ABSTRACT
Comparative studies of democratisation have produced two types of generalisations: those having nearly universal application and those applying more particularly to a given region.1 The relationship between economic development and democracy is perhaps the standout example of the first theme in the democratisation literature, with the successful transitions to democracy of Northeast Asian ‘tigers’ such as Korea and Taiwan following decades of rapid industrialisation and economic growth providing a good example of this linkage in action. However, Asia also provides some of the best counter-examples of the democracy-development link too. In particular, when we turn to Southeast Asia, the relationship between economic development and democratic transition is stood on its head, raising profound challenges for students of democratisation and democratic theory. Similarly, key findings from the scholarly literature on democratic transitions – such as the expectation of democratic support from middle classes, the role of elite pacts and the institutional architecture considered most supportive for democratisation – all face major challenges in Asia. This disjuncture between comparative generalisations and regional experience make Asia an important case for students of democratic transition. However, while the extent and variation in regime type across the region should make for an important testing ground for democratic theory, Asian cases remain marginal to much scholarly work on democratisation. Popular conceptions of the region are dominated by the ever-increasing influence of China, the world’s most powerful authoritarian state, and media reports have often depicted a region of resiliently non-democratic regimes, ranging from North Korea’s family-based despotism to Burma’s former military junta. In addition, those scholarly studies of democratisation that do focus on the Asia-Pacific region take the form of edited collections comprising chapter-length studies of a single country.2 While this has produced many excellent edited volumes, their strength tends to lie in individual case studies rather than truly thematic comparisons. Given this, it remains the case that the Asia-Pacific region, with a few important exceptions, continues to be relatively neglected in comparative studies of democratisation and democratic transitions. Many of the major scholarly studies of democratic transitions rely heavily on European and Latin American
cases but largely ignore Asia.3 Only a few thematic studies of democratic transitions place the Asia-Pacific region centre stage.4
