政观新刊速递 ARPS Vol. 23, 2020（下）
期刊简介：《政治学年鉴》（Annual Review of Political Science）自1998年出版以来，其内容涵盖了政治学领域的重大进展，包括政治理论和哲学、国际关系、政治经济学、政治行为、美国和比较政治、公共管理和政策以及方法论等。
编者按：摘要编译主要由各高校在读硕士生和博士生自愿组织进行。受学生学识及翻译水平所限，译文可能有诸多不当之处，还望读者们见宥，也欢迎留言讨论。此外，由于版权所限，需要阅读原文的读者请通过所在学校/机构的图书馆数据库或其他途径访问下载。
期刊目录
13. 种族划分的易变性
14. 经济发展与民主：倾向和触发因素
15. 民主理论家的制度性讨价还价（或者说我们如何学会不担心并爱上讨价还价）
16. 侍从主义的“红鲱鱼”：非纲领性政治研究的死胡同与新方向
17. 不断变化的西欧分裂政治
18. 威权引导的民主化
19. 国际政治经济学中的调查实验：我们所（不）知道的逆全球化
20. 国际行为体如何帮助国内协议的执行
21. 新兴的军事技术对国际政治而言重要吗？
22. 适应网络审查
23. 欧洲的身份政治和民粹主义
24. 族群多样性和社会信任：叙事与元分析的综述
种族划分的易变性
题目：The Fluidity of Racial Classifications
作者：Lauren Davenport，斯坦福大学政治学系副教授
摘要：本文回顾了研究种族易变性、种族具有可变性和非永久性观点的文献。本文追溯了美国和拉丁美洲种族划分和界线的持续演变过程。这两个地区都曾有过被欧洲殖民、奴隶制和高度种族融合的历史，但却信奉迥然不同的种族观念。就传统而言，对于美国的许多群体来说，种族是不可改变、由祖先决定的；相较而言，拉丁美洲地区的部分群体对此却没有严苛的划分标准，并乐于接受种族融合。然而，新近研究表明美国的种族会随着时间和环境不断变动，尤其是对于社会界定较为模糊的族群而言，而拉丁美洲的部分种族界线却正日益变得泾渭分明。本文认为种族的流动性重新界定了我们对种族身份的理解，并且为未来的政治学学者们，提出了许多强化各学科和研究方法之间联系的方向。
In this article, I review the social science literature on racial fluidity, the idea that race is flexible and impermanent. I trace the ongoing evolution of racial classifications and boundaries in the United States and Latin America, two regions that share a history of European colonization, slavery, and high levels of race mixing but that have espoused very different racial ideologies. Traditionally, for many groups in the United States, race was seen as unchangeable and determined by ancestry; in contrast, parts of Latin America have lacked strict classification rules and embraced race mixing. However, recent research has shown that race in the United States can change across time and context, particularly for populations socially defined as more ambiguous, while some Latin American racial boundaries are becoming more stringent. I argue that the fluidity of race has redefined our understanding of racial identities, and propose several directions for future political science scholarship that bridges disciplines and methodological approaches.
经济发展与民主：倾向和触发因素
题目：Economic Development and Democracy: Predispositions and Triggers
作者：Daniel Treisman，加州大学洛杉矶分校政治学系教授
摘要：学者们对经济发展与民主之间的关系一直争论不休。本文回顾了对这一关系的争论历史并使用当下的数据对相关范式进行了总结和可视化。本文发现在中期阶段（10-20年），高收入与民主化以及民主存续之间存在显著而一致的关系，但这一关系在短期内并不必然出现。在近来众多研究的基础上，本文扩展了一个新的现代化条件理论，它可以解释经济发展对民主转型的滞后效应。这一理论的关键是民主发展的效应受到突发事件比如经济危机、军事挫折或者——更通常的是——领导人更替的触发。政治后果取决于发展的水平、中等收入群体的范围以及公民如何配合。威权政体中领导人的更替与收入和民主化之间暂时出现的强关系有关，而这与前两波民主化浪潮又不谋而合。
Scholars continue to disagree about the relationship between economic development and democracy. I review the history of the debate and summarize patterns visible in data available today. I find a strong and consistent relationship between higher income and both democratization and democratic survival in the medium term (10–20 years), but not necessarily in shorter time windows. Building on several recent studies, I sketch out a new conditional modernization theory, which can account for such lags. The key idea is that the effect of development on democracy is triggered by disruptive events such as economic crises, military defeats, or—most generally—leader change. Political outcomes depend on both the development level and, at intermediate income ranges, how citizens coordinate. Waves of leader turnover in autocracies correlate with temporarily stronger links between income and democratization, which, in turn, coincide with the first two waves of democracy.
民主理论家的制度性讨价还价
（或者说我们如何学会不担心并爱上讨价还价）
题目：Institutional Bargaining for Democratic Theorists (or How We Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Haggling)
作者：Jack Knight，杜克大学法学院Frederic Cleaveland教授；Melissa Schwartzberg，纽约大学政治学系教授
摘要：当代政治学认为讨价还价是民主决策的中心机制，尽管政治理论家通常对允许使用不平等权力与威胁来产生合法结果的程序抱有怀疑态度。在本篇综述中，在转向约翰·罗尔斯和尤尔根·哈贝马斯名作中对讨价还价的处理之前，作者先前多元主义与实证政治理论的立场出发，追踪了制度性讨价还价理论的发展。他们对讨价还价的矛盾引起了人们对协商和妥协价值的新的关注，这些文献在对审议民主的辩护野心与提供政治决策可信模型的愿望之间构建了一个不稳定的中点。作者认为一个公平的谈判过程要求制度性改革，以及以维护平等决策为中心的辩护框架，而不是提倡意图和动机的改变。
Contemporary political science takes bargaining to be the central mechanism of democratic decision making, though political theorists typically doubt that processes that permit the exercise of unequal power and the use of threats can yield legitimate outcomes. In this review, we trace the development of theories of institutional bargaining from the standpoint of pluralism and positive political theory before turning to the treatment of bargaining in the influential work of John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas. Their ambivalence about bargaining gave rise to a new focus on the value of negotiation and compromise but this literature constitutes an unstable midpoint between the justificatory ambitions of deliberative democracy and the desire to provide plausible models of political decision making. Instead of advocating changes in mindset or motivation, we argue that a fair bargaining process requires institutional reform, as well as a justificatory framework centered on the preservation of egalitarian decision making.
侍从主义的“红鲱鱼”：
非纲领性政治研究的死胡同与新方向
题目：Clientelism's Red Herrings: Dead Ends and New Directions in the Study of Nonprogrammatic Politics
作者：Allen Hicken，密歇根大学政治学系教授；Noah L. Nathan，密歇根大学政治学系助理教授
摘要：对侍从主义的研究往往从一个共同的困惑开始：如果选民可以违背他们对政客的承诺，那么侍从主义怎么可能成为一个可行的选举策略呢？标准的解决方案是，政客通过监督和强制来解决选民的承诺难题。但在最近的文献中，很少有证据表明存在个人层面的监督和执行，而且现在许多研究都表明即使在那些政客们意识到承诺难题完全难以解决的地方，侍从主义的手段仍然会被使用。综合来看，最近的研究表明，专注于解决承诺难题是一种“红鲱鱼”（意为引入不实质相关议题而混淆、转移关注焦点）。相反，越来越明显的是，侍从主义不需要受到监控，承诺难题也不会约束政客们对获取选举支持（方式）的选择。在近期研究进展的推动下，新的困惑在未来的研究中值得更多的关注。
Research on clientelism often starts from a shared puzzle: How can clientelism be a viable electoral strategy if voters can renege on their commitments to politicians? The standard solution proposed is that politicians resolve this commitment problem with voters through monitoring and enforcement. But there has been startlingly little evidence of individual-level monitoring and enforcement in the recent literature, and many studies now document the use of clientelism even where politicians are aware that the commitment problem remains completely intractable. When read together, recent studies suggest that the focus on resolving the commitment problem is a red herring. Instead, it is increasingly clear that clientelism does not need to be monitored and that the commitment problem does not bind as politicians choose their electoral appeals. New puzzles, motivated by advances in the recent literature, deserve comparatively more attention in future research.
不断变化的西欧分裂政治
题目：The Changing Cleavage Politics of Western Europe
作者：Robert Ford，英国曼彻斯特大学政治系教授；Will Jennings，英国南安普顿大学政治学与公共政策系教授
摘要：西欧的政治样貌是如何变化的?这些变化在多大程度上反映了潜藏于欧洲政治中的社会和经济结构的变化?本文回顾了经典文献中关于分裂如何构建政党体系的见解，并考虑了新政党的出现和持续存在以及新意识形态的冲突是如何同时导致政党竞争的分界线的改变和政党体系的破碎的。虽然学界越来越关注所谓的欧洲选举政治的第二维度，但是作者强调了对有助于推动这一转变的结构性变化的相对有限的关注。作者发现西欧民主国家在某些社会人口方面的发展可能会制造新的分裂：高等教育的扩张、大规模的移民和选民的种族多样性、社会老龄化和代沟的加剧、以及繁荣且全球化的大城市和衰落的内陆地区之间日益加剧的地理隔离。
How are the contours of Western European politics shifting? To what extent do these shifts reflect changes in the underlying social and economic structure of European polities? In this article, we reflect on insights from the classic literature on how cleavages structure party systems and consider how the emergence and persistence of new parties and new ideological conflicts are leading to both shifts of dividing lines of party competition and the frag- mentation of party systems. While increasing attention has been given to the so-called second dimension of European electoral politics, we highlight the relatively limited focus on structural changes that are helping to drive this transformation. We identify some socio-demographic developments that are potentially generating new cleavages in Western European democracies: the expansion of higher education; mass migration and the growing ethnic diversity of electorates; the aging of societies and sharpening of generational divides; and increased geographical segregation of populations between prospering, globalized major cities and declining hinterlands.
威权引导的民主化
题目：Authoritarian-Led Democratization
作者：Rachel Beatty Riedl，康奈尔大学政府系教授、Einaudi中心主任；Dan Slater，密歇根大学政治学系教授；Joseph Wong，多伦多大学副校长兼副教务长，政治学系教授；Daniel Ziblatt，哈佛大学政府系教授
摘要：当威权政体面临更少的选择或者更低的风险时，其更有可能发生民主化。在某些案例中，民主化对威权政体中的当权者来说风险极低，以至于结束威权统治并不意味着他们要交出权力。本文建立了一个对当权者来说当风险较低时威权引导的民主化转型统一理论。作者认为，威权政体中政党的力量是威权政体引导民主化的关键力量。当执政党力量足够强大能给予在任的威权领导人强烈的信心能赢得选举时，非民主政体就会尝试可逆转的民主实验并最终转变为稳定繁荣的民主政体。欧洲第一波民主化以及当代中国台湾地区和加纳的民主转型证据都表明了政党力量如何在当今世界和现代历史中支持威权引导的民主化。
Authoritarian regimes become more likely to democratize when they face little choice or little risk. In some cases, the risk of democratization to authoritarian incumbents is so low that ending authoritarianism might not mean exiting power at all. This article develops a unified theory of authoritarian-led democratization under conditions of relatively low incumbent risk. We argue that the party strength of the authoritarian incumbent is the most pivotal factor in authoritarian-led democratization. When incumbent party strength has been substantial enough to give incumbent authoritarian politicians significant electoral victory confidence, nondemocratic regimes have pursued reversible democratic experiments that eventually culminated in stable, thriving democracies. Evidence from Europe's first wave of democratization and more recent democratic transitions in Taiwan and Ghana illustrate how party strength has underpinned authoritarian-led democratization across the world and across modern history.
国际政治经济学中的调查实验：
我们所（不）知道的逆全球化
题目：Survey Experiments in International Political Economy: What We (Don't) Know About the Backlash Against Globalization
作者：Megumi Naoi，加州大学圣迭戈分校政治学系副教授
摘要：本文回顾了国际政治经济学（IPE）领域调查研究中积累的证据，并且讨论了它们在解释逆全球化方面的优缺点。本文首先回顾了国际政治经济学中最为常用的调查实验方案，即“全球化即处理”（Globalization-as-Treatment）方案。在这一实验方案中，研究者们随机分配关于全球化不同特征的信息，并询问受访者对保护主义的态度。随后本文讨论了这一方案在应对逆全球化出现带来的关键难题过程中三个问题：（1）使用粗糙的信息处理方式，这一方式与自利假设相悖；（2）过度强调全球化是困难的来源；（3）忽略国家内部和国家之间对调控空间不同的信念。本文为研究这些问题提出了替代性方案和策略。调查实验中获得的证据表明，我们今天目睹的许多逆全球化深深植根于国内政治。
This article reviews the cumulation of evidence from survey experiments in the field of international political economy (IPE) and discusses their strengths and weaknesses in explaining the backlash against globalization. I first review the advancements made by the most commonly used survey experiment design in IPE, namely the Globalization-as-Treatment design, in which scholars randomly assign information about different features of globalization and solicit respondents’ attitudes toward protectionism. Then I discuss three issues with this design in addressing key puzzles in the emergence of globalization backlash: (a) using a coarse informational treatment that stacks the deck against the economic self-interest hypothesis; (b) overattributing globalization as a source of hardship; and (c) neglecting heterogeneous room-to-maneuver beliefs across and within countries. The article suggests alternative designs and strategies to study these questions. Evidence from survey experiments suggests that much of the globalization backlash we witness today is deeply rooted in domestic politics.
国际行为体如何帮助国内协议的执行
题目：How International Actors Help Enforce Domestic Deals
作者：Aila M. Matanock，加州大学伯克利分校政治学系副教授
摘要：国际行为体有时寻求促进和平、民主和人权。关于国际行为体如何帮助现任政府与其国内反对派进行政治交易的研究正在激增。这些研究表明，反对派很难相信现任者会遵守他们达成的政治协议，因为现任者可以利用他们对国家机构的熟悉，以及在协议执行过程中的权力不对称，通过更多地维持现状来违反协议条款。然而，国际行为体可以通过使用监督机制(通常集中于选举活动)和以守约为条件的奖励来克服这些“倒退难题”。当国内行为体试图结束国内冲突、公开选举和减少镇压时，倒退难题和作为一种解决方案的国际行为体的措施在这些议题中是很常见的，但对这些议题的研究在很大程度上仍然是相当割裂的。这篇综述提出，通过统一这些研究并(重新)检验在何种条件下这一解决方案最有效来推进这一研究议程。
International actors at times seek to help bring peace, democracy, and human rights. Studies of how international actors help enforce political bargains between incumbent governments and their domestic opponents are proliferating. They show that opposition groups have trouble trusting incumbents to adhere to the political bargains they strike because incumbents can use their familiarity with state institutions and can use their asymmetric hold on power during bargain implementation to violate terms by retaining more of the status quo than agreed. International actors can overcome these “reversion problems,” however, by using monitoring mechanisms (often focused on electoral campaigns) and incentives conditioned on compliance. Reversion problems, and enforcement by international actors as a solution, are common across issue areas—arising when domestic actors try to end civil conflict, open elections, and reduce repression—but the literatures in these issue areas have largely remained segregated. This review proposes advancing this research agenda by unifying them and (re)examining the conditions under which this solution works best.
新兴的军事技术对国际政治而言重要吗？
题目：Do Emerging Military Technologies Matter for International Politics?
作者：Michael C. Horowitz，宾夕法尼亚大学政治学系教授
摘要：我们生活在一个数字化的世界。这一事实对战争有重大的影响。网络和无人机这两种技术在军事和情报行动以及学术领域都占据重要地位。此外，一种新的学术流派正在研究人工智能的进步如何有可能塑造未来的战争。虽然学者们不同意这些技术对国际政治的影响，但他们倾向于同意它们的影响是由军事组织(无论是国家还是非国家行为体)在相关军事场景中有效使用它们并追求政治目标的能力来调节的。与已经存在几十年的现有技术相比，有关新军事技术的经验证据不足，这也给研究带来了方法上的挑战。
We live in a digital world. This fact has significant consequences for warfare. Two technologies in particular, cyber and drones, feature in military and intelligence operations and in scholarship. In addition, a new vein of scholarship is examining how advances in artificial intelligence have the potential to shape the future of warfare. While scholars disagree about the consequences of these technologies for international politics, they tend to agree that their consequences are mediated by the ability of military organizations, whether state or nonstate actors, to use them effectively in relevant military scenarios and in the pursuit of political ends. Studying newer military technologies, with less empirical evidence than is available for technologies that have been around for decades, also generates methodological challenges for research.
适应网络审查
题目：Resilience to Online Censorship
作者：Margaret E. Roberts，加州大学圣迭戈分校政治学系副教授
摘要：互联网用户在何种程度上能够适应网络审查？审查何时会影响信息消费并遭到抵制？基于日渐增多的有关互联网用户对网络审查反应的文献，作者认为，对审查制度的感知、搜寻信息的动机以及规避审查的策略都对适应审查制度十分重要。作者描述了威权体制如何为了同时减少用户对审查的感知及对未审查信息的需求而调整审查策略的。
To what extent are Internet users resilient to online censorship? When does censorship influence consumption of information and when does it create backlash? Drawing on a growing literature on Internet users’ reactions to censorship, I posit that awareness of censorship, incentives to seek out information, and resources to circumvent censorship are essential to resilience to censorship. I describe how authoritarian regimes have adapted their strategies of censorship to reduce both awareness of censorship and demand for uncensored information.
欧洲的身份政治和民粹主义
题目：Identity Politics and Populism in Europe
作者：Abdul Noury，纽约大学政治学系副教授；Gerard Roland，加州大学伯克利分校经济学系教授
摘要：作者回顾了有关欧洲身份政治和民粹主义兴起的文献。在2008年经济危机之后，民粹政党已获得大量投票份额。作者在多国甚至欧洲议会观察到，政治的主要维度从左与右的差异转换为主流政党和民粹政党的差异。作者检验了这种转换与选民态度变化有何关系，以及政党对这些变化的适应。民粹主义的两种起因浮出水面：经济与文化。在回顾证据时，作者发现经济与文化因素间复杂的相互作用。大量与经济危机和紧缩政策相关的选民的经济焦虑，提高了他们对民粹主义政党文化反冲的信息接受度。
We review the literature on the rise of identity politics and populism in Europe. Populist parties have gained large vote shares since the Great Recession of 2008. We observe in many countries, and even in the European Parliament, a transformation of the main dimension of politics from the left–right cleavage to a new cleavage opposing the mainstream parties to populist parties. We examine how this transformation relates to changes in voter attitudes and the adjustment of political parties to these changes. Two main types of causes for the rise of populism have emerged: economic and cultural. In reviewing the evidence, we find a complex interaction between economic and cultural factors. Economic anxiety among large groups of voters related to the Great Recession and austerity policies triggers a heightened receptivity to the messages of cultural backlash from populist parties.
族群多样性和社会信任：
叙事与元分析的综述
题目：Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: A Narrative and Meta-Analytical Review
作者：Peter Thisted Dinesen，哥本哈根大学政治学系教授；Merlin Schaeffer，哥本哈根大学社会学系副教授；Kim Mannemar Sønderskov，奥胡斯大学政治学系教授
摘要：族群多样性会侵蚀社会信任吗？持续的移民和随之而来的族群多样性的增加引发了现代社会这个基本问题，但海量文献中对此很少有明确的答案。通过对87项研究中的1001个估计数值的叙述与元分析，本文回顾了族群多样性与社会信任之间关系的文献。本综述阐明了族群多样性与社会信任之间的核心概念，强调了相关的讨论，并且检验了其核心主张。元分析中可以看出一些结果。在所有研究中，我们都发现了族群多样新与社会信任之间呈现显著的负相关。协变量仅对其关系有微弱的改变。本综述最后讨论了未来研究的路径。
Does ethnic diversity erode social trust? Continued immigration and corresponding growing ethnic diversity have prompted this essential question for modern societies, but few clear answers have been reached in the sprawling literature. This article reviews the literature on the relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust through a narrative review and a meta-analysis of 1,001 estimates from 87 studies. The review clarifies the core concepts, highlights pertinent debates, and tests core claims from the literature on the relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust. Several results stand out from the meta-analysis. We find a statistically significant negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust across all studies. The relationship is stronger for trust in neighbors and when ethnic diversity is measured more locally. Covariate conditioning generally changes the relationship only slightly. The review concludes by discussing avenues for future research.
编译/校对：施榕、杨端程、康张城、殷昊、赵德昊、吴温泉
编辑：郭静远
【政文观止Poliview】系头条号签约作者
你在看政观么