liberal demokrasiler olan G7 ülkelerinin pandemiyle mücadelesini mercek altına almıştır. Bayesci (önsel) meta-analizde Freedom House Endeksi verileriyle Dünya Sağlık Örgütü’nün pandemi vaka ve vefat sayılarından oluşan birliktelik modeli orta düzeyde uyumludur, etkileşim gücü yüksektir. Meta-analizin sonraki çalışmalar için temel oluşturabileceği öngörüsüne ulaşılmıştır. Son olarak, G7 ülkelerinde demokrasinin pandemi sınavı değerlendirilmiştir. Demokrasinin Çeşitleri Projesi’nin Pandemiyle Bağlantılı İhlaller ve Gerileme endeksleri incelenmiş, sadece ABD’de epey ihlal kaydedildiği ve demokraside gerilemenin yüksek düzeyde olduğu saptanmıştır. Bulgular ışığında, siyasi rejimlerle pandeminin kesiştiği alandaki çalışmaların takip edilmesi ve endekslerdeki kavramsallaştırmanın değişen koşullar uyarınca gözden geçirilmesi önerilmiştir.

Keywords

Covid-19, liberal demokrasi, demokrasi endeksleri, Bayesci önsel meta-analiz, bibliyometrik analiz, siyasi rejimler, endeksler

Covid-19 Pandemic, Political Regimes, and Liberal Democracy

Abstract

This article aims at studying the interaction between Covid-19 pandemic, political regimes and liberal democracies through diverse methods. Firstly, it conducts bibliometric analysis of works on the Covid-19 pandemic and political regimes indexed in Web of Science dataset between 2019 and 2021. The conceptual map on this research area demonstrates that democracy is the central and motor theme. Three conceptual sets comprising polarization, gender, and democratic deficit share similar levels of centrality or external links to other concepts, despite their differing levels of density or internal links. The Sankey diagram shows that authors from institutions based in the USA were influential in the making of this research area. Secondly, since democracy emerges as the motor theme in the bibliometric analysis, this article focuses on the interaction between the pandemic and democracy. It sheds light on the struggle against the pandemic in G7 countries, liberal democracies with high levels of economic development. Bayesian (prior) meta-analysis examines the association between the level of Covid-19 cases as well as deaths according to the World Health Organization and the aggregate level of political rights and civil liberties according to Freedom House Index. The association model resulting from meta-analysis indicates medium-level goodness of fit and high-level effect size, which leads to the prediction that this analysis could be a basis for further studies. Lastly, this article critically assesses G7 countries’ democratic performance at the “pandemic exam” by evaluating the Pandemic Violations and Backsliding Indices of Varieties of Democracy Project. The USA is the only country with some, or considerable violations of democratic standards and high levels of pandemic backsliding compared to other G7 countries. In the light of these findings, it is suggested that research at the intersection of political regimes and the pandemic should be tracked and the conceptualization embedded in indices should be revised in accordance with changing conditions.

Keywords

Covid-19, political regimes, liberal democracy, bibliometric analysis, bibliometric analysis, Bayesian prior-meta-analysis, indices

References

• Acemoğlu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., ve Robinson, J. A. (2019). Democracy does cause growth Suresh Naidu Pascual Restrepo. Journal of Political Economy, 127(1), 47–100. Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model ıdentification. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 19(6), 716-724.
• Aria, M., ve Cuccurullo, C. (2017). An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. 10 Nisan 2020 tarihinde https://www.bibliometrix.org/vignettes/Introduction_to_bibliometrix.html adresinden erişildi.
• Aria, M., ve Cuccurullo, C. (2020). Bibliometrix. 10 Nisan 2020 tarihinde https://www.bibliometrix.org/vignettes/Introduction_to_bibliometrix.html adresinden erişildi.
• Aria, M., Misuraca, M., ve Spano, M. (2020). Mapping the evolution of social research and data science on 30 years of Social Indicators Research. Social Indicators Research, 149, 803–831.
• Benedikt Frey, C., Chen, C., ve Presidente, G. (2020). Democracy, culture, and contagion: Political regimes and countries responsiveness to covid-19. Covid Economics, 18, 1–20.
• Bol, D., Giani, M., Blais, A., ve Loewen, P. J. (2020). The effect of COVID-19 lockdowns on political support: Some good news for democracy? European Journal of Political Research, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475- 6765.12401. 12 Aralık 2020 tarihinde https://ejpr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12401 adresinden erişildi.
• Bolstad, W. M., ve Curran, J. M. (2016). Introduction to bayesian statistics. New Jersey: Wiley.
• Bühlmann, M., Merkel, W., Müller, L., ve Weßels, B. (2012). The democracy barometer: A new instrument to measure the quality of democracy and its potential for comparative research. European Political Science, 11(4), 519–536.
• Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., ve Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22, 155–205.
• Crouch, C. (2004). Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Crozier, M. J., Huntington, S. P., ve Watanuki, J. (1975). The crisis of democracy: Report on the governability of democracies to the trilateral commission. New York.
• Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• DerSimonian, R., ve Laird, N. M. (2015). Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 45, 139–145.
• Druckman, J. N., ve Sharrow, E. A. (2020). Public opinion, crisis, and vulnerable populations: The case of title ix and covid-19. Politics and Gender, 16(4).
• Duval, S. J., ve Tweedie, R. L. (2000). Trim and fill: a simple funnel‐plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta‐analysis. Biometrics, 56(2), 455–463.
• Edgell, A. B., Lührmann, A., Seraphine, F., Maerz, J. L., Grahn, S., Good God, A. F., Lundstedt, M., Natsika, N., Kolvani, P., Bederke, P., Pillai, S., Kaiser, S., Alijla, A., Fernandes, T., Tung, H., Wilson, M. and Lindberg, S. I. (2020). Pandemic backsliding: Democracy during covid-19 (pandem). Version 5. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute, 5 Ocak 2021 tarihinde www.v-dem.net/en/our-work/research-projects/pandemic-backsliding/ adresinden erişildi.
• Freedom House. (2020). Democracy under lockdown. the impact of covid-19 on the global struggle for freedom. 9 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-report/2020/democracy-under- lockdown adresinden erişildi.
• Freedom House. (2021a). Freedom in the world data sources. Tarihinde 9 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world adresinden erişildi.
• Freedom House. (2021b). Freedom in the world research methodology. 9 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://freedomhouse.org/reports/freedom-world/freedom-world-research-methodology adresinden erişildi.
• Huntington, S. P. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late 20th century. Journal of Democracy, 2(1), 12-34.
• Hurvich, C.M., Tsai, C.L. (1989). Regression and time series model selection in small samples. Biometrika, 76(2), 297-307.
• Kadar, A. (2020). In its nature-how stealth authoritarianism keeps stealing along during the pandemic, and How Can it be Stopped?. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 12(2),293-300.
• Krause, W., ve Merkel, W. (2018). Crisis of democracy? Views of experts and citizens. W. Merkel ve S. Kneip (Ed.), Democracy and Crisis: Challenges in Turbulent Times içinde (s. 31–48). Cham: Springer Verlag.
• Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy : Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69–105.
• Lührmann, A., Mechkova, V., Dahlum, S., Maxwell, L., Olin, M., Petrarca, C. S. and Lindberg, S. I. (2018). State of the world 2017: autocratization and exclusion? Democratization, 25(8), 1321–1340.
• Maerz, S. F., Lührmann, A., Hellmeier, S., Grahn, S., ve Lindberg, S. I. (2020). State of the world 2019: autocratization surges–resistance grows. Democratization, 27(6), 909–927.
• Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. Londra: Verso.
• Patsopoulos, N. A., Evangelou, E., ve Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2008). Sensitivity of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis: proposed metrics and empirical evaluation. International Journal of Epidemiology, 37(5), 1148-1157.
• Pepinsky, T. B. (2020). Political economy and democratic capacity to respond to pandemics. 9 Aralık 2020 tarihinde https://items.ssrc.org/covid-19-and-the-social-sciences/democracy-and-pandemics/political- economy-and-democratic-capacity-to-respond-to-pandemics/ adresinden erişildi.
• Petersohn, S., ve Heinze, T. (2018). Professionalization of Bibliometric research assessment. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 565–578.
• Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A., ve Limongi, F. (2000). Democracy and development: political institutions and material wellbeing in the world (1950-1990). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Reny, T. T. (2020). Masculine norms and infectious disease: The Case of COVID-19. Politics and Gender, 16(4).
• Rodriguez, C. G., Gadarian, S. K., Goodman, S. W., ve Pepinsky, T. B. (2020). Morbid polarization: Exposure to COVID-19 and partisan disagreement about pandemic response. PsyArXiv Preprints, 1–45. 10 Aralık 2020 tarihinde https://psyarxiv.com/wvyr7/ adresinden erişildi.
• Schedler, A. (2007). Electoral authoritarianism. The SAGE Handbook of Comparative Politics içinde (C. 35, s. 381–394). Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimensions of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461-464.
• Smith, J. C. (2020). Where are the women? Descriptive representation and covid-19 in U.K. Daily Press Briefings. Politics and Gender, 16(4), 991–1000.
• Sonn, J. W., ve Lee, J. K. (2020). The smart city as time-space cartographer in COVID-19 control: the South Korean strategy and democratic control of surveillance technology. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 61(4–5), 482–492.
• Staudt, K. (2008). Politics, Gender, and Concepts. G. Goertz ve A. G. Mazur (Ed.), Politics, Gender, and Concepts içinde (s. 136–158). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., ve Jones, D. R. B. (2001). An illustrated guide to the methods of meta-analysis. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 7, 135–148.
• UN Food and Agriculture Organization. (2021). The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020. 2 Şubat 2021 tarihinde http://www.fao.org/3/ca9692en/online/ca9692en.html#chapter-Key_message adresinden erişildi.
• Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem). (2021). Pandemic backsliding project (pandem). 12 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://www.v-dem.net/en/analysis/PanDem/ adresinden erişildi.
• Wadhwa, D., ve Blake, P. (2021). 2020 Year in review: The impact of covid-19 in 12 charts. 9 Şubat 2021 tarihinde, https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/2020-year-review-impact-covid-19-12-charts adresinden erişildi
• Waylen, G. (2015). Engendering the crisis of democracy. Government and Opposition, 50(3), 495–520.
• Web of Science (WoS). (2020). Main Page. 5 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://apps.webofknowledge.com/WOS_GeneralSearch_input.do? product=WOS&search_mode=GeneralSearch&SID=D4hORYNJKgXsyX8EkdW&preferencesSaved= adresinden erişildi.
• WHO. (2021). WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Dashboard. 9 Şubat 2021 tarihinde https://covid19.who.int adresinden erişildi.
• Wong, M.C.S., Wong, E.L.Y. Huang, Junjie, Cheung, A.W.L., Law, K., Chong, M. K. C., vd. (2021), Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine based on the health belief model: A population-based survey in Hong Kong, Vaccine, 39 (7), 1148-1156.