TY - JOUR
T1 - How Constitutional Drafters Use Comparative Evidence
AU - Chernykh, Svitlana
AU - Elkins, Zachary
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Editor, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - This article analyzes the transcripts of constitutional deliberations in two settings of third-wave democratization, Brazil and Ukraine. The focus is on the extent and kind of references to foreign countries and political institutions. Such references are relevant to the micro-foundations of theories of institutional diffusion. The evidence suggests that foreign references in constitutional debate are as frequent as are references to core concepts such as “democracy” and “freedom”. Also, actors employ foreign references mostly in order to attempt analytic comparisons across institutional models. These references mostly take the form of “endorsements” of the speaker’s favored policy, but a full third of them are negative examples (“warnings”), which lends credence to arguments about “aversive” diffusion mechanisms. Finally, the identity of countries referenced by Brazilian and Ukrainian constitution makers is analyzed. The ordering and profile of these target countries is remarkably similar despite differences in the cultural and geographic character of the two countries. Actors in both countries focused their attention on a small set of countries in the democratic “core”.
AB - This article analyzes the transcripts of constitutional deliberations in two settings of third-wave democratization, Brazil and Ukraine. The focus is on the extent and kind of references to foreign countries and political institutions. Such references are relevant to the micro-foundations of theories of institutional diffusion. The evidence suggests that foreign references in constitutional debate are as frequent as are references to core concepts such as “democracy” and “freedom”. Also, actors employ foreign references mostly in order to attempt analytic comparisons across institutional models. These references mostly take the form of “endorsements” of the speaker’s favored policy, but a full third of them are negative examples (“warnings”), which lends credence to arguments about “aversive” diffusion mechanisms. Finally, the identity of countries referenced by Brazilian and Ukrainian constitution makers is analyzed. The ordering and profile of these target countries is remarkably similar despite differences in the cultural and geographic character of the two countries. Actors in both countries focused their attention on a small set of countries in the democratic “core”.
KW - Brazil
KW - Ukraine
KW - comparative policy analysis
KW - constitutional design
KW - diffusion
KW - institutional ecology
KW - policy innovation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120001201&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13876988.2021.1990737
DO - 10.1080/13876988.2021.1990737
M3 - Article
SN - 1387-6988
VL - 24
SP - 529
EP - 556
JO - Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice
JF - Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice
IS - 6
ER -