The transition to democracy by formerly dictatorial regimes in Eastern and Southern Europe and Latin America during the past decade and a half has been a significant and momentous development in the “third wave” of democratization. Scholars of comparative politics and international relations, however, disagree on the primary cause of these transitions to democracy.

Much of the literature in comparative politics emphasizes internal or domestic factors, while tending to minimize external or international ones. On the other hand, most scholars of international relations emphasize external factors, such as the role of great powers, in helping the spread of democracy in these transitional countries.

In Democracy from Above, Jon C. Pevehouse takes issue with both sets of scholars. He argues that they fail to appreciate the role that regional organizations play in both the transition to and the survival of democracy in these formerly dictatorial nation-states. Furthermore, he contends that the role of domestic elites via their membership in regional organizations has assisted governments in the delicate path to democratization by representing the concerns of interest groups such as business and the military. In a comprehensive and rigorous set of empirical case studies that examines Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Paraguay, Peru, and Turkey, Pevehouse makes a generally strong case for the role that these regional institutions play in the generation and sustenance of democracy.

The book’s eight chapters are very well-organized and clearly written. While chapter two focuses on theories that address the international influences on the transition to and the achievement of democratic outcomes within a state, the third chapter combines these elements of theory with an empirical focus. Primarily, the chapter lays out the methodology for measuring the role of these international organizations. More importantly, however, this chapter offers a powerful argument against the role of great power politics as a significant actor in the democratizing process.

From this, the fourth chapter proceeds in an empircal fashion to test the association between membership in regional and international organizations and the transition to democracy. In chapter five, Pevehouse examines the case studies of Hungary, Peru, and Turkey and the regional organizations that assist in the transition to democracy. Subsequently, chapter six focuses on democratic consolidation and provides a quantitative test of the democratic endurance argument. The most significant finding here is that membership in a specific international organizations is very strongly related to the duration of democracy.

In chapter seven, the book critically examines the role of regional organizations in protecting democracy, specifically the cases of Greece, Paraguay, Guatemala, and Turkey. Finally, chapter eight addresses the theoretical implications of the book’s conclusions for scholars of comparative politics, international relations, and policy analysis. Moreover, Pevehouse’s concluding argument attempts to make a strong case for the synthesis of comparative politics and international relations approaches to the phenomenon of democratization, as his citation of the work of political science professor Peter Gourevitch indicates.

As strong as the book is, however, it is not able fully to bridge the gap between the different perceptions of democracy and democratization held by the scholars of comparative politics and international relations, respectively. The book’s primary shortcomings lie in the way it defines democracy, democratic leadership, and the direction of democracy in states.

By using a procedurally-based definition of democracy stemming from the work of Notre Dame political scientist Scott Mainwaring—emphasizing competitive elections, broad adult suffrage, protection of minority rights, and respect for civil liberties—Pevehouse underemphasizes a democratic literature that is also and primarily concerned with outcomes. Curiously, he cites Yale professor Robert Dahl’s 1971 work Polyarchy but does not cite any of his work from the 1990s that is much more concerned with the effectiveness of democracy as well as its institutional architecture.

A second concern that comes about involves Pevehouse’s assumption of who are primary actors in the implementation and maintenance of democracy through the regional organizations that are the book’s main focus. By concentrating on the importance of elites such as those in business or the military and the protection of such rights as property and commitment to free trade, the book seems to substantially underplay the role of the broad base of the population itself in both the initiation and consolidation of the democratic process. The author offers considerable literature on institutional analysis, but missing is the rich literature in comparative institutional analysis, particularly that of Northwestern professor Kathleen Thelen, that looks at a variety of social forces much wider than those only at the elite level.

Thirdly, to any scholar who has studied democratic theory or domestic political institutions, the title of the book Democracy from Above seems quite strange. As Harvard sociologist and political scientist Barrington Moore argued almost 40 years ago in Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, democracy is much more sustainable if it comes from the bottom up and not the top-down. More recent scholarship by Brigham Young political science professor Wade Jacoby in his 2000 book Imitation and Politics stresses the important role that domestic actors have in “pulling in” reforms rather than have them “pushed in” from the outside.

Oddly enough, a quotation from the concluding chapter seems to acknowledge this very point. In quoting Southern Illinois historian Richard Millett, Pevehouse acknowledges that no matter how important international actors are in the democratization process, the primary responsibility for democracy’s success resides in democratically elected leaders. Such a concluding statement could seem to undercut the potency of the book’s main point.

Criticisms of Democracy from Above should not diminish the importance of comparative politics and international relations scholars finding ways of bridging the theoretical gaps that often still divide them. Indeed, Pevehouse has done an excellent job emphasizing the mid-level institutions that are important in helping initiate and sustain democracy in transitional countries. And no comparativist seriously discounts the role of international actors in the process of democratization. Nevertheless, by the same token, scholars of international relations who wish to engage in debates on both the procedure and outcome of the democratic process need to pay much greater attention to the broad base of the populations in these countries. It is these very people that democracy is supposed to both empower and ennoble during these vital transitions.