The Construction of democracy: lessons from practice and research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How should democracies balance the hopes and constraints of their societies with the architecture of their constitutions and institutions to secure freedom, promote citizenship, and foster prosperity? In The Construction of Democracy, leading scholars from seven different countries-and key decision makers from eight-come together to analyze the dimensions of democratic design and draw not only practical but feasible recommendations. Here citizens, politicians, and government officials offer valuable insight into the craft of politics with real examples of success and failures from some of the leading policy makers of our time-including the president of Portugal, former presidents of Brazil and Colombia, and a former prime minister of India. Drawing on the work of the Club of Madrid's Conference on Democratic Transition and Consolidation, the contributors discuss building and sustaining a contemporary democratic state, strengthening pluralism and public participation, designing effective constitutions, confronting economic challenges for new democracies, and controlling corruption. In a rare instance where the expertise of practical-minded scholars is melded with the experience of thoughtful policy makers, this volume offers much-needed insight to others seeking sensible and effective solutions. Contributors: Carlos Blanco, minister for the reform of the state, Venezuela; Fernando Henrique Cardoso, former president of Brazil; Anibal Cavaco Silva, president of Portugal; Antonio Octavio Cintra, the Research Service of the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies; Rut Diamint, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella, Buenos Aires; Jorge I. Dominguez, Harvard University; Grzegorz Ekiert, Harvard University; Cesar Gaviria, former president of Colombia; Anna Grzymala-Busse, University of Michigan; Inder Kumar Gujral, former prime minister of India; Anthony Jones, the Gorbachev Foundation of North America; Marcelo Barroso Lacombe, the Research Service of the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies; Jose Luis Mendez, El Colegio de Mexico; Andrew Richards, Instituto Juan March of the Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Ciencias Sociales, Madrid; Susan Rose-Ackerman, Yale University; Richard Simeon, University of Toronto; Luc Turgeon, University of Toronto.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.088 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.035 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".