uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Comparing No-Party Participatory Regimes: Why Uganda Succeeded and Others Failed
Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Government.
2008 (English)Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The objective of this dissertation is to evaluate the performance of the no-party participatory regime (NPPR) model in a few selected countries. Such a regime, it was claimed, would give rise to a real and true democracy, would serve the people better, and would protect them against what many leaders saw as divisive party politics.

This study investigates the extent to which these no-party participatory regimes were able, through mass institutions of mobilisation and participation, to involve people in public affairs, to capture the popular will, to promote people’s power, and to serve the population in at least a fairly efficient and effective way. More precisely, the study seeks to evaluate how responsive and effective the rule of regimes in Uganda, Pakistan, Libya and Ghana actually was, and to elucidate how the performance of said regimes was linked to a measure of legitimacy and stability. With regard to the main case, that of Uganda, the purpose of the book is to assess—by examining the performance of the Movement Regime Project (i.e., the system of reformed local government based on local councils)—the degree to which the stated goal of responsive and effective rule was achieved. The regimes in the historical cases (Pakistan, Libya, and Ghana) varied in how they performed against this model, but all of them chalked up a history of failed projects. The regimes in question simply became dictatorial; indeed, it is to such an outcome that the model has historically gravitated. Uganda, however, is a unique exception. The Movement project managed fairly well, at least up to 2005, to achieve responsiveness, a degree of effectiveness, legitimacy, and stability. To become fully democratic, however, it needs to take radical steps—above and beyond what it does today—in the furtherance of political freedom.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis , 2008. , 281 p.
Skrifter utgivna av Statsvetenskapliga föreningen i Uppsala, ISSN 0346-7538 ; 173
Keyword [en]
democracy, Uganda, stability, No-Party Participatory Regimes, Ghana, Libya, Pakistan, governance, responsiveness, effectiveness, legitimacy
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-8918ISBN: 978-91-554-7230-6OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-8918DiVA: diva2:172224
Public defence
2008-06-04, Brusewitzsalen, Badhuset, Gamla Torget 6, Uppsala, 14:15 (English)
Available from: 2008-05-14 Created: 2008-05-14 Last updated: 2009-03-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text
Buy this publication >>

By organisation
Department of Government
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalization Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 755 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link