DEMOCRATIZATION OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AT THE REGIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS IN THE CONTEXT OF DECENTRALIZATION: THE CASE OF FOUR UKRAINIAN REGIONS

On-line Journal Modelling the New Europe, 2024

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.24193/ojmne.2024.46.03
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This article examines the democratization of the Ukrainian political system at the regional and local levels in the context of decentralization reform. The level of democratization is measured using the Tatu Vanhanen measurement method (Tatu Vanhanen Index), which is a mathematical formula for multiplying the percentage of votes not received by the ruling party (coalition of parties) in regional and local elections to representative bodies by the percentage of voter turnout. For the study, four regions of Ukraine were selected: Lviv region, Kharkiv region, Kherson region and Chernihiv region, as well as their administrative centres, meeting both the criteria of geographical location (north, south, west, east), population size (large regions, with a population of several million people, as well as small regions, with a population of less than 1 million people), as well as traditional political preferences of a significant part of citizens (relatively “pro-European” and relatively “pro-Russian”). The study showed that in most of the regions we studied, the democracy index decreased after the start of the reform, but then increased again after the next electoral cycle. Most of the regions we studied have similar dynamics of changes in the democracy index over three electoral cycles. Secondly, the study found that in most of the studied regions, the democracy index at the regional level as a whole is slightly higher than the democracy index at the level of their administrative centres. The exception, in both cases, is the Kharkiv region and Kharkiv, which have a trend directly opposite to other regions. The study concludes with a recommendation to reevaluate the level of democracy at the regional and local levels after the next local elections, to gain a more objective dynamic picture.