METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF RESEARCHING THE PRESIDENTIAL INSTITUTE: THE EXPERIENCE OF WESTERN SCIENTISTS IN THE BREAK OF THE CENTURY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35774/gsip2022.01.026Keywords:
Institute of the presidency, semi-presidency, theoretical and methodological problemsAbstract
Abstract. One of the leading institutions of state power in the world is the institution of the presidency. The history of its study goes back decades (in Europe, Asia, LatinAmerica), and even centuries (for example, in the USA). The attention of researchers to the specifics of the functioning of the presidency became especially relevant with the collapse of the USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia and the emergence of new states, many of which became presidents.
The article, based on the methods of selection, comparison (of cross-national and cross-temporal studies of scientists) and generalization of the results of the study of individual cases of the functioning of the presidency institute (presented in the English-language literature), analyzes the development of the logic of its research, as well as directions for expanding the subject field of scientific analysis; methodological approaches, specific method sused by Western researchers of the presidential institute are singled out; a number of issues have been clarified, without studying which there will be a lack of understanding of the essence of the institute and its development prospects, including in Ukraine.
It is established that:
- despite the long history of the institution of the presidency (in particular, in the USA) and the constant attention of researchers to it, only in the second half of the 20th century did a peculiar break through in the study of the presidency take place. One of the dominantev idences of this was the appearance of the work of R. Neustadt, the feature of which was the analysis of the presidency from a new angle (with posing new questions using new research methods and the emergence of new evaluation accents regarding the effectiveness of presidential decisions);
- at the end of the 20th – at the beginning of the 21st century. There was a significant expansion not only of the subject field of research on the institution of the presidency (including duet othe in creased attention of scientists to the study of semi-presidential forms of government), but also the development of the theoretical and methodological basis of the analysis (based on neo-institutionalis mand, above all, on the theory of rational choice, streng thening research interest in the application of empirical institutionalism, etc.); in the end, a kind of analytical «going beyond the borders of the West» took place: studies devoted to the study of presidential regimes outside «old Europe» and the USA (inparticular, in Ukraine) began to appear;
- among the problematic issues of the analysis of the institution of the presidency, which will require the intellectual effort of researchers in the future, there are those related to the instability of analytical definitions (for example, «semi-presidency», «semi-presidential form of government», etc.), with the absence of generally accepted algorithms (strategies) research and «measurement» of the effectiveness of the institute, with an excellent (to date) depth of analysis of the presidency invarious countries (outside of Western Europe and the USA).
References
Aberg J., Sedelius T. A Structured Review of Semi-Presidential Studies: Debates, Results, and Missing Pieces. 2020. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321833768_A_Structured_Review_of_Semi-Presidential_Studies_Debates_Results_and_Missing_Pieces
Beckmann M. The President's Playbook: White House Strategies for Lobbying Congress. Journal of Politics. 2008. V. 70 (April). P. 407–419. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608080390
Bell D. S., Gaffney J. Introduction: The Presidency in the French Fifth Rispublic. The Presidents of the French Fifth Republic. Eds. D. Bell, J. Gaffney. Palgrave Macmillan; 2013th edition. P. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137302847_1
Brady D. W., Volden C. Revolving Gridlock: Politics and Policy from Carter to Clinton. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 1998. Р.125–136.
Cameron Ch. M. Bargaining and Presidential Power. Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-First Century, eds. Robert Y. Shapiro, Martha Joynt Kumar, and Lawrence R. Jacobs. New York: Columbia University Press. 2000a. P. 44–77. https://doi.org/10.7312/shap10932-007
Cameron Ch. M. Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2000b. 292 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613302
Canes-Wrone B. The President's Legislative Influence from Public Appeals. American Journal of Political Science. 2001. V. 45 (April). P. 313–329. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669343
Canes-Wrone B. The Public Presidency, Personal Approval Ratings, and Policy Making. Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2004. V 34 (September). P. 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2004.00208.x
Canes-Wrone B. Who Leads Whom? Presidents, Policy, and the Public (Studies in Communication, Media, and Public Opinion). University of Chicago Press. 2005. 192 р. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226092492.001.0001
Cohen J. E. Presidential Leadership in the Age of the New Media. In Presidential Leadership: The Vortex of Power, eds. Bert A. Rockman and Richard W. Waterman. New York: Oxford University of Press. 2008. P. 179–184.
Cooper Ph. By Order of the President: The Use and Abuse of Executive Direct Action. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. 2002. 320 p.
Dickinson M. J. We all want a revolution: Neustadt, new institutionalism, and the future of presidency research. 2009. URL: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/We+all+want+a+revolution%3A+Neustadt%2C+new+institutionalism%2C+and+the...-a0211714732
Dickinson M. J. Neustadt, New Institutionalism, and the Presidential Decision Making: A Theory and Test. Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2005. V. 35 (June). P. 259–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2005.00248.x
Dickinson M. J. Bargaining, Uncertainty, and the Growth of the White House Staff. Uncertainty in American Politics, ed. Barry C. Burden. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2003. P. 27–47.
Dickinson M. J. Staffing the White House, 1937–1996: The Institutional Implications of Neustadt's Bargaining Paradigm. Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-First Century, eds.: Robert Shapiro , Martha Joynt Kumar and Lawrence Jacobs Kindle Edition. 2000. P. 209–234. https://doi.org/10.7312/shap10932-012
Dietz N. Presidential Influence on Congress: New Solutions to Old Problems. Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations, ed. James A. Thurber. Washington, DC: CQ Press.2002. Р.105–106.
Doyle D., ElgieR. Maximizing the Reliability of Cross-National Measures of Presidential Power. British Journal of Political Science. 2016. V.46 (4). Р. 731–741. URL: https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:article:S0007123414000465/resource/name/S0007123414000465sup003.pdf https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000465
Edwards G. C. III, Mayer K. R., Wayne S. J. Presidential Leadership: Politics and Policy Making. Eleventh Edition. Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, 2020. 592 р.
Edwards G. C. ІІІ,Barrett A. Presidential Agenda Setting in Congress. Polarized Politics: Congress and the President in a Partisan Era, ed. Jon R. Bond and Richard Fleisher. Washington, DC: CQ Press. 2000. P. 109–133.
Edwards G. C. ІІІ. The Quantitative Study of the Presidency. Presidential Studies Quarterly. 1980. V. 11 (Spring). Р.146–150.
Elgie R. Three Waves of Semi-Presidential Studies. Democratization. 2016 V. 23.1. P. 49–70. URL:https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/30934642.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2014.960853
Elgie R. What Is Semi-Presidentialism and Where Is It Found? Semi-PresidentialismOutside Europe. Robert Elgie and Sophia Moestrup, eds, New York: Routledge, 2007. P. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203954294
Fleisher R., Bond J. R., Wood B. D Which Presidents Are Uncommonly Successful in Congress?" In Presidential Leadership: The Vortex of Power, eds. Bert A. Rockman and Richard W. Waterman. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. P 191–214.
Fortin J. Measuring presidential powers: Some pitfalls of aggregate measurement. International Political Science Review, 2012. № 34 (1). Р. 91–112. URL: https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/44189/ssoar-intpolitscirev-2012-1-fortin-Measuring_presidential_powers_Some_pitfalls.pdf?sequence=1 https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512111421357
Freie J. F. Making of the Postmodern Presidency: From Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama. Routledge, 2015. 221 p https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315633572
Hale H. E. Ukraine: The Uses of Divided Power. Journal of Democracy. 2010. 21.3. P. 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0174
Hale H. E. 25 Years After the USSR: What`s Gone Wrong?Journal of Democracy. 2016. 27.3. P. 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0035
Hale H. E. Introduction: Freeing Post-Soviet Regimes from the Procrustean Bed of Democracy Theory. Stubborn Structures: Reconceptualizing Post-Communist Regimes. Edited by Balint Magyar. Central European University Press. 2019. P. 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789633862155-004
Hanley D. Political Leadership: from the Fourth to the Fifth Respublic. The Presidents of the French Fifth Republic. Eds. D. Bell, J. Gaffney. Palgrave Macmillan; 2013 th edition. P. 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137302847_2
Hess S., Pfiffner J. P. 2002. Organizing the Presidency. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. 2002. 286 p.
Howell W. G., MoeT. M. Presidents, Populism, and the Crisis of Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2020. 256p. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226728827.001.0001
Howell W. G. Power Without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.2003. 264 p.
Hult K. M., Walcot Ch. E. Empowering the White House: Governance Under Nixon, Ford, and Carter. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. 2004. 272 p. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400874392
Ibrahimov N. Prezidentli VƏ Parlamentli Respublikalarda Prezidentliyin Əsas XususiyyƏtlƏri. 2018. URL: https://www.elibrary.az/docs/JURNAL/jrn2018_750.pdf
Johnston J. C. The Big Cheat: How Donald Trump Fleeced America and Enriched Himself and His Family. SimonSchuster, 2021. 304 p.
Jones Ch. O. Professional Reputation and the Neustadt Formulation. Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2001. 31 (June). P. 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0360-4918.2001.00171.x
King A. Executives. Handbook of Political Science. Eds. F. I. Greenstein and N. W. Polsby, eds. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975. Vl. 5. XX+459.
King G. The Methodology of Presidential Research. 1993. URL: https://gking.harvard.edu/files/methpres.pdf
Lewis D. E. Presidents and the Bureaucracy. Management Imperatives in a Separation of Powers System. The Presidency and the Political System. 8th ed., ed. Michael Nelson. Washington, DC: CQ Press. 2006.
Linz J. J. Democracy: Presidential or Parliamentary Does it Make a Difference? 1985.URL: https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNABJ524.pdf
Linz J. J. The Perils of Presidentialism. Journal of Democracy. 1990. № 1.1. Р. 51–69.
Lowande K., Shipan Ch. R. Where Is Presidential Power? Measuring Presidential Discretion Using Experts. British Journal of Political Science. Volume 52, Issue 4, October 2022. P. 1876–1890. URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/where-is-presidential-power-measuring-presidential-discretion-using-experts/C9EA7F7A061261BECA4EE851E664951D https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123421000296
Mayer K. R. With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 2002. 312 p. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400824243
Metcalf L. K. Measuring Presidential Power. 2000. URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0010414000033005004
Moe T. M. The Revolution in Presidential Studies. Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2009. V. 39 (December). P. 702–725. URL: https://www.uvm.edu/~dguber/POLS293/articles/moe.pdf https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2009.03701.x
Moe T. M., Howell W. G.. The Presidential Power of Unilateral Action. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization. 1999. V.15 (March). P. 132–179. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/15.1.132
Neustadt R. E. Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. New York: Free Press. 1990. 400 p.
Passarelli G. Parties’ Genetic Features: The Missing Link in the Presidentialization of Parties. The Presidentialization of Political Parties: Organizations, Institutions and Leaders,edited by Gianluca Passarelli. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. Р. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137482464_1
Researching the Presidency: Vital Questions, New Approaches.G. C. ІІІ Edwards, J. H. Kessel, B.A. Rockman, eds. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1993. 496 p.
Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations, ed. James A. Thurber. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2001. 296 p.
Rudalevige A. Managing the President's Program: Presidential Leadership and Legislative Policy Formulation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 2002. 292 p. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691190266
Schleiter P. Morgan-Jones E. Citizens, Presidents and Assemblies: The Study of Semi-Presidentialism beyond Duverger and Linz British. Journal of Political Science , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , October 2009. P. 871–892. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990159
Sedelius T., Linde J. Unravelling Semi-Presidentialism: Democracy and Government Performance Under Four Distinct Regime Types. Democratization. 2018. 25 (1). P. 136–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2017.1334643
Shugart M. S. Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive and Mixed Authority Patterns. French Politics. 2005. V. 3. P. 323–51. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087
Siaroff A. Comparative Presidencies: The Inadequacy of the Presidential, Semi-Presidential and Parliamentary Distinction. European Journal of Political Research. 2003. V. 42. P. 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00084
Skowronek S. Notes on the Presidency in the Political Order. Studies in American Political Development. 1986. V. 1. P. 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X00000390
Skowronek S. Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal. University Press of Kansas. 2011.154 р. URL: http://web.mit.edu/lroyden/Public/skowronek-time.pdf
SkowronekS.What’s New in the Political Leadership of Donald Trump, Presidential Leadership in Political Time. University Press of Kansas, 2020. Р. 195–220.
Skowronek S. The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill Clinton. Revised Edition Paperback. 1997. 576 p.
Skowronek S. The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from john Adams to George Bush. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.1993. Р. 36–45.
The Constitution of the United States of America. URL: https://www.senate.gov/civics/resources/pdf/US_Constitution-Senate_Publication_103-21.pdf
The Failure of Presidential Democracy. Juan J. Linz and Arturo Valenzuela (eds.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994. Рp. xvi + 436. URL: https://books.google.com.br/books?id=e5dkxDhDjCoC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ru#v=onepage&q&f=false
The Presidency and the Political System. 12th Edition by Michael Nelson (Editor). CO Press, 2020. 736 p.
The Presidents of the French Fifth Republic. Eds. D. Bell, J. Gaffney. Palgrave Macmillan; 2013th edition. 235 p.
Tulis J. K. The Rhetorical Presidency: New Edition (Princeton Classics Book 100). Kindle Edition. Princeton University Press. 2017. 255 p.
