著者
松本 八重子
出版者
ラテン・アメリカ政経学会
雑誌
ラテン・アメリカ論集 (ISSN:0286004X)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.54, pp.69-96, 2020 (Released:2021-09-10)
参考文献数
34

During decolonization, from 1958 to 1967, Suriname experienced consociational grand coalition governments, which were formed by the three ethnic groups: Creole, East Indian (Hindustani) and Javanese. After the turbulent times characterized by the military regime and the civil war in the 1980s, the fourth ethnic group, who were descendants of Maroons, became integrated into Suriname’s plural political system. Since the country’s democratization in 1988, Suriname’s party system has changed into a competitive system. This paper aims to systematically examine the historical changes in the party system of Suriname. After surveying previous studies conducted in this field, this study conceptualizes the categories “ethnic parties,” composed of the four major ethnic groups, and “non-ethnic parties,” composed of developmental, left-wing, and civic groups. Based on the analytical framework, this paper describes the historical development of Suriname party politics from the 1940s to the 2015 general election, and analyzes the formation and reorganization of party alliances after democratization. The results of analysis indicate that during the period between democratization and the 2015 election, Suriname’s party system satisfied the four lenient conditions for twopartism, in which the “governing alone” clause of twopartism was relaxed by G. Sartori himself. Therefore, it could be concluded that the New Front alliances descended from the grand-coalition and the developmental National Democratic Party with its origins in the military regime played roles as the two major parties. Meanwhile, each Javanese party tended to seek its political orientation and interests separately, by shifting its allegiance one way or the other in the bipolar system.
著者
和田 毅 三浦 航太
出版者
ラテン・アメリカ政経学会
雑誌
ラテン・アメリカ論集 (ISSN:0286004X)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.56, pp.35-65, 2022-12-23 (Released:2022-12-23)
参考文献数
46

This article explores the conditions under which conflicts over water resources are resolved in a sustainable, democratic, and participatory manner. Water conflicts often get intense because the meaning and values of water differ considerably depending on the actors in conflict. Water can be considered as an essential component of the natural environment and biodiversity, as indispensable public goods supporting people’s everyday lives, as a precious source of energy and economic development, or as a fountain of communal identities and cultures. How to resolve water conflicts through dialogue rather than force while ensuring the democratic participation of diverse actors with conflicting values and interests? Using Global Atlas of Environmental Justice (EJAtlas), a database of environmental disputes, we extract 26 water conflicts in Latin America between 1991 and 2021 and apply a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify the conditions or causal pathways leading to sustainable and democratic outcomes. The result indicates that the existence of “brokers” capable of encouraging dialogues between opposing forces (e.g., between economic developers and local residents)—is an essential, if not sufficient, condition. We also discuss the implications of the findings and future tasks.