Organizations, Resistance, and Democracy: How Civil Society Organizations Impact Democratization

Abstract

When are episodes of resistance likely to lead to democratization? We argue that the participation of durable organizations rooted in quotidian relationships that are not themselves designed to compete for political power (what we call “quotidian civil society organizations,” QCSOs) drives successful democratic transitions. QCSOs are more likely to have stable preferences for democracy and durable mobilization structures that create greater accountability for new elites during political transitions and thus make shifts to democracy more likely compared to movements dominated by other organization types, such as political parties. Quantitative tests using novel data on the composition of resistance movements in Africa from 1990 to 2015 support these arguments. Older QCSOs and those independent from opposition political parties and the state also appear to be the most likely to engender democratization.

Guest Editors’ introduction: Nonviolent resistance and its discontents

“…There has been an increase in scholarship on violent flanks, as well as tactical diversity within largely nonviolent campaigns, with recent work showing that many actors use both violence and nonviolence (Cunningham, Dahl & Frugé, 2017; Hallward, Masullo & Mouly, 2017; Belgioioso, 2019; Breslawski, 2021; Krtsch, 2021; Gleditsch & Abbs, 2022 ). While recent scholarship has produced datasets focused more on organizations as the primary unit of analysis (Butcher et al, 2022; Pinckney, Butcher & Braithwaite, 2022), most existing quantitative scholarship treats events or campaigns as the primary units of analysis, neglecting the complexities of diversity within coalitions.…”

Relationship Between ‘Civil Society’ and ‘Democratic Freedoms’

“…Grahn and Lührmann (2020, p.5) Research on non-political CSOs in Africa finds that they create greater accountability for elites during democratisation. Pinckney et al (2022) look at what they call "quotidian civil society organizations" (QCSOs). These are organisations which are "rooted in quotidian relationships that are not themselves designed to compete for political power" (p.1).…”

Tactics of resistance and post-conflict judicial independence

“…These prospects for democratization following nonviolent campaigns, in particular, have been explained by the character of such movements and their residual influences on society (Bethke & Pinckney, 2021;Bayer, Bethke & Lambach, 2016;Celestino & Gleditsch, 2013;Chenoweth & Stephan, 2011;Stephan & Chenoweth, 2008). As compared to rebel groups, nonviolent movements are more likely to engage a broad array of societal actors (Butcher et al, 2022). This can have the effect of dispersing power widely among participants, often developing a culture more amenable to powersharing and coalition building (Celestino & Gleditsch, 2013).…”

“…rights will be protected, we expect participants of nonviolent campaigns to be particularly invested in these outcomes. Civil resistance movements far more commonly feature participation by political parties and civil society organizations, as compared to antigovernment movements engaged in armed rebellion (Butcher et al, 2022). Although some rebel groups emerged from parties, trade unions, religious groups, and student communities (Braithwaite & Cunningham, 2020), the preponderance of antigovernment mobilization by these organizations is nonviolent in nature (Engels, 2019;Butcher et al, 2022).…”

“…Furthermore, and with respect to civil society groups in particular, these opposition organizations are often not part of the permanent government even in the event of a post-campaign transition; thus, they have an interest in making sure they are shielded from abuse by future elites (Ansell & Samuels, 2014; Pinckney, Butcher & Braithwaite, 2022). As previously discussed, independent courts can be a valuable tool to advance such protections.…”