Ghana och Zambia : En fallstudie om institutioners roll för demokratisk utveckling

Sammanfattning: "A Case Study Regarding Ghana and Zambia’s Democratization". This study investigates why two African states have developed differently, regarding democratization. Ghana and Zambia are two countries, that in many ways had similar starting points. They both have a history as English colonies. They became independent reasonably at the same time and they began the process of democratization in the early 90s. Despite many similarities, Ghana has succeeded better than Zambia. This essay aims to examine whether the Institutional theory can explain why the two nations have developed in different directions regarding democracy. By examining the various criteria that researchers in institutional theory considers important for democratic conditions, the author hopes to find an answer to the question why some nations succeed, while others fail. This essay aims to put an institutional perspective on democratization. By describing and presenting a case study of the two chosen countries, the results show that institutions have a considerable role in a country’s development. Zambia’s problems can be explained by its lack of freedom of the press and violent demonstrations. Ghana’s success can be traced back to independence, where Ghana already had created a stable institutional base and centralized state. Ghana seems to have accepted pluralism and inclusive elements; more than Zambia have done. Overall, the results show that institutions can explain the differences regarding the two nations democratization-process. However, the importance of multiple elections, cannot be confirmed.